The very large size of the proposed development is totally inappropriate. It will be one of the largest in the nation. The visual impact of such a huge industrial solar farm would fundamentally change the tranquil character of the area. We consider solar farms should be appropriately located on already industrialised land, on roof tops or adjacent to motorways, not on productive agricultural land.
There is no local energy benefit. The electricity produced will feed directly into the National Grid: the beneficiaries could be in Nottingham or Grimsby, not Norton or Grittleton.
The area will undergo disruption, noise, and traffic during construction, and a permanent loss of countryside and heritage once completed. It is already shown to have reduced house values in the area.
Tourism is a vital part of the local economy, supporting countless businesses, jobs, and livelihoods. The first sight many visitors will encounter when entering the area from the south will be an ocean of solar panels, stretching across miles of countryside visible from the Cotswold AONB. This industrialisation threatens to undermine the region’s reputation as a place of natural beauty, harming local businesses and the wider economy.
The loss of permeable farmland will increase flood risks to nearby villages, while chemicals and leaks from infrastructure threaten to contaminate drinking water supplies.
The Battery Energy Storage System introduces the danger of toxic gas emissions and fires, which are notoriously difficult to extinguish.
Such incidents have already caused multiday evacuations elsewhere.
The construction stage will last up to two years and will bring more than 20,000 articulated lorries, HGVs and vans transporting materials to site creating noise and pollution, and endangering pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders. Additionally, a 25+ mile trench stretching from Sherston to Melksham will be incredibly disruptive for all around.
The Cotswolds is one of the UK’s most treasured landscapes, drawing visitors from around the world. Towering panels, industrial structures, and fencing will destroy unspoiled countryside views, replacing them with an industrial wasteland.
The UK currently relies on imports for approximately 46% of its food, making us the world’s third-largest importer of food. Arable land in the UK is declining. The farmland planned for development is 30% Best quality farm land (BMV). Losing such land will worsen our reliance on imports at a time when resilience is critical.
This development poses significant risks to our community for two generations, over a period of 60 years, until 2090.
Currently, there is no enforceable mechanism to ensure the developers remove the solar panels and infrastructure at the end of the project’s life. This raises serious concerns about who will bear the cost of decommissioning and restoring the land –potentially leaving the burden on local communities or taxpayers.
Historic sites including the Fosse Way and Wessex Way, and footpaths
and bridleways used and loved by pedestrians, riders and cyclists, will be overshadowed by this industrial sprawl, risking irreparable damage to ancient landscapes and archaeological treasures.
Wildlife habitats will be destroyed, and shading under the panels will degrade vegetation, impacting grazing and local ecosystems.
It is vital to give your feedback to IGP and let them know in your own words why you object to their proposals. Decide what messages you want to get across and leave it at that. Q1 is about national policy rather than local issues and we would suggest ignoring it.
replaced with acres of solar panels up to 4.5 metres high, with tall mesh security fencing, security cameras, inverter cabins, substations, batteries and lighting.
that cross the proposed solar farm area, and access to rural amenities. Would you use footpaths that are narrow corridors between security fences?
The effects on your mental health of living near an ugly industrial development.
are the studies by the developer sufficient to understand the effects on wildlife,
both common and rare or protected species that experts and locals are aware of including otters, water voles, bats and birds such as owls, migratory species such as swallows and swifts? Are the mitigation measures they propose going to be adequate?
some existing hedgerows will have to be removed to get access to build the farm and cable route and this will compromise wildlife. How quickly will new hedging grow, will it be adequate to screen installations and will deciduous screening be adequate during winter months?
See Expert Report on Storm Bert under Stop Lime Down Campaign tab
The risk of permanent contamination of our water supply from: damaged panels; firefighting water if
there should be a fire in the battery storage system (BESS); herbicide application to substations.
We just have to look at other Lithium Battery fires in the news recently to see the risk.
The solar utlity’s proximity to where you live, any conservation areas, listed buildings including
homes, churches and monuments, and how the ‘setting’ around these areas will be affected.
How it will affect the nature of the Cotswold landscape and rural villages, and the value of homes:
although adverse effects on house prices are not a planning consideration, you should still mention it!
Note: planning decisions do not consider the loss of views from private properties.
The loss of income to local businesses, possible closure of pubs and cafés due to reduced tourism.
HGV traffic during the 2-year construction period and additional traffic once operational. Having to re-
route your own trips to avoid the heavy lorries. Danger to pedestrians and cyclists. Damage to
roadside buildings.
including the extensive piledriving which will be required.
Lights and noise from the sites’ inverter cabins, battery storage and transformers.Some, if not all,
solar panels will rotate to follow the sun: this will also generate noise. Effects of glint (flashes of bright
light) and glare (continuous reflected light) from the panels.
The ‘temporary’ 60-year tenure of the solar farm: how will lands be returned to former use (to be
farmed?); the risk of renewed planning permission or new alternative industrial development on what
will now be an industrial site.
(Likely to be made in China) their replacements over six decades and their disposal, cleaning and maintenance.