Representation by Councillor Amy Wheelton
- Date submitted
- 20 March 2024
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
I object to this application based on the bellow initial comments : No Solar on the Best and Most Versatile Land (BMV) and grade 3b - put solar on rooftops not on good agricultural land and food security needs prioritising. • Glint and Glare issues from the vast solar arrays. • Detrimental Landscape and Visual Impact on the rural character of the area from solar arrays, containers and 3m high fencing with security cameras – increasing urbanisation of a rural area with coalescence (merging) of small rural villages. • The size and scale of the development would be out of scale with the landscape and dominate an attractive rural area. • 40 years is a significant period in peoples lives and the development would detract from the landscape character and visual amenity. • The hum from the inverters would add to an industrial installation. • At consultation, the construction phase was 16 months adding an unacceptable impact on rural local road networks including the A444, Stapenhill, Drakelow, Walton on Trent, Rosliston and Coton in the Elms and other surrounding villages. • The build compounds are on small rural winding rural roads unacceptable for large HGVs and large traffic numbers. • The new Walton Bypass is not built and the Chetwynd bridge at the A513 now has a weight restriction sending all farm and existing traffic through the villages which are already bottlenecks and rat runs to a creaking lack of traffic infrastructure with poorly maintained roads riddled with crater like potholes. • Abnormal loads through rural roads and Coton in the Elms are unacceptable and contraventions of the 7.5t weight limit are a large issue now before the additional associated traffic is introduced from the development. • The historic environment of local conservation areas and heritage assets including listed buildings will be affected by the alien industrial development. • Every existing agricultural land drain will be ripped up by the pile driving of each solar array, leading to a change in water flow and increased flooding and an inability for the land to ever return to agricultural use with nutrients washed out of the soil and drainage decimated. As a neighbouring farmer to this application, I wish to state the below please: • 60% Best and Most Versatile Land (BMV) but with 100 years of adding muck I bet its far higher if you tested the soil - put solar on rooftops not on good agricultural land and food security needs prioritising, the population is growing and you cannot make new land • Glint and Glare issues from the vast solar arrays. Not one mention of equestrian and farm traffic which the opaque netting which is going to destroy the character of the area, horses use every road as do high tractors, not a mention of the effect on them, this is the breadbasket of South Derbyshire for food production. • Detrimental Landscape and Visual Impact on the rural character of the area from solar arrays, containers and high fencing with security cameras and opaque netting – increasing urbanisation of a rural area with coalescence (merging) of small rural villages. 2 further BESS applications around it now. • The size and scale of the development would be out of scale with the landscape and dominate an attractive rural area. I live on a scheduled monument and am next door and have 5 Derbyshire Wildlife sites on the farm adjacent to this, some documentation ignores this. • 40 years is a significant period in people’s lives and the development would detract from the landscape character and visual amenity. • SDDC voted for an ecology crisis 09/23 not one mention of it in the 211 documents on PINS which stated: “This Council formally declares an ecological emergency in response to the ongoing threat to wildlife and ecosystems. The declaration recognises the essential role that nature plays and provides a statement of intent, to enhance and restore our natural landscape, local wildlife, rivers, streams, water resources, habitats and trees and resist the destruction of such habitats through a considered and sustainable local planning policy. This motion will see the council add ecological considerations, together with any implications, alongside those for climate, sustainability, and nature recovery in our new corporate plan as strategic priorities embedded within all areas of council engagement. The Council will continue to collaborate with our communities, businesses and other organisations, existing networks, and partnerships to improve ecological literacy, encourage greater biodiversity, increase local sustainable food production in order to protect food security, tree planting and management.” • The hum from the inverters would add to an industrial installation, this area is full of bats, deer, badgers you will displace them. • The loss of livelihoods and income from agricultural contractors, tenant farmers, farm workers and suppliers is not addressed from a large 191ha solar application nor its impact on local villages and amenity. All local landowners and farmers got from this firm and continue