Gate Burton – Representation Comments
- This application is just 1 of 4 (currently) within a few miles of each other. The total area would amount to around 10,000 acres of farmed land. These 4 projects, at present, are all going to be submitted and accessed individually. Surely it would be better that they are assessed as a whole. The impact of one project is far different than that of the impact of 4.
- Do you think this is reasonable or should they be assessed altogether?
- The Parish Council are of the opinion that the current footprint of the proposed development is excessive. Although Councillors are very aware of and support the requirement of the U.K. Governments drive towards green and renewable energy solutions, this should not be at the detriment of the hamlets and villages on or within the boundaries of the proposed development. This view is based upon several concerning factors, which have already been submitted as part of the non-statutory consultation but broadly centre on, the diverse wildlife and nature which will be impacted, the loss of arable land and views & walks which also be significantly impacted.
With such a huge, proposed development so close to the hamlets and villages, the councillors believe this to be a significantly unique factor, which sets apart this proposed development from others that have been approved across the U.K.
- Why are there sites where land is unused and does not affect anyone but are not being considered, for example moorland? This raises a number of concerns/issues:
- The land in question is viable agricultural land. Food producing land will be lost.
- The proposed project will encompass the hamlets within the proposed area. With the boundary of some areas of the project being close to residential property.
- The affect this will have on jobs and skills within the farming industry.
- The combined construction time would be 4 years when combined with the other 3 projects. This will undoubtedly cause disruption in and around the proposed site, increased works traffic; mental health issues/wellbeing issues for residents and visitors to the area and will natural habitats and wildlife are affected.
- Solar panels are inefficient and a poor use of the land. We were given figures of around 27% efficient, which is a low level of energy gained.
Surely these would be more effective covering the vast amount of commercial and domestic roof space where it can directly help with energy costs as opposed to inefficiently covering farmland. It is a nonsense that a ‘new build’ property has to have an electric charge point by law, but does not have to have any solar panels or heat pump.
- This proposal on open farmland would not only be visible from country lanes but also to the local properties in which this site would encompass.
- Would this land covered by such structures blend into the landscape or dominate it?
- Were important factors such as panel height, glare, battery storage, generation capabilities, flood risk and brownfield site use accurately communicated.
- The solar panels and precious minerals are to be sourced and manufactured abroad in China and the construction (allegedly forced) labour sourced outside of the area.
- This begs the question as to whether this is an ethically sound proposal. Will the human rights of these overseas works be respected and checked upon?
- When the developer consulted the public on this proposal the majority of people expressed that they are totally against these plans with approximately 78% against and only 2% in support. This is direct from the people that live in these small hamlets which are going to be swallowed up by these solar farms. The people here have paid a premium to live in the countryside not only in the house prices but in Council Tax Rates too. The overriding opinion is against these plans; any other plans that would have been submitted to WLDC would be thrown out on his basis alone as this is a stipulation in the Local plan. So how can the opinions of local people count for nothing.
- A concern over how these projects will affect house prices. If accepted will have a massive detriment to the appeal and state of this area with building works lasting years and the loss of over 10,000 acres of farmland/public footpaths/beauty spots.
- Has any research been done into any health issues caused by having solar panels and the battery storage units etc. so close to houses? If not, why not?
- One of the world's largest Battery Energy Storage Systems (BESS) is a potential fire and chemical risk to life and property.
- Is it acceptable to locate this kind of infrastructure on farmland?
- Or is it better to locate this apparatus close to the Grid connection or a brownfield site?
- The Gate Burton Energy Park is in close proximity to many historic buildings and the heritage village of Gate Burton.
- Has the land been selected on suitability or purely on availability?
- Has the scheme been well planned and does it really consider the environment and wildlife?