Representation by Catherine Looper
- Date submitted
- 1 March 2022
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
I object to this application and understand that at this stage you require an outline of these matters as opposed to a detailed objection, which will be requested at a later date. The views expressed are solely my own personal views as a resident and community member and do not represent the views of any others persons or organisations. The Sunnica project is vast; significantly and detrimentally impacting a number of small, rural villages, where the historic and dominant character of the area is an agricultural landscape. The proposed solar development would encircle and dominate several rural villages and would significantly alter the beauty of these places. It would ultimately result in these village becoming islands in the midst of a vast array of solar infrastructure. The effect on historic settlements would be harmful and the impact on heritage would be significant. The effect on archaeological significance is also a concern. The landscape impacts would be detrimental- this area ranges from flat fen landscape to rolling fields. Both would be highly visible within the landscape despite landscaping mitigation due to the changes in land levels and the public viewpoints that can be achieved. The districts in which the project is proposed have already accepted more appropriately scaled solar development. The proposed development would be of a significantly larger scale and the area would be dominated by solar development. The cumulative impact must be considered. It should also be noted that this project is located in an area known for its Grade 1 Agricultural Land, the loss of which would be highly detrimental. This is not one field that can be ‘rested’, it is a significant portion of land spread out across the area which will no longer farmed. This area is famed for its agriculture and food production, and the economical implications for our food industry must be considered, as well as the resulting implications in terms of carbon emissions from further importation of food. With the climate crisis and decline in wildlife there is greater emphasis in both local and national policy in terms of creating, preserving and enhancing habitats for wildlife. The proposal would result in an industrial landscape which would significantly impact on the wildlife that we are lucky to have here. It will interrupt wildlife routes, breeding and hunting grounds, habitats and nests, and significantly reduce ecological permeability. Once these habitats are disrupted it would not be possible to rectify. It would take years of significant investment, wildlife conservation and reintroduction, and habitat creation in order to reintroduce even a small percentage of the wildlife lost. The proposal would disrupt transport and publicly accessible walking routes. This area of the country simply does not have the transport infrastructure to facilitate the kind of construction traffic that will be required for a project of this scale. In addition, the temporary access roads that will need to be built will further disrupt the countryside and wildlife habitats. I would welcome the opportunity to provide more detailed representation.