Lincolnshire County Council says it will object to a proposal to reroute existing power lines, while district councillors failed to agree on what to do.
Ahead of its application to build the Weston Marsh substation, National Grid has applied to reroute two current overhead lines.
It would lead to some existing pylons being demolished but a total of three more ones being put up than are currently there, as well as around 300 metres more of cable.
This and any future application for the substation will be decided by central government.
But both the county council and district council have initially been asked about the rerouting of the two existing lines.
South Holland District Council planning officers recommended councillors offer no objection, but members of its planning committee last week said they were worried that might come across as a no objection to any future full proposal for the new substation.
Coun Andrew Woolf described raising ‘no objection’ to the three extra pylons as ‘dangerous’.
“If we approve this we’re setting a precedent,” he said. “It’s purely on the presumption of something that’s coming along.
“If we say it’s ok, we’re tick boxing and that’s not right as we don’t know what’s coming along.”
Coun Paul Barnes claimed objecting was ‘playing into the hands’ of the Secretary of State.
“The district council represents the residents of South Holland. There’s 40 odd objections.”
The meeting was told that the authority had to respond by May 10 so voted for the Chairman’s Panel, where decisions are made behind closed doors, to come up with a response that included comments relating to concern.
Meanwhile Lincolnshire County Council’s Planning and Regulation Committee is meeting on May 11 and its planning officers have recommended their councillors do raise objections.
The report to them argues that if the application is passed it would lead to a wait for the passing of the substation itself.
“The council considers such a prolonged period of disruption to local communities to be unacceptable and can be avoided if all the works were undertaken within the construction window of 2029 to 2033,” it says.
It also says the council objects on ‘highway safety grounds’ because of a lack of detail and says there’s ‘insufficient information’ in relation to archaeology, ecology and flood risk.