to receive letters offering £1000 plus rents per acre, I have a draw of them, it's a joke they looked at other sites!!! • The PINS documents fail to look at Sub aquifers and boreholes I have both on my farm adjacent to the site with many local streams/brooks/ditches flowing to the nearby rivers Mease and Trent, the BESS installation and potential for lithium-ion pollution into water courses from fire risk is not properly addressed and I am lower than this site and that is dangerous, water flows downhill and down through soil. • Diffuse pollution from the 16 month build and temporary (40 plus years!) track is not addressed, a tenant framer is currently being threatened by his landlords over another BESS and this permanent track this application needs, I know all this ground and its a nature area with a peat bog type area and they want to destroy it and the trees/brook next to it. • The construction phase is 16 months adding an unacceptable impact on rural local road networks including the A444, Stapenhill, Castle Gresley, Drakelow, Rosliston and Coton in the Elms and other surrounding villages, the new routes have not been consulted on and are unenforceable. Farm traffic will not be able to operate and has not even bee mentioned. • The build compounds are on small rural winding rural roads unacceptable for large HGVs and large traffic numbers. • The new Walton Bypass is not built and the Chetwynd bridge at the A513 now has a weight restriction sending all farm and existing traffic through the villages which are already bottlenecks and rat runs to a creaking lack of traffic infrastructure with poorly maintained roads riddled with crater like potholes. • Abnormal loads through rural roads and Coton in the Elms are unacceptable and contraventions of the 7.5t weight limit are a large issue now before the additional associated traffic is introduced from the development, the culverts are crumbling now from the HGVs • The historic environment of local conservation areas and heritage assets including listed buildings will be affected by the alien industrial development, they admit that in the documents. • Every existing agricultural land drain will be ripped up by the 2m pile driving of each solar array, leading to a change in water flow and increased flooding and an inability for the land to ever return to agricultural use with nutrients washed out of the soil and drainage decimated, the DEMP leaves cables 1m down stopping any future land drainage on a rare BMV land commodity. As a farmer of 50 years this land could never be returned to farming with the pile driving, nutrients washed out by the water off the panels and soil disturbance at the end to take out the cables. Its £30/m now to lay a hedge in 40 years who is going to lay 11000 m of hedge as you cannot cut a 3m hedge no machine is big enough. It is absolutely clear planners have no understanding of soil and farming and wish to destroy the countryside and starve future generations you do not concrete over and pile drive and put cables underground on BMV or any farmland or put containers on which could pollute the sub aquifers and water courses, the roads flood now and not one SuD or swale is being put in, it is simply about money, I have 2 Ground source heat pumps and two lots of solar on rooftops and it has generated virtually nothing for 9 months after the wettest overcast winter on record. Please note when this was 1st published, I did submit but wish to update that submission please having read all 211 documents. Many local and elderly residents have contacted me with their veiws, some not on email and who are unable to register their views online, not one resident has been in favour. Please see below my further views: • 60% Best and Most Versatile Land (BMV) but with 100 years of dairy farming adding manure to this ground soil testing would show a higher proportion of BMV land - solar should be on rooftops not on good agricultural land and food security needs prioritising, the population is growing, and you cannot make new land and BMV is a scarce resource. This area is the breadbasket of South Derbyshire for food production. • Glint and Glare issues from the vast solar arrays. Not one mention in the documentation of equestrian, HGVs and farm traffic, horses use every road as do high seated tractors/farm, machinery, the opaque netting, which is going to destroy the character of the area, will not be high enough to cover these high vehicles and should not be used, plastic netting is hardly complying with Climate change and is a major adverse impact on local landscape and character as is 11000m of fencing. • Detrimental Landscape and Visual Impact on the rural character of the area from solar arrays, containers and high fencing with security cameras and opaque netting – increasing urbanisation of a rural area with coalescence (merging) of small rural villages. • The size and scale of the development would be out of scale with the landscape and dominate an attractive rural area. I live on a scheduled monument and have 5 Derbyshire Wildlife sites on the farm adjacent to this. • 40 years is a significant period in people’s lives and the development