Filter
Mallard Pass Solar Project

Relevant representations (registration comments)

Search by the person or group making the submission or the content of the submission.

Showing 826 to 850 of 1223 representations, newest first.

Results per page 25 | View 50 results per page | View 100 results per page

  • Michael Timmis

    Loss of productive agricultural land to produce food.

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 27 February 2023

  • Rita Grundy on behalf of Mr and Mrs Halford

    We object to the use of good land when there are plenty of brown sites available. There should be legislation that all new buildings of warehouses etc should have panels on the roof.

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 27 February 2023

  • Mr Richard John Taylor

    The project is too big and will harm the natural environment and cause a bigger risk of flooding.

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 27 February 2023

  • Mrs Helene Belinda lumbard

    Project is far too big for the area, will destroy valuable agricultural land

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 27 February 2023

  • Mrs Jennifer Trawford

    I am writing to reiterate my objections to the proposed Mallard park solar development on land near Essendine and surrounding villages .I have attended all the meetings in respect of this next stage... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 27 February 2023

  • Nicola Catherine Younger

    The size of the development is too big for the site proposed and the surrounding area. Whilst I agree with renewable energy, this will be the largest solar plant in the UK (over 8 times larger than... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 27 February 2023

  • Nicola Richardson

    The local residents when buying their lovely homes in this area surely have some say where they live.. It is totally unfair that this beautiful rural area with its pretty villages should be... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 27 February 2023

  • Nigel Gareth Eveleigh

    Mallard Pass represents the industrialisation of the countryside. It represents the lamentable absence of joined up thinking in so many areas of government thinking. The use of solar panels has to be... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 27 February 2023

  • Pamela Adams

    My family and I have lived in Toft for some 23 years, not three miles from where the proposed site MP will be located just off the increasingly busy B6121. Currently we are fortunate enough to still... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 27 February 2023

  • N/A (N/A) on behalf of Paton (Paton)

    This development and the scale are inappropriate in what is attractive and undulating countryside. Essentially a significant area of productive farmland will be lost at a time where it is becoming... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 27 February 2023

  • Patricia Rentowl

    I am strongly opposed to the increased traffic on rural roads and the associated pollution, congestion, pot holes, disruption and danger to school children, pedestrians, cyclists and other road users... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 27 February 2023

  • Paul Biggs

    Concerned about the impact of solar farms on prime agriculture land.

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 27 February 2023

  • Paul Morriss

    I can not see the logic of constructing this inefficient monstrosity on good quality agricultual land which is located in beautiful ungelating countryside that will have such an impact on the wider... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 27 February 2023

  • Peter Beever

    Damaging to the landscape, countryside and the environment. Unnecessary development to meet government's flawed "net zero" policies.

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 27 February 2023

  • Rachel Herron

    In response to the statutory consultation, I wish to express my objections to the scheme for the following reasons. 1. The proposed site is largely high grade agricultural land which is needed for... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 27 February 2023

  • Richard Green (Richard Green)

    I fully support this proposal. The project delivers:- Environmental gain to wild life and the local community. Visual impact is minimal The large majority of the land chosen is only used for... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 27 February 2023

  • Rita Grundy

    We need all the agricultural land we have to grow food for this country. We rely too much on imports. There are many more sites suitable for these projects without taking arable land

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 27 February 2023

  • Roger Burton

    1. Solar power is not a reliable power source. 2. This project will occupy valuable farm land which is needed to produce food for this country.

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 27 February 2023

  • Rutland Solar Action Group Ltd (Rutland Solar Action Group Ltd)

    I am interested in the proximity to housing and the impact this development may have from a noise as well as visual perspective.

    Submitted by: Non-statutory organisations
    Date submitted: 27 February 2023

  • Samuel John Younger

    The lack of benefits/perks to the local residents of having the farm surrounding us. There is no reason that's counters the huge eyesore/traffic issues the locals would have to deal with.

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 27 February 2023

  • Sandra Chapman

    The scale of the scheme is far too big and will visually and physically overwhelm this attractive rural area impacting wildlife, house prices and recreation and take land out of food production. There... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 27 February 2023

  • Sandra Maria Trickey

    My home will be subject to compulsory acquisition by the developer and at this stage, the impact on my life has not been sufficiently explained but described in such a way that the developer can do... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 27 February 2023

  • Sharon forrester-Jeckell

    There is far too much building works taking place in stamford. I know that the land works is in Rutland but all the people working and living on this site will cause the inferstructour in Stamfords... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 27 February 2023

  • Simon Houghton

    Hello there. I have to admit the scale of this project is frankly ludicrous for the amount of energy it will produce. Would be much better, putting it done the motorway or use up all available roofs.... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 27 February 2023

  • Simon Moody

    I feel this development is in the wrong place and will do unmeasurable damage to the area and it's community. It is a green field site so will have a massive detrimental impact on the wildlife. We... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 27 February 2023