20/06840/Ful Solar Farm and Battery Storage Facility with All Associated Works Equipment and Necessary Infrastructure at Land North of Melksham Substation
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
20/06840/FUL SOLAR FARM AND BATTERY STORAGE FACILITY WITH ALL ASSOCIATED WORKS EQUIPMENT AND NECESSARY INFRASTRUCTURE AT LAND NORTH OF MELKSHAM SUBSTATION We strongly oppose the above application for a number of reasons. Development Plan Policy and Government Guidance We believe that this application is not within a number of policies. We understand that the Core Policy 50 states that Wiltshire’s natural environment is one of Wiltshire greatest assets, Core Policy 51 states that development should protect, conserve and enhance landscape character and should not have harmful impact. Core Policy 42 states residential amenity, including noise, odour, visual amenity and safety should be taken into account. This application is contrary to these policies. You are planning to allow this solar development on open agricultural land just because Wiltshire has committed to become Carbon Neutral. The National Planning Practice Guidance also states that renewable energy farms should be provided on non agricultural land or previously developed (brown field sites). Why is a solar farm planned for an open area of countryside which provides amenity for many local people? Why is the Melksham area subject to a number of solar farms? This farm is a massive size, in open countryside. We understand that electric from this site would provide electric for 10,500 homes, Sandridge provides electric for 12,000 and Broughton Gifford for 4,500 homes, this is much more than our area requires – so why not site a solar farm in another area, where there are brown field sites in Wiltshire? Wiltshire has the 2nd highest number of solar installations and electric generation in the country, surely this puts Wiltshire in good stead and there is no need to create farms in open countryside adjacent to communities. Loss of amenity/ Design, appearance and layout Beanacre is already subject to 40 acres of land being used by National Grid, the area has limited places for public amenity and walks (due to a busy main road, pylons, power station) and is subject to regular disruption by National Grid, noise and often alarms. Surely, this small community should not be subject to further unnecessary electrical sites? If this application is to go ahead it should not include the area adjacent to Westlands Lane (in full view from the lane) or the field adjacent to Daniel’s Wood which would remove the view/visual amenity for the local community. We understand there has been a reduction in panels in the high field but there should be no panels. Our home is one of those that looks onto the high level field, our home will be affected by the loss of visual amenity due to the design, appearance and layout of this plan. Our view will be removed and the countryside marred further. Our property value will be reduced, not a planning consideration, but fact. Conservation of tress and open land/Need to safeguard the countryside The area planned for panels close to Westlands Lane should also be removed, this is a beautiful, well maintained lane with an open aspect, which many enjoy whilst travelling by car in the lane and walking. The area is open countryside! There is a heritage woodland, with many wildflowers and fauna in the area and a range of animals ranging from badgers, deer, pheasants, birds of prey, rabbits, foxes, bird life which would be displaced or lost. We note you have a badger survey within your documents, but what about the deer and fox population? Every time you walk in the area you see these species, where will they go and why should their habitat be subject to solar panels and their area of roam reduced? These areas bring much pleasure to local people who currently can walk the fields freely seeing this wonderful wildlife daily. We note you mention public access but who will want to walk through solar panels, whilst under the gaze of pylons and a substation? Due to the substation, National Grid land, there are few safe places to walk, there are phone masts, pylons and a substation, the area designated for this development is used by walkers, also the lane. During lockdown, in particular, many people took advantage of these open spaces for walks, this would be removed and in fact walking just down the lane would no longer be a pleasure. It is already marred by a massive 40 acre electrical site on one side. This open land should be conserved in line with planning policy, this is a massive area to be used for solar panels, we must safeguard open areas, this area is a community asset and well used. The effect of these solar panels will be obvious, usually solar areas are away from communities and in less obvious sites, often in dipped land. This site should not be used. The site area which is predominantly hidden along the line of the A350 does not affect anyone, yet the area linked near Westlands Lane will affect a community. At the Parish Council meeting where representatives spoke freely, it was noted that the Solar Farm could be reduced in size by up to half and would still be viable. The developers went away to consider removing the fields by Westlands Lane and in particular the high field adjacent to Daniel’s Wood as these are the fields which cause most issue to the local community. This has not happened, the number of panels in the high field have been reduced only. This is not enough, there should be no visual impact on residents. We would suggest that the area along Westlands Lane and around Daniel’s Wood be removed from the plan, leaving the area which is not seen by properties or the public along the route of the A350 for solar development. We also feel that the decommissioned solar farm, in the future, will then be a brown field site which will be developed for housing long term. We believe there is no requirement in any plan/policy for this land to be returned to countryside. Noise disturbance/ Highway Safety and Traffic The development of the site is also a concern in terms of noise disturbance not only initially but long term. We already suffer noise from the substation and pylons. We note that construction will be between 10-4, 6-8 weekdays and Saturdays 10-1, using noisy JCB’s, this leaves little time for peace for local residents. We note that vehicles and roads will be washed down. In the last few years National Grid held similar works in the area, crossing Westlands Lane, the mess and inconvenience to residents was huge, you could not walk in the lane or drive in the lane without getting covered in mud and yes, they did hose down and it just made watery mud with no outlet for the excess water. The noise from the batteries/substation for the solar panels is also a concern, local people do not want to hear any noise; it may be minimal but why should we have further annoyance. This is why solar developments should be on brown field sites away from communities. We believe that any access in Westlands Lane is also unsafe, vehicles use the road at high speeds and will not be prepared for entrances, mud and the access is immediately after the railway bridge, giving no clear vision for oncoming drivers. Other local considerations It is still unclear to researchers how safe it is to live near pylons, power stations, solar panels. We know that solar panel inverters are attributed with elevated magnetic fields with high voltage emissions, there are studies which suggest links to poor child health. There have been cases of unusual cancers/tumours in the vicinity of the village of Beanacre. How safe are these panels and yet another 132kw substation to add to the huge kw voltage already above our heads? Beanacre is an area which is subject to flooding, the fields adjacent to Westlands Lane become waterlogged and flooded, including the road where a suggested entrance might be. Yes, mitigation of flooding may be carried out but in general terms often the water is just moved elsewhere. The area is in a high flood area and the consequences are readily clear every winter in Westlands Lane, we believe that any development in the area will increase the risk of flood. This is not good in an area with septic tanks rather than mains drainage and could cause environmental risks. We also understand that at this point that ‘no community benefit’ has been agreed. We cannot believe that there will be any community benefit for local residents in Westlands Lane. There is no benefit for those personally affected, despite this project affecting our lives and value of our properties. This planning application should not be supported by the Parish or Town Council and should be refused. It is not in line with planning policy and is merely to help Wiltshire Council reach its carbon commitment. Should this be at the loss of open countryside, resident’s wellbeing and visual amenity, should it be allowed when it will affect and we will lose our wildlife and open countryside? This should not be allowed. Martin and Carolyn Beale.