Representation by John Crampin
- Date submitted
- 27 February 2023
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
The matter of visual impact and the health of our local countryside with its links to personal mental health and well-being are at the centre of my response to the Mallard Pass Proposal. I am unreservedly against it. If the development goes ahead on this scale, this relatively small area centred on the village of Essendine will have been changed from a typical rural landscape to an essentially industrial one. Fields which are currently producing crops will have been replaced by great stretches of glass panelling and metal fencing and buildings which are inappropriate for their setting. In some solar projects, residents might be able to put up with a small blot on the local landscape but the scale of this proposed development is so enormous that the whole area would be blighted, if it is allowed to go ahead. I could be convinced about the advantages of 'green energy', but I think that the costs, in terms of negative effects on our countryside, need to shared throughout the country. If this scheme goes ahead, without substantial reduction, those living around the site will suffer for many years in terms of a reduced quality of life. Other aspects of the plans need consideration: 1. Negative effects on the natural environment, locally. 2.Losing an extensive acreage of agricultural land is questionable when the security of food production is such an issue nationally. 3. Other methods of providing 'green energy' locally need consideration. In conclusion, I believe that no satisfactory solution is available with a project on this size. I think that the Inspectorate should consider limiting the plan to no more than half its current size.