Representation by Andrew Gowing
- Date submitted
- 12 May 2024
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
I object to the development. My reasons are as follows. I moved from an urban environment to Bishopton specifically to enjoy a rural agricultural setting and raise a family. I wanted my child to enjoy the rural village lifestyle I enjoyed as a child. Byers Gill is part of 8 solar schemes in the very local vicinity and as such will have a very significant and deleterious impact on the area both in terms or visual amenity and the consequential psychological impact on its population. There is already a flooding issue associated with 3 of the 4 routes into the village. During the last winter, I have had to take alternative routes numerous times as a result and experienced car damage. Removing crops and installing impervious solar panels will increase the speed of surface run-off and increase flooding. I am also troubled by the concept of taking good agricultural land out of use for decades when we should be aiming to minimise food imports which have a negative environmental impact. As a country, we should be striving for food self-sufficiency. My hobbies of photography and cycling will be negatively impacted by this development. I cycle locally and am not looking forward to riding past miles of solar panels (the planting suggested in the development to act as screening, will take years to be effective). The visual impact on a landscape photography will be significant. This development will have a negative impact on ecosystem services - visual, natural diversity including impacts on wildlife. I have witnessed a wealth of creatures (curlews, deer, water voles, and owls to mention a few) on my local walks and want my toddler to experience that too. I want to stress that I'm not an anti renewable energy individual but the cumulative impact of all of the local solar farms doesn't seem to be considered, only the individual development, so the bigger picture is missed in the planning stage. Please don't do that this time. There are more appropriate non-agricultural locations suitable for panels. As for the consultation by the developer - my view is that it has been piecemeal, has paid lip service and in some instances seems to have been deliberately obstructive by placing information offers in too small a number or in locations well away from the development and seemingly avoiding attendance at meetings they are invited to.