****Points that are not relevant to planning law****
1. Biomass and other alternative renewable energies.
2. The people involved.
3. The money involved.
4. Any subsidies the developers would receive.
5. The efficiency of solar power.
6. Any personal issues.
Instead, the subject(s) of your letter should ideally come under one of these headings in
order to be “valid”
1.Damage to Landscape Character and Visual Impact.
2.Damage to the Local Economy.
3.Impact on Nature Conservation.
4.Cultural Heritage.
5.Living conditions nearby, including Noise and other pollution.
6.The Cumulative impact with other similar developments.
Points you can use
Green Belt: The proposed land (for Channel View) is GREEN BELT land. There really should
not be any other discussion about the proposal after this as you cannot put structures on
green belt land. The solar panels should be considered to be an inappropriate development
that is not in keeping with the local surroundings. If this was accepted then the land would
no longer be considered as Green Belt and therefore who is to say that we could not end up
with another housing estate being put on the land?
This is Best And Most Versatile Land (BMV). It is shown on the latest Agricultural Land
Surveys as Grade 2 and as such should be reserved for agriculture.
Visual Impact: The proposal is so large that it would dominate the whole area and would be
seen for miles. The panels are VERY large and will require a high metal fence round the edge
of the field. Do you want to see this at the bottom of your garden? When considering a
planning application you must consider the openness of the space. This proposal is on such
a massive scale.
Temporary: The proposals state that they are only going to be temporary, but in this case
temporary is 25 years!
Wildlife: Must consider the negative effect that this will have on our wildlife. The fields and
hedges are teeming with wildlife. If the plans were to go ahead the countryside would be
totally destroyed.
Reflection and glare from the panels. Will residents be safe and able to use their gardens
once the panels are in place?
Lack of consultation: Please mention the way that the proposal has been put in. There has
been no consultation with local residents or the council. There has been no community
involvement which the government recommends there always should be. This is being
forced on us by a large company. We are meant to be a community that works together.
Health Risks: Many solar panels contain chemicals which could cause damage to the local
environment and possibly public health. Arsenic, cadmium telluride, hexafluoroethane, lead,
and polyvinyl fluoride could cause untold devastation should they leach into the water
supply. Silicon tetrachloride renders crops infertile, causes skin burns and increases the
likelihood of lung disease, and transforms into acids and poisonous hydrogen chloride gas
when exposed to air. What will happen if these panels break? Cadmium may be
carcinogenic. Exposure affects the lungs and kidneys and can be fatal. It's gene toxic and a
mutagen, so it has the ability to affect DNA, meaning it could affect reproduction and future
generations' DNA. Cadmium is technically banned by the European Union's Restriction on
Hazardous Substances directive, although the policy currently allows an exemption for its
use in solar modules.
Privacy: The solar panels will be so close to the properties and there can be no doubt that
our privacy will be affected. The panels will need maintaining that will mean security
personnel and workmen regularly on site looking into your gardens and houses.
Noise & Heat: The panels will cause a level of noise and when they are on such a large this
would ruin resident’s opportunity to enjoy the peaceful countryside.
Distraction to road users: The panels will be so large, drivers on the A48 could become
distracted and the chance of a road traffic accident massively increased.
Increased Fire Risk: How will the emergency services be able to access the site if there is a
fire?
Heavy rainfall would cause soil erosion and heighten the risk of flooding in the area.
Increase in traffic: Safety risk to our children and elderly members of the community on
what are already busy roads
Recycling: They are very hard to dispose of. Will they be left to cause irreversible damage to
our community and countryside?
Solar Farms should be built on brownfield sites in preference to areas of outstanding natural
beauty.
The various site being considered for the solar panels are in an area that I pass by regularly
and have friends whose properties will be affected (via visual impact) directly by the
development.
The scale of the developments will have a massive impact both on the visual and the
ecological aspects of the areas in question, I would imagine that people with properties
overlooking the development sites will find such a dramatic change to their outlook quite
depressing, possibly enough to make them wish to move from the area.
The access to this site is via routes that are not well suited to heavy plant type traffic.
I have no objections to solar farms on the whole but strongly object to the siting of them in
the proposed area and feel that there are many more suitable places available where the
impact would be felt a lot less by the ecology and the general public.
I cannot believe that you want to destroy such a beautiful peaceful place enjoyed so many
local residents and visitors to this area with such a proposal and wish to register my
opposition to this proposal.
It will destroy the amenity value of this area which has come to be a haven for walkers,
cyclists, mountain bikers, runners and others just interested in the beautiful scenery from
both inside and outside the area
It will impact upon the many heritage assets within the area.
The resourcing of green power should not be on green field sites. The whole point of green
energy is to preserve our valuable countryside and the ecological balance. Ensuing soil
erosion, unsightly fencing and cameras and threat to wildlife are good reasons for rejecting
this application.
