Representation by Sue Holloway
- Date submitted
- 27 February 2023
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
I have lived in the local area for nearly 25 years; I have an in-depth knowledge of the area, amenities and local community. I am writing to express my wholehearted objection to the Mallard Pass Solar Farm for the following reasons: 1. Scale: Solar on this scale level is inappropriate and disproportionate in its setting. The majority of solar farms in the UK are very small scale in comparison, can be more discreetly located and contribute less overall harm to the environment and communities. 2. Location: The site has been chosen purely because of proximity to the grid. Little real consideration has been given to broader range of criteria that need satisfying. 3. Landscape character: The site is made up of lightly undulating topography across agricultural land providing clear uninterrupted views in many places. The construction of over half a million solar panels will harm the character of the landscape and turn it into an industrial landscape, and for an indeterminate period of time. 4. Residential receptor: with the most far reaching view across the site and one of the largest field parcels in front of my property, it is not possible or appropriate to screen off the impact of the solar panels. It would intrinsically change the character of the area, whilst also being ineffective, thereby confirming the choice of location to be inappropriate. Screening is not always the solution. 5. Productive agricultural land: In the fertile lands of East Anglia the fields across the site are nearly all given over to crop production. Changing their use will sacrifice valuable productive agricultural land at a time when the UK needs to be maintaining production and considering long term food security more seriously. 6. BMV land. Future food strategy clearly indicates that food production must be maintained. Given the high proportion of BMV land proposed to be used, this does not meet local and national planning policy guidance. 7. Community impact: over the last few years since Covid and the increase in working from home, people have had more time for recreational activity attracting more people to the area to enjoy the many public rights of way and beautiful countryside, whether cycling, riding, walking or just driving around. Why would anyone want to walk amongst a sea of solar panels 3.3m high and all the associated equipment and fencing. This industrialisation of the environment will isolate affected local communities, people will vote with their feet and go elsewhere. 8. Riding. I am a keen horse rider using local bridleways. I know horses can be unpredictable at the best of times. Ask them to go somewhere completely out of character with strange noises and potential glint and glare, and it will make for a very unpleasant and potentially dangerous ride. 9. Bio-diversity: Living in a very rural location I am aware of the huge variety of wildlife and this does not seem to be fully represented through the survey or desk based work Mallard Pass has done. An underestimation of the wildlife is an underestimation of the impacts. I am extremely concerned about the impacts through the construction, operation and decommissioning of this scheme to many species, as well as habitat damage. 10. Heritage: Landscape setting is an intrinsic part of the heritage asset, this has been underestimated by Mallard Pass in their evaluation. 11. Flooding: I have watched the change in climate and the more extreme weather conditions making areas of the proposed site and off-site particularly susceptible to flooding, and this will only get worse. Whilst some areas have flood plains, other areas are residential and have suffered badly from flooding over the years. Solar panels will increase the speed of water run-off, and proposed mitigations will be inadequate given the setting and context of the site. 12. Noise: I am hugely concerned that the noise impact, for myself and anyone within reach of noise-emitting equipment, has not been fully assessed. The open countryside means the SW wind direction, which can be exceedingly strong for many months of the year, will compound this harmful impact which is hugely detrimental to health. 13. Archaeology. This has clearly not been concluded fully yet as the trial trenching activity was still taking place while the application was being submitted in November. 14. Construction: Mallard Pass has failed to identify the real and tangible impacts that will be experienced through the construction process as a stand-alone project, whether on the road network, on the local community and across the environment. 15. Cumulative impacts. If all the key local and national infrastructure projects in the pipeline are to be approved, there will be a complete breakdown of our road traffic network and all the associated impacts of huge construction projects on the local area. This has not been taken into account. 16. There needs to be a clear distinction between a temporary application which has a clear end date, and a permanent one that ends when it is obsolete. 17. Attention to detail and misleading information. There are a number of key areas in the application with inaccuracies, missing or misleading information. 18. Physical & mental health. Not only is the prospect of the solar farm causing great upset and anxiety, but if approved the impact on people living in and around the community will cause continued and sustained harm with potential unintended consequences. 19. Many of the compulsory acquisition rights being requested in the draft DCO place an unnecessary burden and impact on residents. 20. I reserve the right to add to or amend my representation in the light of new or additional evidence produced by the developer or other parties.