Parish Council Objects to Peak Cluster Proposals
Gawsworth Parish Council submitted the following objection to the Peak Cluster proposals.
Gawsworth Parish Council recognises the importance of tacking climate change and commends any industry which is working to take steps to mitigate the impact of its operations. However, such action must balance environmental benefits against the impact on local communities. We record a STRONG OBJECTION to the Peak Cluster proposals as currently drafted.
The project fails to demonstrate that the mitigation hierarchy has been applied. Specifically, the proposed route through Gawsworth Village and the siting of an Above Ground Installation (AGI) in the Green Belt are inexplicable when more logical, less harmful southern alternatives exist.
This paper outlines the grounds for our objection and what further information we believe needs to be provided to the Gawsworth community.
Information Requirements
Before this project proceeds to the next stage, the following data must be made public:
Detailed Safety and Risk Assessment
Detailed technical data on the safety of dense phase CO2 transport must be made available. Answers at one of the councillor’s consultation events concerning the US leakage incidents have been met with vague responses and have not allayed concerns in this proposal. We believe a Major Accident Hazard Transparency Report should be prepared at an early stage to set out how safety of communities near the line will be guaranteed.
Ecological and Hydrological Data
If the routing is to remain close to the Danes Moss Site of Special Scientific Interest, there must be robust evidence prepared that it will not have a negligible impact on the site and its functional impact zone.
Strategic Justification for inclusion of Cauldon works
There should be a clear differential financial and environmental justification for including the Cauldon works. The inclusion of Cauldon results in significant additional impact to communities, notably Gawsworth. It is not clear how the additional expenditure of including CO2 capture at Cauldon is justified and if Cauldon were excluded, the requirement for a pipeline through Gawsworth would be nullified.
Detailed Analysis on Alternative Options
There must be a transparent breakdown of why non-pipeline alternatives (e.g. rail or local sequestration) were dismissed. This should assess in detail the financial, ecological and environmental impacts of each alternative option.
The detailed objections below further identify additional information that must be prepared to understand the impact of the route on various aspects.
Routing of Section Four
The Parish Council raises strong objections to the proposed routing of section four due to the impact this will have on Gawsworth. We strongly believe that a southern alternative corridor should instead be progressed which will avoid the pipeline being within close proximity to a number of sensitive sites, through the open countryside, outside the green belt and away from major settlements.
Contrasting the current proposal vs an alternative proposal demonstrates a significant benefit to a southern route:
| Aspect | Current Gawsworth Route | Proposed Southern Route |
|---|---|---|
| Settlement Impact | Bisects village; passes within 200m of school. | Avoids settlement edges; crosses open countryside. |
| Heritage | High impact on Gawsworth conservation area and the historic parkland of Gawsworth Hall. | Low impact; avoids historical landscape. |
| AGI Location | Elevated site within the green belt | Non-green belt farmland (e.g. Marton area). |
| Infrastructure | Poor access via weight-restricted lanes. | Superior access via the A34. |
| Distance | Longer, winding route through the village | Shorter, more direct southern trajectory. |
Peak Cluster has so far refused to share information about the basis on which the route through Gawsworth is being proposed or why alternative routes are not being currently considered. While many of the issue topics with the Gawsworth route have been identified as important by the planning Inspectorate in their Scoping Opinion we urge Peak Cluster to immediately explain how the design of the proposed development in Gawsworth Parish has been evolved and shown how the mitigation hierarchy has been applied with reference to apparently much less impactful routes in the area.
We request that Peak Cluster immediately change the preferred route of the pipeline and search site for the AGI by adopting a preferred route well south of Gawsworth village. The threat of the current illogical route and AGI siting is causing significant concern to residents.
Location of proposed AGI
The proposed AGI search area (between Dark Lane and the A536) is entirely unsuitable.
- The proposed location is within the green belt. Planning policy requires that permanent industrial infrastructure in the green belt requires very special circumstances to be demonstrated. Peak Cluster has failed to demonstrate a lack of reasonable alternatives outside the Green Belt.
- The proposed location is an elevated site which will result in greater visual impact. The AGI will be a major blot on the sensitive landscape.
- The AGI sits on a raised horizon in the direct line of sight of the Jodrell Bank Telescope.
- Access to the site via the A536 or Dark Lane is logistically irresponsible. The A536 is a high-risk road, identified in 2017 as one of the 50 highest risk road sections in England. Whilst there have been safety mitigations it is a major road connecting Macclesfield and Congleton which is expected to have significant development in the coming decades. Dark Lane is a narrow, weight restricted lane home to an important local business, Newtons Dairy. The western limit of the search area is Pexhill Road, a busy, weight restricted road on which a number of accidents occur. It would be unsuitable as an access road for construction traffic.
- The northern section of the AGI search area is bordered by a line of electricity pylons; adjacent to this site is land identified for future housing development. The proximity of an AGI in this area could adversely affect the deliverability of this site and thus the planning authority’s ability to plan delivery of the nationally mandated housing targets.
