No solar farm in our bit of England (Stanford on Soar and Normanton on Soar)

nono

#26

2014-07-27 15:02

the is not a brown field site

Guest

#27

2014-07-30 12:04

farm land should only be used for growing food

Guest

#28

2014-07-30 17:13

I wish to register my objection to the development of solar panels (Stanford on Soar & Normanton Areas)This is in the wrong place, in rural countryside on ‘Best and Most Variable’ agricultural land on a hillside. It is too close to neighbouring villages and will create an unnecessary visual impact for those communities and have a terrible visual impact on the stunning countryside.

Alex Caven Nottingham

Guest

#29

2014-08-20 20:44

Whilst greatly in favour of sustainable energy resources the siting of this farm in a rural area with narrow rural roads seems to go against all logic. Why not use brownfield sites with better communications

Guest

#30

2014-08-27 09:55

You only have to read the comments to understand the concerns  -  I am fully in favour with green energy but, there is a "right" place for everything & this is not it.  There is already a large installation on the Wymeswold airfield site which must surely be classed as brownfield & certainly NOT as valuable land as the proposed site  - as one or two comments pointed out, this is "Big Business UK" in partnership with Landowners, attempting to ride roughshod over small communities when there are clearly more appropriate areas to place this type of development - the alternative areas may NOT be greenfield & may NOT be as easily developed but they WILL have less impact on communities & wildlife & be far less of an ugly BLOT on the landscape for all to see.    Why not develop this encircling the landowner's property if they are so keen that it should go ahead, surely that would be an alternative site for this ugly mess, the two sites then would be comparable at least ?   Greed can be SO harmful & can eliminate any sense of responsibility to others which is EXACTLY what is being shown here with this proposal.

Rambler

#31

2014-08-29 14:12

Additional walking areas within the site boundary are proposed as a safe alternative to walking on the public roads. I can't imagine that most local rambler groups will choose to walk amongst arrays of 100,000+ solar panels in place of fields of crops. This is devastating to our local countryside.

Visual receptor

#32

2014-08-29 14:16

The presentation of the visual impact did not give a full view of the area. The video footage showed driving uphill with hedges screening the panels from the least visible angle and only showed 1 or 2 panels, not the full 55,000 which as now turned into over 105,000 - so the developers did not give an illustration of the full visual impact.

Local resident

#33 Planning Refusal Precedent

2014-08-29 14:25

I cannot see how this application could possibly be approved by the Planning Authority that refused permission for a 10m x 3m storage building on adjacent land 300 yards from the proposed area in 2012.


Guest

#34 No Solar Farm at Stanford

2014-09-06 11:41

While I am strongly in favour of renewable energy sources and realise that electricity is a valuable part of modern life. To take away the beautiful views of open farmland across from Normanton on Soar to Stanford and to put this blot on the landscape would be a sad decision.  The narrow roads in this area and the impact on these tiny villages would be overwhelming.  Has anyone taken in to consideration the logistics of get the units to the site and traffic need to maintain this infrastructure I am sure there is a better location without destroying our countryside. 


Guest

#35

2014-10-09 20:49

What a waste of valuable farm and widlife resources