Planning – Application Comments

Please see Documents tab for comments

Please see Documents tab for comments

Please see Documents tab for comments

Objection to Planning Applications: 25/01471/EIA
25/01472/EIA

To: Bedford Borough Council Planning Department
Application: 25/01471/EIA & 25/01472/EIA - Change of use of agricultural land for a solar farm (temporary permission up to 40 years) with associated infrastructure, ecological enhancements, landscaping, and access modifications.
Introduction

I wish to formally object to the above planning application. While I recognise the importance of renewable energy, this proposal is inappropriate due to its negative impacts on mental health and wellbeing, the loss of agricultural land, food security, soil health, and the wider environment.
________________________________________
1. Mental Health and Wellbeing Impacts
The proposed development will significantly reduce access to open green space currently used by the community. Extensive research demonstrates that natural environments are vital for psychological health and social connection.
- Green Social Prescribing (GSP): A nationally endorsed, evidence-based approach that connects people with nature to improve mental health. The Government's GSP pilots (2021-2025) showed dramatic improvements in life satisfaction, happiness, and reductions in anxiety for over 8,300 participants. Outcomes were described as "better than medication" and cost-effective compared to conventional therapies.
- Equity and Access: Vulnerable groups - including children, ethnic minorities, and those from deprived backgrounds - benefited most from GSP. Removing local, accessible green space disproportionately harms those most in need of non-medical, nature-based mental health support.
- Policy Alignment: The proposal conflicts with the UK's 25-Year Environment Plan and the Green Social Prescribing Project, both of which recognise the healing power of nature and commit to expanding, not diminishing, green access for public health.
By industrialising a therapeutic landscape, this proposal undermines a recognised health intervention strategy and increases inequality in mental health access.
________________________________________


2. Loss of Agricultural Land and Food Security
The application site is currently productive agricultural land. Converting it to solar infrastructure undermines local and national food resilience.
- National Food Security: The UK imports almost half its food supply. Any reduction in domestic agricultural capacity increases vulnerability to global market fluctuations, conflict, and climate shocks.
- Best and Most Versatile (BMV) Land: This site is Grades 1-3a, it should be safeguarded. The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) makes clear that BMV agricultural land should not be developed unless absolutely necessary.
- Local Food Networks: Retaining farmland sustains local economies, reduces food miles, and supports community resilience. With growing population and climate pressures, preserving land for food production must take priority.
________________________________________
3. Environmental and Ecological Concerns
- Soil and Ecosystem Services: Healthy farmland soils support carbon storage, flood prevention, and biodiversity. Solar development risks compacting soil, reducing fertility, and degrading these long-term ecosystem services.
- Landscape and Character: The installation of solar arrays and infrastructure fragments habitats, diminishes rural character, and reduces opportunities for informal therapeutic use of open countryside.
- Climate Trade-offs: Solar energy is vital for decarbonisation, but it should not displace multi-functional green land. More sustainable options exist: rooftops, brownfield sites, car parks, and industrial estates. These provide renewable energy without sacrificing food production or green wellbeing space.
________________________________________
4. Conflict with Planning Policy
This proposal is inconsistent with:
- National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF): Protects BMV agricultural land, requires consideration of food security, and balances renewable energy benefits with countryside protection.
- DEFRA & Food Strategy: Recent policy highlights the importance of maintaining agricultural capacity to ensure national resilience.
- Local Plan Objectives: Bedford Borough's Local Plan recognises the need to balance renewable energy with agricultural protection and the preservation of rural character.
________________________________________


Conclusion
In summary:
- The development will erode vital green space, harming mental health and undermining nationally supported social prescribing interventions.
- It will cause the permanent loss of agricultural land, reducing food security at both local and national levels.
- It will damage soils, biodiversity, and landscape character - contradicting national and local policy priorities.
- Alternative siting options for solar exist that do not compromise food production or mental health benefits.

For these reasons, I strongly urge Bedford Borough Council to refuse this application.

