Representation by Norman Arthur Melaney
- Date submitted
- 21 March 2024
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
I object to the proposed Solar Farm on the following issues, The items do not include all issues included in my objection, i wiil add further comment in due course. General- The facilities will interfere with existing land uses and can impact the use of areas such as wilderness or recreational management areas. Solar Farms are not environmentally friendly. The amenity of neighbouring property can be seriously harmed by secured boundaries and intrusive CCTV. It is highly unlikely that the land could return to agriculture in 40 years’ time. How recyclable are the panels? Solar intermittency is the most obvious issue related to PV panel efficiency. The sun is not visible for 24 hours per day except for a short time each year at extreme latitudes. Health and Wellbeing Solar power plants produce electromagnetic radiation that can affect the health of nearby residents. These rays are not coming from the solar panels themselves, but from industrial equipment used for the farms. While their effects are minimal, they can cause vision problems and headaches. Noise- Bishopton village is renowned for being a particularly quiet place to live. Noise surveys show this to be true particularly at night. This will be lost. Noise levels from plant, Transformers, Convertors and other equipment associated with the operation of a solar farm that will create noise this will become an issue as RWE have not explained how they will mitigate this and have merely dismissed it referring to panels that make no noise. The noise levels described above will exist for the 40 years the Farm exists if approved The Construction Phase noise levels have also been dismissed which again is unacceptable, Visual Impact and loss of Amenity- Social acceptability has not been investigated through a proper detailed visual impact assessment with panels and BESS being located very close and within 500mtrs of properties. The landscape character of the site and its surrounding are not correctly evaluated regarding its sensitivity to change and, taking into account the magnitude of change, the effect that the proposal would have on the local landscape character has not been properly assessed. RWE have failed to accurately identify potential visual receptors (i.e., people who would be able to see the development), evaluate their sensitivity to change and, take into account the magnitude of change, assess the effect that the proposal would have on visual amenity. Residential visual amenity issues are not included in their DCO. RWE have failed to identify landscape elements associated with the site, evaluate their sensitivity to change and, taking into account the magnitude of change, assess the effect the proposals would have on landscape elements. RWE have failed to identify mitigation measures and opportunities for landscape character and visual amenity enhancement, in order to mitigate, offset or reduce the predicted adverse effects RWE have failed to accurately produce an assessment to consider potential cumulative landscape and visual impact of the proposed development in conjunction with the consented solar scheme at Gately Moor, Long Pastures, 2 Whinfield sites, 2 Thorpe Thewles sites, + 5 more and 2 Wind Turbine sites within 2 miles of the villages The sites will have significant adverse impacts on the character and appearance of the landscape. The expansive tranquil landscape of open green fields with their far-reaching views will be turned into an industrial, utility-grade power complex with fields of tal dark solar panels towering over walkers and blocking views. The project size is far removed from what could be termed appropriate scale The size and locations of the solar panel sites impact the character and appearance of the landscape. The development will have a significant adverse visual impact on local properties located close to the site boundaries. The sites will have significant adverse impacts on the character and appearance of the landscape. The expansive tranquil landscape of open green fields with their far-reaching views will be turned into an industrial, utility-grade power complex with fields of tal dark solar panels towering over walkers and blocking views. The project size is far removed from what could be termed appropriate scale Panel area A-F are all too close to residential properties. These areas will restrict access The storage areas will destroy the peaceful area by producing low level noise 365 days per year. They will have a detrimental effect on people’s health in terms of anxiety stress dealing with loss of our hard-earned assets. There is no known research in the effects of living so close to a Solar power station development. The extremely large size of the proposed development is totally inappropriate for sites so close to residential properties in the rural villages threatened by the development. The Solar Farm should be appropriately located in areas that will not cause significant visual impact on the residents and those further afield who visit the affected areas. The associated equipment including containers, transformers and communications towers will remove the character, appearance and instinctiveness of the landscape ambience of the areas and destroy visually sensitive skylines, visual amenity and protected Conservation areas. The associated equipment including containers, transformers and communications towers will remove the character, appearance and instinctiveness of the landscape ambience of the areas and destroy visually sensitive skylines, visual amenity and protected Conservation areas. The solar panels CCTV cameras ad columns, access roads, sub-stations and security fencing will destroy the wide, open views and create an unpleasant tunnel along the footpath and bridleway, degrading the amenity value of the areas. Access roads will directly impact on the visual amenity and permanently scar the landscape. The amenity of neighbouring property can be seriously harmed by secured boundaries and intrusive CCTV. Site boundaries are delineated by security fencing and intrusive CCTV. Some of the proposed new facilities have no access on foot clearly a token gesture by RWE. Battery storage or BESS will remove the character, appearance and instinctiveness of the landscape and amenity. Bishopton village is renowned for being a particularly quiet place to live. Noise surveys show this to be true particularly at night. This will be lost. The associated equipment including containers, transformers