would detract from the landscape character, historic environment and visual amenity. • SDDC voted for an ecology crisis 09/23 not one mention of it in the 211 documents on PINS which stated: “This Council formally declares an ecological emergency in response to the ongoing threat to wildlife and ecosystems. The declaration recognises the essential role that nature plays and provides a statement of intent, to enhance and restore our natural landscape, local wildlife, rivers, streams, water resources, habitats and trees and resist the destruction of such habitats through a considered and sustainable local planning policy. This motion will see the council add ecological considerations, together with any implications, alongside those for climate, sustainability, and nature recovery in our new corporate plan as strategic priorities embedded within all areas of council engagement. The Council will continue to collaborate with our communities, businesses and other organisations, existing networks, and partnerships to improve ecological literacy, encourage greater biodiversity, increase local sustainable food production in order to protect food security, tree planting and management.” The hum from the inverters would add to an industrial installation, this area is full of bats, deer and badgers and you will displace them with the noise and fencing. • The loss of livelihoods and income from agricultural contractors, tenant farmers, farm workers and suppliers is not addressed from a large 191ha solar application nor its impact on local villages and amenity. All local landowners and farmers got from this firm and continue to receive letters offering £1000 plus rents per acre for solar and Bess applications. • Biodiversity - the land could be put into BNG, the National Forest or even the ELMS farming schemes to gain the same biodiversity if not more without the urbanisation of the countryside and loss of BMV land. Land is a precious commodity. • The PINS documents fail to look at local Sub aquifers and boreholes the BESS installation and potential for lithium-ion pollution into water courses from fire risk is not properly addressed, fire engines struggle to access this area due to the width restrictions on the river Trent crossings. • Diffuse pollution from the 16 months build and temporary (40 plus years) track is not addressed, a tenant farmers land needed for the new access this application needs is currently under pressure by their out of area Landlord. A BESS has been consulted on next to this track and brook, the land adjacent is a nature area with a peat bog type area. • The construction phase is 16 months adding an unacceptable impact on rural local road networks including the A444, Stapenhill, Castle Gresley, Drakelow, Rosliston and Coton in the Elms and other surrounding villages, the new routes have not been consulted on and are unenforceable. Farm traffic will not be able to operate and has not even been mentioned. • The build compounds are on small rural winding rural roads unacceptable for large HGVs and large traffic numbers. • The new Walton Bypass is not built and the Chetwynd bridge at the A513 now has a weight restriction sending all farm and existing traffic through the villages which are already bottlenecks and rat runs to a creaking lack of traffic infrastructure with poorly maintained roads riddled with crater like potholes. • Abnormal loads through rural roads and Coton in the Elms are unacceptable and contraventions of the 7.5t weight limit are a large issue now before the additional associated traffic is introduced from the development, the culverts are crumbling now from the HGVs. • The roads around this site have been under water for the last 8 months in particular Coton road, when the land drains are all smashed with the pile driving and the ditches are no longer cleaned as it is not farmed the flooding will become worse, the NSIP documents fail to address this issue in any way. • The historic environment of local conservation areas and heritage assets including listed buildings will be affected by the alien industrial development. • Every existing agricultural land drain will be ripped up by the 2m pile driving of each solar array, leading to a change in water flow and increased flooding and an inability for the land to ever return to agricultural use with nutrients washed out of the soil and drainage decimated, the DEMP leaves cables 1m down stopping any future land drainage on a rare BMV land commodity. It is £30/m now to lay a hedge in 40 years who is going to lay 11000 m of hedge as you cannot cut a 3m hedge no machine is big enough, by then iot will be thin and need management to return to BMV land. • Decommissioning - if this proposal proceeds a bond should be set up now to reinstate the land to hedgelay the 11000m hedge, put new land drains in the entire area including the track and mains cable to Drakelow. The current infrastructure crisis around sewage in rivers and investment firms putting profits/shareholder dividends before infrastructure could happen in 40 years with these vast solar firms – whose responsibility if the firm dissolved would it be to decommission?