Political opposition to controversial solar development spreads
POLITICAL opposition is mounting against plans for a huge solar farm - dubbed a ‘factory’ - which would cover vast tracts of open land around Rotherham communities.
MPs have already weighed in by raising objections to the Whitestone plan for a solar farm, so large would cover three distinct areas, both in Rotherham and across the boundary into Dearne areas of Doncaster.
Now members across different political groups at Rotherham Council have sent in a joint letter, spelling out their objections, to the proposals.
The development would be so large and important that a decision on whether it can go ahead will be made at Government level, rather than by local authority councillors, which would be customary.
Rotherham’s Conservative council group is leading the latest round of opposition, with all the council’s members from that party signing the letter, along with eight others from different political backgrounds joining them.
Cllr Joshua Bacon said: “We don’t see these proposals as a solar farm, we see them as a solar ‘factory’ that will scar our countryside for decades to come.
“We are calling on all Rotherham Borough Councillors to put party politics aside and join us in raising concerns share be many residents across the huge area affected,” he said.
The area affected by the proposals would be approaching 2,000 hectares with 1,370 of those covered with photovoltaic panels, to generate power.
The letter states: “As local councillors representing communities across the borough, we are deeply concerned by the sheer scale of industrial photovoltaic panels, battery energy storage systems, substations, access tracks and associated infrastructure proposed across open countryside and agricultural land.
“This is not a solar farm, but a solar factory.”
They say villages including Harthill, Alley, Ravenfield and Whiston would be all “radically” affected by the development.
There are similar concerns for communities including Conisbrough, which would be affected by one element of the Whitestone development.
The letter acknowledges that a ‘buffer’ for the site has been created by removing some proposed panels from the plan, totalling 279 hectares, but states: “While some mitigation is welcome, the fact that such a large reduction was required underscores how excessive the original layout was.”
They suggest that brownfield and rooftop developments should be prioritised as an alternative and have called on the company to withdraw the proposals.