Representation by Patricia Prosser
- Date submitted
- 15 July 2023
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
We oppose more pylons through the Suffolk countryside. In particular, a new longer pylon route is planned north of Ramsey Wood in Hintlesham, thereby encompassing the woods on three sides. This route is more expensive than doubling up the existing line which would cross a corner between Ramsey and Hintlesham Woods. It has not been explained why this route is favoured. We have asked for where we can see detailed ecology reports for Ramsey Wood… is there a report for the land north of Ramsey Wood where the pylons are actually proposed, or doesn’t this matter? The project manager for National Grid reported there was not a clear way forward and it was ‘still open for discussion’. Rare and environmentally important species don’t just stay in one wood - they are in whole of the area involving where the new pylons would be. There is a link between Hintlesham and Wolves Wood which is regularly used by many species. The alternative proposed Option 2 which would parallel the existing line in this area would be the best if continuing with the pylon option and is understood to be cheaper. On this proposed additional line we are told 18km will be 400KV pylons and 11km underground. Why are some people and areas favoured above others for undergrounding? By agreeing to underground certain areas National Grid accepts the argument that undergrounding is a better option for the environment and landscape. Why because Hintlesham and its special area around several SSSI sites is not considered as valuable as the Stour valley should it be further bespoiled rather than made better? Undergrounding the line around Hintlesham woods would be an even better option: the land returns quickly to the countryside and residents and landowners along this section are supportive of undergrounding. The impact of a new line so close to us - 50m in places and requiring construction access across our property - will cause huge disturbance, undermine the value of our homes and the chance of any further residential development of the site. It risks harming the health of our family. The site includes a 16th Century farmhouse with earlier origins that should be protected and is where several families live. It is iniquitous that a part of the line that doesn’t interfere with people is redirected to affect people very close to the northern route and the effect of 24 hour radiation.