Building the AGI in such close proximity to Gawsworth village will have a significant negative effect on the amenity of residents and visitors alike. This is resolved by following a southern route (as set out above).
Peak Cluster should explain why an alternative AGI siting has not been proposed. The Parish Council urges them to adopt a less damaging and more practical location as their favoured position.
Additionally, there is great uncertainty as to what the AGI will look like and what screening options there are for this to minimise any amenity impact. Transparent information on this must be made available.
Environmental and Heritage Concerns
The existing proposals raise significant concerns as to their impact on a number of locally important sites.
Impact on Hydrology and Ancient Fishponds
The pipeline corridor cuts across complex natural springs that feed the ancient Gawsworth fishponds, Wall Pool, and the Gawsworth church pools. Any disruption to these sub-surface inflows could cause irreparable damage to Cheshire’s most iconic historical water features.
The water supply to these ancient pools is critical and the inflows are complex, there is no single inflow source.
A full and detailed investigation into any potential effects must be undertaken in close collaboration with site owners and made public.
Impact on Danes Moss SSSI and Peatland Sensitivity
The route sits within the functional impact zone of the Danes Moss lowland peat area. The pipeline route and AGI must avoid peat deposits and any potential detrimental impact on peat deposits from works. There has been massive local and national environmental objection against development on nearby North Danes Moss. Peak Cluster can expect the same objections to the destruction of peat and release of CO2 which will come from pipeline and AGI work in Gawsworth.
The ecology of the SSSI, including several rare species, is affected and dependent on the surrounding environment outside the borders of the nature reserve. The pipeline construction and the AGI have the potential to adversely affect a wide area in Gawsworth and this must be fully evaluated.
The Parish Council is concerned as to the impact of the works on the wider hydrology of the Danes Moss SSSI and we require evidence that the pipeline will not drain the surrounding peatland, leading to the collapse of rare habitats.
Impact on Ancient Gawsworth Parkland
The exact extent of the parkland is not firmly established although it is believed to stretch to at least 600 acres and to include important pleasure gardens. The park surrounding the Old Hall was developed from the 16th century. Most of the original parkland has now been given over to farmland but several reminders exist including farms such as New Park House Farm and Old Parks Farm. There has been little or no investigation of buildings which were once in the wider park area. The pipeline construction runs the risk of destroying archaeological remains and ancient trees which may be scattered over the 600 acres. A detailed investigation is needed across the ancient park land area, including archaeological excavation particularly in the vicinity of farms and for some distance outside the Gawsworth Hall walls and elsewhere as recommended by experts.
Impact on Gawsworth Conservation Area
Figure 7.3 of the appendices to the scoping report fails to show the extent of conservation areas. Gawsworth Conservation Area is absent from this map. The proposals, however, pass through the eastern edge of the conservation area and no appraisal has been provided as to the impact on this.
Contravention of Principles of Gawsworth Neighbourhood Plan
The Gawsworth Neighbourhood Plan places great value on the preservation and retention of trees and hedgerows. The proposals, by cutting through rural land, are likely to have a significant impact on a number of historic hedgerows and veteran trees, contrary to planning policy and the clearly expressed wishes of the community.
Impact on Community, Amenity and Local Business
The proposed routing presents the likelihood of significant detrimental impact and concern from residents.
The pipeline corridor borders the settlement of Gawsworth village running adjacent to a number of houses. This close proximity will cause significant harm which can be avoided by an alternative (southern) route. In places the corridor impinges on gardens. Some landowners have not been identified and notified. The disturbance to residents and to traffic through during the construction phase can easily be avoided and is therefore unacceptable.
Peak Cluster has failed to provide reasonable evidence about safety of the pipeline after burying and this will cause considerable and continuing mental health harm to residents and will depress property value in Gawsworth.
Gawsworth FP1 is crossed by the pipeline corridor. This is an essential PROW serving to connect Lowes Lane residents with the village facilities. It must be kept open at all time.
The pipeline corridor passes within less than 200m of Gawsworth Primary School and crosses pedestrian and vehicular routes to the school. The danger, perceived or real, from the pipeline could have a lasting negative effect on the school. Again, this can easily be avoided by taking an alternative route south of Gawsworth and is therefore unacceptable.
The route threatens the viability of Gawsworth Fisheries ponds and the business’s future though construction impact and potential hydrological and amenity impact. The route risks the accreditation and soil health of Cloverbank Organic Farm, an established organic business. Construction traffic on Woodhouse End Road/Lane will sever the Cheshire Cycleway, a vital source of tourism income for the village café. These are unacceptable risks to rural businesses, which already face significant economic challenges.
Moreover, the Parish Council has concerns about the impact of construction of the pipeline and future land management on any farms which it dissects. Farm land is essential for food production and the industry faces a significant number of economic challenges, this project cannot add to this burden and risk domestic food production nor local farming businesses.