Jump to content
Parish Clerk

Public Consultation - proposed Solar Farm Rhosygadfa

Recommended Posts

That's right ROBMIT.

If anyone wants to make representations to the Inspectorate directly, they can do it online using the following address :

acp.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/caseSearch.aspx

The case number is : 3142392

It's not too difficult, but worth the effort. The more people who use it will reflect the depth of resistance/objections there is to the deprivation of our lovely Shropshire countryside.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Above planning application:

I attended the council meeting in the pavilion last evening and was very disappointed that more members of the public did not attend.   I understand that there is to be another meeting shortly to discuss the matter further.   For those of you who really value the wonderful amenities of the beautiful Shropshire countryside and the fact that agricultural land should be used for just that rather than converted into industrial sites I do hope for more interest.   We have to lodge our appeal again by the 9th March at the very latest and as much support and as many useful comments we can muster will assist us in preventing even further destruction of our amenities and food production.  We may not own the land on which this change of use is being sought but we do own the atmosphere and views around it and we need to preserve our heritage for future generations and to safeguard the important tourist trade which such a beautiful area encourages and of course very important food production.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand that the Special Meeting is going to be held in Gobowen on 1st March at 7.00 pm at the Pavilion.

I hope many readers will read the 'activity' page on this website, and be encouraged to support the campaign to stop the further industrialisation of good quality agricultural land and retain  local amenities for future generations. It is vital that as many residents as possible voice/write their views to reflect the passion we have to protecting our beautiful Shropshire countryside.

Solar Energy should be generated on Roofs not in Fields

Edited by Bethan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Bethan,

Thanks for keeping us informed, as always, which I am certain that many of us appreciate.   I visited the area again on Thursday and just cannot understand how any planning authority could possibly agree to the desecration of such a beautiful area nor allow good farmland to be wasted for such a cause when as you say " Solar Energy should be generated on Roofs" and I would add of course, on brown-field sites, disused farmers' barn roofs and hidden enclosed yards etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A quick walk (or ride) will reveal that the hedges near the Solar Farm site have now been "slashed" at a level about 1 meter above last year's trim.

Is this the start? Or is the decision of the appeal being anticipated?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Extracts from an article published 9 months ago by CPRE

 

When you look at the economics, the reality is that most renewables just don’t work,                          
by Mike Greene, businessman, philanthropist and campaigner

 

I’m not against renewable energy. As a matter of fact, I have solar panels on the roof of my house. But when you look at the economics, the reality is that most renewables just don’t work – and are unlikely to ever work – if you take away the subsidies that come with setting them up Many local councils are keen to invest in solar energy because it’s seen as an easy win.

They are not driving these plans forward because of any green credentials; by slapping down solar panels they can gain access to Government funding and low-interest loans.

The subsidies involved are huge, because solar and wind energy still aren’t viable without them. One of the key arguments for renewables is the increasing cost of energy. The thing that seems to be ignored is that food prices are predicted to grow at a much higher rate than energy prices. At the moment, our supermarkets are in a strong negotiating position and can dictate cheap prices. But as consumption increases in China, India and Africa, the countries we import so much of our food from will increasingly be able to sell all their produce at home. We’re in a better position to grow crops than many countries, but if we haven’t kept our farmland, we’re going to be even shorter of food.

 

Our prime, or even secondary, agricultural land is the last place we should be looking to build solar or wind farms.

 

All the projected profits of the schemes are based on the optimistic, or naive, assumption that the solar panels will last 25 years with hardly any degradation in efficiency. With set-up costs being so high, profit could easily turn into a loss. Meanwhile, tenant farmers whose families have been working this land for five generations are being given notice to leave to make way for energy parks. They’ve sunk their life savings into their farms, and would receive minimal compensation. If you’re going to have solar, put it on top of buildings, not in the countryside. 

 

 If we’re going to subsidise things, let’s subsidise roof tiles that work as solar panels, and look at whether solar could be built into the planning  of all new housing. That’s not going to impact visually on the beautiful countryside, or harm farming, but it could help to generate energy for individual properties and feed something back to the National Grid. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is regrettable that the 5MW application, approved last December, does not also  include an agricultural plan.

 

One of the reasons in the statement made by the Secretary of State,made when dismissing an appeal against the refusal of planning permission at Parkham Old Hall reads :

 

  The Secretary of State also found the 25 years’ loss of agricultural land (there were no definitive plans for agricultural use alongside the development) “counts against the proposal”.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for posting this information Bethan which will be very useful when appealing to the Council to take into consideration all the "pros and cons" of this application and the "cons" seem to me to outweigh by a huge majority the "pros".

Without any bias it seems to me that ALL the points raised in the article are very valid and, especially, the last paragraph.

We must prevent this attempt to override the 2014 decision and also I hope we might be able to manage an appeal against the 2015 decision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Extracts from an article published 9 months ago by CPRE

 

 

 

 

 

When you look at the economics, the reality is that most renewables just don’t work,                          
by Mike Greene, businessman, philanthropist and campaigner

 

 

 

I’m not against renewable energy. As a matter of fact, I have solar panels on the roof of my house. But when you look at the economics, the reality is that most renewables just don’t work – and are unlikely to ever work – if you take away the subsidies that come with setting them up Many local councils are keen to invest in solar energy because it’s seen as an easy win.