This lovely area provides so much pleasure to so many people. My family and neighbours
and friends love the views and sense of freedom. This proposal is completely out of
character with the area.
I have had several friends from other parts of the UK visit and comment how lucky we are to
have this scenery right on our doorstep. Please will somebody see sense and protect this
incredible asset from ill thought out and inappropriate development.
These panels belong on the roofs of local schools and other large roof space such as
warehousing, not in a field in an unspoilt location.
Why is it preferable to use greenfield sites rather than brownfield sites? I would be
interested to read a convincing argument...
Planning permission for the construction and installation of the Solar Photovoltaic Farm
should be rejected without hesitation by Newport Council.
I have lived in the area for XX years and have enjoyed the unspoilt beauty of the area. It is a
habitat for numerous species of plants, animals and birds which would be destroyed by the
above installation.
It is also an attraction which encourages tourism to the area, as can be witnessed by the
numerous walkers, the sight of huge solar panels will certainly have a detrimental effect on
this which we can ill afford.
The traffic for installation and maintenance will be hazardous, to say the least as the narrow
country lanes are not equipped to cope with heavy lorries etc.
Surely it is the Council's duty to protect our green fields for future generations to enjoy.
This is a beautiful area and the development will ruin the area.
The solar farm will not benefit the community and provide no practical return for the
disruption and destruction it will cause.
The effect on the local wildlife (animals and horticultural) is devastating.
No development should take place on this land. It should be designated an area of
outstanding natural beauty and remain greenbelt.
I fundamentally oppose this planning application due to the visual impact it will have on the
landscape and the volume of traffic it generate in construction and maintenance phases.
Fields are for growing crops and or grazing animals not for growing solar panels. There is no
argument other than an easy option to make a quick profit for blighting the countryside in
such a disgraceful way. There are plenty of buildings that solar panels can be fitted to.
Why do we despoil the more natural areas of the country with solar farms, (and wind
turbines), when there are any amount of brownfield sites that could be used instead?
I was shocked and saddened when I first heard of the plans this solar farm, this is an
outstanding area of beauty and one I have known all my life, the view would be totally
spoiled should this go ahead, it would be a disaster and upset so many people.
I strongly object to this development. How can it even be considered as it would be a
travesty to an area of such natural beauty. It would also open the flood gates to more
developments in the area
The sheer size and scale of the proposed site will ruin the outstanding beauty of the whole
of the area. The area has walkers from around the country and to blight it in this way is
shocking it’s about time we stood up to the constant attacks on our beautiful countryside.
The development is totally out of character with the area and whilst I agree with solar
energy it should be on brown field sites. There is no point trying to protect one part of the
environment by destroying another part
Imagine my reaction when the solar panels I ordered have been hung on a north facing wall,
under the eaves, obscuring a window and destroying the swallows nest. I protest. The fitter
points out the super efficiency of the panels, the need to curb greenhouse gases and hires
an expert to tell me that the ivy he intends to plant will obscure them eventually. I protest.
He accuses me of being selfish and says that the view from my window was not up to much
in his opinion and I will get used to the loss of view in 15 years time anyway. More
importantly, he says that I should be proud of my contribution to humanity. I point out the
obvious fact that he has put them in the wrong place. He thrusts a wad of impressive
reports into my hand and suggests I could wear a blindfold. I ask why he is so keen to stick
to such an absurd position. He admits that he will be paid much more money if he can dump
them here.
What should I do? Perhaps I should seek advice from the council. Surely they cannot be so
easily fooled.
I grew up in the local area. I object to the proposed solar farm very deeply and am horrified
that the proposal is being put forward by the applicants. The area is valued for its beauty
and simple green-ness. The proposed photovoltaic arrays are huge in scale; their height will
ensure their visibility; the screening will ultimately block out any views into what is currently
green farmland; the site will always be visible. The nature of the area will be transformed
into - essentially - industrial, right in the middle of valued countryside.
It’s an unthinkable act of utter stupidity for such plans to even be considered on such a part
of local natural beauty.
Opening the floodgates springs to mind. This new application appears to be on land a
previous application attempted to put a golf course on. Is Newport Council going to allow
our beautiful countryside to become a solar panel dumping ground? This is exactly why this
planning application and any new proposals must be refused.
This area is designated Green Belt and as such should be free from this sort of industrial
development, there is no special case for this particular land. There is already an
acknowledged shortage of quality agricultural land in Wales. It is particularly close to areas
enjoyed by both locals and an increasing number of visiting walkers and cyclists. Keep Green
Belt for our enjoyment and recreation.
If this development were to go ahead, it will potentially serve as a 'green light' to other
similar developments in this area, which will further degrade the environment.
These proposals provide no social or economic benefits to the local community. It will
create significant traffic problems during construction, have no effective screening for many
years and will have a negative effect on wildlife.