Representation by Susan Elizabeth Barker
- Date submitted
- 11 February 2023
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
Whilst fully appreciating the need for the UK to increase its sustainable energy capacity I am totally opposed to this proposal. I briefly summarise my objections as below: 1. Scale of proposal. At over 2,100 acres this proposal will transform our area of undulating countryside into an ugly industrial setting. No amount of mitigation will be able to disguise 560,000 solar panels and associated infrastructure. 2. Loss of agricultural land. The war in Ukraine has highlighted the need for the UK to become more self sufficient in its food production capacity. Over 40% of the scheme will be sited on BMV agricultural land, this alone should mean the proposal is dismissed. 3. Flood risk increase outside of the development site. Despite significant concerns raised throughout the consultation period the Developer has not addressed this issue. The siting of 560,000 solar panels, associated roadways and long term ground compaction during the construction period of over 2 years will inevitably increase the volume and speed of surface water run off in periods of heavy rainfall. This run off will enter watercourses and the West River Glen, increasing flood risk to Greatford and other locations. The Developer has paid 'lip service' to this problem by suggesting the seeding of the site with a mixture of grasses and wild flowers will make the situation no worse than at present. Sorry but this is not plausible. 4. Construction period. Local communities will be faced with 2 years plus of major disturbance, in particular a huge number of HGV movements through the local road network. We already have problems with HGV traffic from local gravel pits using shortcut unauthorised routes. The Mallard Pass Scheme will massively increase this problem with no way of policing what routes drivers take. Add to this noise, dust and light pollution, local residents will be paying a heavy price of inconvenience. 5. Loss of leisure amenity. As a regular walker in the area, this scheme will have a major impact on me and many of the local residents, who would want to walk through fields of solar panels fenced off with 2 metre high fencing. It will do major harm to the health and wellbeing of many of the local community. 6. Loss of habitat. Whatever the developer may say a scheme of this nature and size will have a major impact on local wildlife, including herds of muntjac that have roamed these fields for years, rabbits, hares, badgers and many other species of wildlife. Are we not trying to preserve these creatures for future generations. 7. Conclusion. For all the above reasons the application should be rejected.