Dozens of objections against solar farm on border between West and South Yorkshire
More than 50 residents and councillors have so far objected to proposals to install solar panels on land near South Elmsall
Plans for a major solar farm on agricultural land straddling the border between West and South Yorkshire have been submitted.
More than 50 residents and councillors have so far objected to proposals to install solar panels along with a battery energy storage system (BESS) across 40 hectares of land near to South Elmsall.
Those opposed to the scheme said it could result in an “industrial landscape” returning to the former mining community.
Concerns have also been raised over flooding, the impact on local wildlife and risk of fire from the BESS facility.
BESS facilities take in power from renewable energy sources and then release it back to the National Grid when demand is high.
Infinis, the developer behind the application, said any environmental harm from the project would be “limited and localised” and contribute to national and local green energy targets.
The company’s cross-border proposals for the development, referred to as Colliery Junction Solar Park, have been outlined in documents submitted to Wakefield Council and Doncaster Council.
The applicant is seeking permission to install panels and energy storage units within a secure compound with new vehicle junctions and internal tracks.
Other proposed infrastructure includes the installation of an electricity substation, cabling and transformers at the green belt site.
If approved, the scheme would be in place for up to 40 years.
A total of 56 residents have objected to Wakefield Council since the plans were submitted on August 26.
One resident said: “This is the only home I’ve known and I’ve grown up with open fields and countryside around me.
“To suddenly have an industrial solar farm built there would completely change the area and take away what makes this place special.
“The fields already hold a lot of water after heavy rain.
“Putting solar panels on them will cause more run-off and make the problem worse for our street and the local community.
Another objector stated: “At a time when food security is so important, we should not be taking farmland out of food production to build solar farms.
“It is clear that brownfield or less sensitive sites have not been properly looked at.
“There are far more suitable locations for solar panels, such as rooftops, car parks or poorer quality land, without destroying valuable countryside and farmland.”
A third resident said: “This area, being on the edge of both South Yorkshire and West Yorkshire, does not have much to offer its residents.
“However, the one thing we do have is Frickley Country Park, which is a haven in the middle of a deprived and industrialised landscape.
“Granting permission for this solar farm will be developing the only natural vista we have.”
An objection submitted by Steve Tulley and Michelle Collins, councillors for South Elmsall and South Kirkby, said: “While residents support renewable energy in principle, this proposal conflicts with several national and local planning policies.
“The harm to green belt, biodiversity, agricultural land, amenity and flood safety significantly outweighs the benefits.”
The proposals have so far received one comment of support on Wakefield Council’s planning portal.
A planning statement submitted by Infinis said: “The clean energy and climate change mitigation credentials of the proposed developments give rise to environmental, economic and social benefits that positively contribute and promote strong, vibrant and healthy communities.
“The environmental harm is limited and localised. Subject to the successful implementation of the proposed mitigation measures, there would be no unacceptable adverse effects.”
The statement said the scheme complied with the “vision, principles and objectives” of plans to generate more renewable energy.
It added that there should be a ‘presumption in favour’ of approving the scheme, adding: “Applying the presumption means the scales of the planning balance do not start from an even keel; they are tilted in favour of approval.
“Having taken account of all the material considerations in this case, this statement finds planning permission should be approved without delay.”