Support

Representation ID: 42

Received: 07/03/2024

Respondent: Mrs Marie Jackson

No further comment

Object

Representation ID: 319

Received: 02/04/2024

Respondent: Mr John Bavister

Acceptance of PV growth is people having been green washed, not understanding the full and finite use of energy, the end-to-end real generation and release of carbon in the total process of manufacture, installing, decommissioning and disposing of PVs The true PV’s panel carbon footprint.
Time to consider the technical scientific implications,
One day, when PVs have inflicted enough carbon release, society will look back and discover the loss of all of the green land associated with this phase of delusion will not have been worthwhile and will be staring at a mess left in previously good agricultural fields.

Object

Representation ID: 679

Received: 19/04/2024

Respondent: Sally Jordan

Surely all new homes should have solar panels, heat source pumps etc? It’s much more expensive to retrofit properties so initial cost should be on the developer. Stamford North also demonstrates a high carbon approach to development (e.g bund removal and repositioning of water pipes which could easily be avoided)

Object

Representation ID: 1010

Received: 23/04/2024

Respondent: Dr Ray Butler

Renewables are ok, but don’t use double standards - using the agricultural argument only for renewables.

Object

Representation ID: 1220

Received: 24/04/2024

Respondent: Mr Adam Brookes

Given the national public interest in increasing the supply of renewable energy, local communities should not be given a veto but instead their concerns addressed in the normal way provided by other policies to ensure that those concerns are considered in the context of proposed mitigations and the benefits of the scheme on both a local but importantly national level.

Object

Representation ID: 1800

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Lincolnshire Wildlife Trust

We understand the Councils criteria as laid out in the consultation, but there is no recognition that renewable energy developments also have the potential to recover nature and deliver multiple benefits if designed correctly, such as, deliver natural flood management.
For example, South Kesteven, and Lincolnshire as a whole, has seen a significant increase in the number of proposed solar farms which present an opportunity to develop areas of multiple land-uses. The large areas such project often require present an opportunity to recover biodiversity at a landscape scale while increasing habitat connectivity, and delivering natural carbon capture through introduction of hedgerows or tree screening. These areas can also still contribute to food production, via grazing flocks and/or intercropping. Developers should be pushed to be as innovative as possible in regards to addressing public concern about national food production, and securing nature’s recovery.

Object

Representation ID: 1809

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Cllr Penny Milnes

I note from the recent Inspector’s decision to approve the Folkingham solar farm, S23/0511, that whilst the policy RE1b) states “The proposal can demonstrate the support of affected local communities” this is not reflected in the Renewable Energy Document in the appendix. Is this policy requirement to be retained as a material consideration enabling the impacted communities to have a voice?
also note that SK is to plan positively with policies to encourage renewable energy development in ‘the right places’, that there will be no ‘quota’ and to encourage use of roofs as well as reduce the loss of agricultural land, stressing the importance of agriculture in SK. Will the new policy be more explicit?

Object

Representation ID: 2092

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Buckminster

There is an inherent contradiction between Paragraph a. and e. as there is a presumption in favour of solar panels on grade 3b, 4 and 5 that will have a negative impact on that agricultural land asset in terms of reduced food security for as long as PV panels and their associated semi- industrial associated infrastructure remain.

Object

Representation ID: 2286

Received: 23/04/2024

Respondent: Central Lincolnshire Local Plan team

We are not sure that RE1: Renewable Energy Generation meets the requirements of footnote 58 of the NPPF. Without identifying areas as suitable for wind energy development in the development plan or supplementary planning document, any intended wind energy development would not be considered acceptable.

Support

Representation ID: 2331

Received: 23/04/2024

Respondent: National Highways

Policy RE1 sets out the Council’s policy on proposed development for the production of renewable energy. National Highways is supportive of such proposals in principle, however we would draw your attention to DfT policy with respect of proposals close the SRN.
As set out in DfT Circular 01/2022 paragraph 65-67, wind turbines should not be located where motorists need to pay particular attention to the driving task, such as the immediate vicinity of connections, sharp bends, and crossings for pedestrians, cyclists and horse-riders. To mitigate the risks to the safety of road users arising from structural or mechanical failure, wind turbines should be sited a minimum of height + 50 metres or height x 1.5 (whichever is the lesser) from the highway boundary of the SRN.
In addition, as per DfT Circular 01/2022 paragraph 70, some developments, notably solar farms, wind turbines and those with expansive glass facades, have the potential to create glint and glare which can be a distraction for drivers. Where these developments would be visible from the SRN, National Highways should be consulted on an appropriate assessment of the intensity of solar reflection likely to be produced. This should satisfy National Highways that safety on the SRN is not compromised.

Object

Representation ID: 2464

Received: 22/04/2024

Respondent: Phoenix Sustainable Investments Limited

The SKDC adopted renewable energy policy is onerous and restrictive. It will be difficult to bring forward renewable energy projects within the South Kesteven area taking into account the policy emphasis for ‘community support’ and the criteria against which applications are assessed.
The existing policy framework needs a full review to ensure it delivers the amount of new energy infrastructure that the District requires.
The existing South Kesteven policy guidance should be supplemented with an ‘Energy Opportunities Map’, or a specific wind, solar, BESS and energy to waste opportunities map as is commonly found in a number of adopted Local Plans across the country.
The Council should be focusing on setting a Renewable Energy Prospectus that sets out how much local energy demand, in the context of the population and business need of the authority area, can be secured from renewables such as small and large-scale wind turbines, solar energy generation, BESS and energy to waste.