and communications towers will remove the character, appearance and instinctiveness of the landscape ambience of the areas and destroy visually sensitive skylines, visual amenity and protected Conservation areas. The solar panels CCTV cameras ad columns, access roads, sub-stations and security fencing will destroy the wide, open views and create an unpleasant tunnel along the footpath and bridleway, degrading the amenity value of the areas. Access roads will directly impact on the visual amenity and permanently scar the landscape. The amenity of neighboring property can be seriously harmed by secured boundaries and intrusive CCTV. Site boundaries are delineated by security fencing and intrusive CCTV. Some of the proposed new facilities have no access on foot clearly a token gesture by RWE Biodiversity- The proposed Biodiversity measures are inadequate and planting wildflower seeds is not the answer. Biodiversity is threatened when there is significant habitat loss or degradation as is the case with solar panel farms, when an area that was once used as a habitat is no longer inhabited by nature. Industrial activities such as Solar Farms often remove crucial habitat space for wildlife and plants. The land is degraded with little potential for biodiversity as half of it will be in permanent shadow under the solar panels Solar Farms are not environmentally friendly. Topsoil is removed and cleaning materials can contaminate the soil. Limited research suggests that there is a negative impact on biodiversity from solar farms. Various mitigations can affect this impact. However, agriculture policy is also developing significant measures that will increase biodiversity on farmland. PRoW- The document includes inadequate detail on PROW and JBM mitigation methods. The development would create significant adverse visual impact along the footpath and bridleway, with arrays of tall/high dark coloured solar panels which would tower above walkers blocking those views. The footpath and bridleway would be separated from the site by a 2.8m high security fence. The solar panels and fencing would destroy the wide, open views and create an unpleasant tunnel along the footpath and bridleway, degrading the amenity value. Any proposals affecting Public Rights of Way can only be acceptable where it can be demonstrated that the routes and the recreational and amenity value of the Public Rights of Way will be protected, or satisfactory diverted routes that deliver a level of recreational and amenity value at least as good as the routes being replaced are provided Heritage Assets- Very few if any residents of the village will live long enough to see the results of proposed screening we are being subjected to and industrial scale eyesore for the rest of our lives. Proposed screening cannot ever achieve the proposed intent Panels are 3M high. Hedgerows will not screen, even trees cannot achieve screening when site is elevated from the viewing line which is often the case on most sites. The character of heritage assets and our appreciation of them can be significantly harmed. By this development. Heritage statements by JBM are misleading. Royal Flying Corp Airfield will be covered with solar panels .RWE are not carrying out any archeological surveys on the site merely ignoring its history Construction Impacts- The construction of solar facilities on vast areas of land imposes clearing and grading, resulting in soil compaction, alteration of drainage channels and increased erosion Residential neighbors have the setting of their property altered and industrialized. Boundaries are delineated by security fencing and intrusive CCTV. • Peace and quiet is destroyed by industrial grade traffic and light pollution. • Inverters can overheat in extremely hot weather requiring the use of noisy fans to provide cooling. Road access to and from the village will be severely restricted or closed during construction. This will negatively affect local businesses resulting in loss of income. Roads already in a very poor state will be made much worse as a result of the HGV traffic resulting in damage to residents and visitors’ vehicles. Roads will not be repaired following construction. Resident’s vehicles movements and parking within the village will be severely disrupted. The proposed development route will create significant transport impacts on the locl roads network. The limited route indicated routes through the villages include narrow roads, sharp bends and restrictive weight limits Loss of Village Trees- Excavations will impact 48 No trees whose roots will be damaged during construction works and will result in loss of trees protected by Conservation rulings on the village green. The villages are popular with walkers, cyclists, pedestrians and Horse riders, the routes are already overburdened and totally unsuitable for construction traffic and HGV’s Consultation- Consultation by JBM very poor 25 information documents secretively dropped at village hall is inadequate. Leaving documents in Norton which is not affected by the development also unacceptable. Providing incorrect location for market stall presentation in Stockton-on -Tees. Residents denied access when RWE left location 2.5 hours before offered opening times. Failure by JBM to provide more than 25 Consultation Booklets for 156 Homes or 356 residents of Bishopton Reliance on online provision of information does not respect the age demographic of the village with many residents unable to access online content. BESS (Battery Energy Storage System- BESS units are extremely unreliable and if Thermal Runaway occurs extremely dangerous. This is particularly true in the case of the BESS facility planned to e installed next to the fence line of the Village playground exposing the children who use it to Fires, explosions and very toxic chemicals that are released when the batteries overheat. It should be noted that the fires cannot be extinguished with water as this release’s additional toxic chemicals. Generally, the Fire Brigades in the UK are beginning to respond to the potential problems and are trying to produce guidance on the BESS system. The increasing problems with BESS in Europe and United States are becoming regularly publicized generating real concerns. Our Parish Council is concerned that the “duty of care “which is incumbent on both the Local Authority and Government is not being exercised. The proposed management put forward by RWE will not be suffice and is merely an attempt by RWE to give the impression that they have a fire suppression system that will work, it will not.