Solar farm decision delayed
A decision on a scheme to put thousands of solar panels next to a village recreation ground has been deferred to enable Sport England to comment on the project.
The controversial scheme by Freetricity involves converting nearly 17 acres of farmland on the outskirts of Stoke Golding, near Hinckley.
-
If approved, the solar farm would generate enough energy to power more than 600 homes.
But the proposal is opposed by hundreds of people who have signed a petition and written protest letters to Hinckley and Bosworth Borough Council.
NEW LEBANESE HOME BUFFET EVERY DAY @ CEDARS LEBANESE REST £ 6.99...
Leicester's ONLY Lebanese Cuisine - Cedars Bar & Restaurant 46/48 Church Gate Leicester LE1 4AJ
View detailsA LA CARTE MENU ALWAYS AVAILABLE :)
Terms: Entertainment SATURDAY NIGHT Live Belly Dancer
Contact: 0116 2169184
Valid until: Monday, May 27 2013
Residents are concerned about the impact on the community and of the possible problems should cricketers hit balls into the development, smashing panels.
On Tuesday, more than 60 residents packed the public gallery when members of the planning committee agreed to defer the application until next month.
The protestors have formed Stoke Golding Concerned Residents' Action Group (SGCRAG).
SGCRAG spokeswoman Jane White said: "We now have time to make sure Sport England is consulted and we will be demanding a proper landscape and visual impact assessment is carried out.
"It is frightening to think that, had this development been agreed, work would start immediately to erect nearly 8,000 solar panels next to the recreation ground, so we are very relieved."
SGCRAG said Sport England was not aware of the application until they informed them before the weekend.
She said the local cricket club was particularly worried about the costs it could incur if its balls damaged the panels, as batsmen regularly hit them over the fence.
The group has also criticised screening proposals submitted by the developers to try to hide the 8ft security fences that will surround the 16.8 acre site.
Ms White said: "SGCRAG will be making sure all these issues are properly addressed and will be making sure the villagers are kept informed of further developments."
The proposal was opposed by county councillor Ivan Ould and district councillor Michael Mullaney.
MP David Tredinnick also voiced strong reservations about the scheme after meeting residents who were strongly opposed to it.
However, 11 people had written letters supporting the scheme
Nicholas Prinse, from Freet-ricity, would not comment on the decision to defer the application.
But a spokesman for the company told the council in its planning application: "The siting of the panels has been carefully selected, taking into account buildings nearby and a generally small minority of residents who may dislike the appearance of this particular type of solar panel."
The committee, which had been recommended to approve the scheme by its officers, will now discuss the project on February 19.
10 Comments
by Bigroy1340
Monday, January 28 2013, 9:21PM
“Just who will benefit from it. Will we get cheaper electric. And how much is coming out of the tax payers pocket.”
by 4_Stroke
Saturday, January 26 2013, 10:31AM
“The Government has already cut the feed-in (tax payer funded subsidy) for solar power which has caused some upset in the industry.... shame!
It is likely that if the economy continues to deteriorate then we will go the way of Spain and Greece and will kill it altogether as an unaffordable luxury. Even Germany has cut its subsidy on Solar Power because of escalating energy costs to the consumer.
These things will soon become rusting hulks scattered across our landscape.”
by roundthehorne
Friday, January 25 2013, 1:18PM
“Oh, the "landscape and rural outlook next to a recreation fround"? Oh my goodness. Those are absolutely vital to the future of society, aren't they? Far more important than reducing our dependance on fossil fuels that will soon run out.
stokeg, your hilarious attempt to justify this nimbyism just reinforces what a bunch of nimbys you and your neighbours are.
Why build on open countryside? Hmm, where else do you think we might find 17 acres of land? How about we put all these solar panels on your gardens and your driveways? Then you could play cricket to your heart's content.
This whole thing is pathetic. Even more self-serving, short-sighted and reactionary than that other lot with their bus lanes.”
by 4_Stroke
Friday, January 25 2013, 11:31AM
“A triumph of democracy over outdated political correctness.”
by stokeg
Friday, January 25 2013, 9:55AM
“Unfortunately this article and these comments do not give the full picture - this isn't about NIMBYs not wanting renewable energy in their backyard. It's about the landscape and rural outlook next to a recreation ground, which is well used by the residents, being wrecked for the sake of 16 footlball pitches' worth of solar panels - and the small amount of energy generated from these is not going to directly benefit the village. Yes, I live in Stoke Golding and, contrary to Freetricity's spokesperson, it's more than a small minority of residents who don't want this! Why build on open countryside?”
by prog_rock_fan
Thursday, January 24 2013, 5:22PM
“@Jane White: "It is frightening to think that, had this development been agreed, work would start immediately to erect nearly 8,000 solar panels"
Goodness no — renewable energy! The horror, the calamity! Reducing Britain's dependence on fossil fuels — the shame!
Never shall we allow our inalienable right to play cricket to be traduced by the needs of the planet!”
by prog_rock_fan
Thursday, January 24 2013, 5:22PM
“The NIMBY Cricketeers rear their ugly heads.”
by Shushhhh
Thursday, January 24 2013, 11:13AM
“Clearly cricket comes above the environment.”
by chemistman
Thursday, January 24 2013, 11:10AM
“Better get building that wind farm on the site then!”
by roundthehorne
Thursday, January 24 2013, 9:35AM
“Yawn. Another bunch of nimbys. None of these people have given this any thought, it's just a bunch of blinkered little-Englanders with their knee-jerk reactions against anything that might make the world a better place.”