Representation by Nathan Bull
- Date submitted
- 24 March 2024
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
I am writing to express my strong objection to the proposed planning application for the construction of a 400-acre solar farm and battery storage facility on farmland currently in use. While I understand the importance of renewable energy projects, I believe this particular proposal raises significant concerns that warrant careful consideration. 1. Utilization of Best and Most Versatile Land (BMV): - The proposal to use grade 3A and 3B agricultural land for solar development is unacceptable. Rooftop solar installations should be prioritized over the use of prime agricultural land to ensure food security needs are not compromised. 2. Glint and Glare Issues: - The vast solar arrays pose potential glint and glare issues, which could have adverse effects on nearby residents and wildlife habitats. 3. Landscape and Visual Impact: - The industrial scale of the development would detrimentally alter the rural character of the area, leading to coalescence of small rural villages and an overall increase in urbanization. 4. Scale of Development: - The sheer size of the project is disproportionate to the surrounding landscape and would dominate the area for the entirety of its 40-year lifespan. 5. Noise Pollution: - The hum from inverters associated with the solar farm would introduce industrial noise into an otherwise tranquil rural setting. 6. Impact on Local Infrastructure: - The proposed 16-month construction phase would place an undue burden on rural road networks, exacerbating existing traffic issues and infrastructure deficiencies. 7. Historic and Environmental Concerns: - The development threatens local conservation areas, heritage assets, and listed buildings, compromising their historic and cultural significance. 8. Environmental Degradation: - The disruption caused by construction, including the ripping up of agricultural land drains, would lead to increased flooding, soil degradation, and irreversible damage to the local ecosystem. 9. Road Networks 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. Full public consultation is needed on new traffic routes including A444 and Stapenhill. In light of these concerns, I urge the planning authority to reject the current application and explore alternative sites or mitigation measures that minimise the negative impacts on the community, environment, and agricultural land. Thank you for considering my objection.