They are not driving these plans forward because of any green credentials; by slapping down solar panels they can gain access to Government funding and low-interest loans.

 

The subsidies involved are huge, because solar and wind energy still aren’t viable without them. One of the key arguments for renewables is the increasing cost of energy. The thing that seems to be ignored is that food prices are predicted to grow at a much higher rate than energy prices. At the moment, our supermarkets are in a strong negotiating position and can dictate cheap prices. But as consumption increases in China, India and Africa, the countries we import so much of our food from will increasingly be able to sell all their produce at home. We’re in a better position to grow crops than many countries, but if we haven’t kept our farmland, we’re going to be even shorter of food.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Our prime, or even secondary, agricultural land is the last place we should be looking to build solar or wind farms.

 

 

 

 

 

 

All the projected profits of the schemes are based on the optimistic, or naive, assumption that the solar panels will last 25 years with hardly any degradation in efficiency. With set-up costs being so high, profit could easily turn into a loss. Meanwhile, tenant farmers whose families have been working this land for five generations are being given notice to leave to make way for energy parks. They’ve sunk their life savings into their farms, and would receive minimal compensation. If you’re going to have solar, put it on top of buildings, not in the countryside. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 If we’re going to subsidise things, let’s subsidise roof tiles that work as solar panels, and look at whether solar could be built into the planning  of all new housing. That’s not going to impact visually on the beautiful countryside, or harm farming, but it could help to generate energy for individual properties and feed something back to the National Grid. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

DON'T FORGET - SPECIAL MEETING TOMORROW TO DISCUSS APPEAL.

AT THE PAVILION, GOBOWEN - 7.00 PM

Edited by Bethan
DATE 1ST MARCH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the update and I appreciate and totally agree with Bethan's comments.

We must safeguard our agricultural lands and our wonderful unique Shropshire heritage which once ruined would be almost impossible to regain.   The loss to the country and, especially the people of Shropshire, that the agricultural benefits this land should provide could in no way justify its desecration.

Hope to see a big crowd tomorrow evening!

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading the agenda for tomorrow's Council Meeting , the chairman is only allowing 15 mins. for Public participation!!

Shame really,This project that will have such a detrimental effect on our precious countryside. Surely it would be courteous to allow the public more that 15 minutes to voice their opinion!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I agree with you Bethan, I have ticked this as a "like" but I certainly don't like it!

I am surprised and disappointed as we need all the enthusiasm we can muster to overcome this threat to our farmland and food production.   I imagine that many, like myself, are putting off other matters to attend this meeting and a time limit of 15 minutes does seem unreasonable and discourteous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DON'T FORGET EVERYONE THE PARISH COUNCIL MEETING IS ON WEDNESDAY, 9TH MARCH AT 7.00 PM IN THE PAVILION.

AMOUNGST OTHER THINGS, THERE WILL BE A DISCUSSION TO FINALISE THE OBJECTION TO THE APPEAL AGAINST THE SOLAR FARM

PLEASE TRY AND GET THERE TO ENSURE THAT THE POINTS MADE AT THE LAST MEETING (1ST MARCH) ARE COVERED!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're ABSOLUTELY RIGHT, Gardner - Thank you for putting out.

PLEASE NOTE EVERYBODY - THE COUNCIL MEETING IS AT SELATTYN SCHOOL ON WED. 9TH MARCH - 7.00 PM

Sorry about the misleading info earlier

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The documents for the appeal include a letter from the Inspectorate to Shropshire Council regarding a site visit.

It reads as follows :

"I am writing to inform you that the Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State to determine the above appeal(s) is L Crosby MA MRTPI The Inspector will visit the appeal site at 09:30 on 14 April 2016. It is important that you make immediate arrangements for the Inspector to be met at the site to enable the inspection to be made. If you cannot attend, you should arrange for someone else to attend in your place. If this is not possible, you must let me know immediately.

The Inspector will expect to be accompanied by representatives of both parties. If one of the parties fails to arrive, the Inspector will determine the most suitable course of action, which could mean that they will conduct the visit unaccompanied. In other circumstances, the visit might have to be aborted.

At the commencement of the site inspection the Inspector will make it clear that the purpose of the visit is not to discuss the merits of the appeal(s) or to listen to arguments from any of the parties.

The Inspector may ask the parties to draw attention to any physical features on the site and in its vicinity. In turn the Inspector may wish to confirm particular features referred to by interested parties in their written representations."

Lets hope it will be a nice day to draw as many people as possible to line the route with placards!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GREAT NEWS!

The appeal for the Solar Farm has been refused:- 

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 14 April 2016 by Louise Crosby MA MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government Decision date: 06 June 2016 Appeal Ref: APP/L3245/W/16/3142392 Rhosygadfa, Gobowen, SY10 7BP 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just read the GREAT NEWS!

Lets hope that this second refusal will stick and that the appalling saga is now closed. If Elgin wish to continue they must either find a way of making it more economically viable or withdraw.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×