Not Available

To: Bedford Borough Council Planning Department
Application: 25/01471/EIA - Change of use of agricultural land for a solar farm (temporary permission up to 40 years) with associated infrastructure, ecological enhancements, landscaping, and access modifications.
I strongly object to this application on the following grounds, particularly concerning mental health and wellbeing impacts:
1. Mental Health and Wellbeing Impacts
1. Loss of Green Space and its Mental Health Consequences
The proposed development will convert valuable agricultural and natural land - currently providing open, green space - into a solar farm with associated infrastructure. Research has proven that green and accessible landscapes significantly contribute to mental wellbeing. Green spaces offer opportunities for psychological restoration, anxiety relief, and social connection.
- Green Social Prescribing (GSP) is a nationally endorsed, evidence-based approach where healthcare practitioners refer individuals to nature-based activities to improve mental and physical health (NHS England, 2020; Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC), 2022).
- A major cross-government GSP pilot (2021-2025) delivered dramatic improvements in mental health: over 8,300 participants experienced significant increases in happiness, life satisfaction, and reductions in anxiety - bringing them in line with national averages (Beyond Greenspace, 2024; Sheffield University, 2024; The Guardian, 2024).
- Participants described nature-based interventions as "better than medication" and more cost-effective than typical therapies like CBT - a green prescription cost about £500 vs. roughly £1,000 for therapy sessions (Sheffield University, 2024; The Guardian, 2024).
By reducing local accessible green space, the proposal undermines public access to environments that support natural mental health interventions. This is especially concerning for residents who may rely on nearby natural areas as part of their mental wellbeing routines or nature-based referrals.
2. Barrier to Access and Health Inequality
Green prescribing initiatives are especially impactful for vulnerable populations - children, people from ethnic minorities, socio-economically deprived areas - who saw notable benefits during GSP pilots (Beyond Greenspace, 2024; Sheffield University, 2024). If local natural space is diminished, it disproportionately affects these groups, exacerbating pre-existing inequalities in access to nature and to accessible non-medical mental health support.
- Surveys indicate that low-income households and disabled individuals already spend less time in nature due to access and resource barriers (Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC), 2023).
- Removing open, green land in the community further reduces equitable access to mental health-supporting environments.
3. Contradiction with National Environmental and Health Strategy
This site's development conflicts with the objectives of holistic environmental and health strategies.
- The UK's 25-Year Environment Plan and the governmental "Preventing and Tackling Mental Ill-Health through Green Social Prescribing" project aim to harness the natural environment to prevent mental ill-health and reduce demand on the health system (ECEHH, 2025; Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC), 2022).
- Natural England emphasises the healing power of nature and that green spaces are perceived by 90% of adults as supporting mental wellbeing (Natural England, 2022).
- Active GSP frameworks rely on vulnerable people being able to engage with community green spaces - something made harder if such land is reduced or access is restricted.
Therefore, approving a long-term solar site that limits use or connectivity to natural space conflicts with longitudinal national goals for environmental health synergy.
4. Loss of Landscape Connectivity and Informal Therapeutic Use
Even if the application includes ecological enhancements, the landscape connectivity, tranquillity, and sense of escape that people currently obtain from open fields would be altered. Such settings are often used informally for walking, solitude, reflection, or social activities in nature - all key elements of therapeutic benefit - as evidenced in patient and clinician perceptions of GSP (Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC), 2023).
The site's conversion to industrial infrastructure - even if greened - cannot replicate the same restorative qualities that unspoiled, accessible green land provides.
2. Loss of Agricultural Land and Food Security
The proposed site is currently productive agricultural land. Converting this into industrial-scale solar infrastructure raises serious concerns about food security and sustainable land use.
- National Food Security Concerns:
The UK currently imports around 46% of its food supply. The Climate Change Committee and the National Food Strategy highlight that reducing domestic agricultural capacity makes the nation more vulnerable to supply chain shocks, climate instability, and global market fluctuations.
- Best and Most Versatile (BMV) Land:
This site falls within Grades 1-3a agricultural land (BMV); it should be safeguarded for food production. National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF, Para. 174 & 183) explicitly states that development on BMV land should be avoided unless absolutely necessary. Using high-quality farmland for energy generation undermines the UK's resilience and directly conflicts with national planning priorities.
- Local Food Production and Community Resilience:
Productive farmland contributes to local food networks and reduces dependency on imports. Preserving agricultural capacity is especially important as the East of England faces growing pressures from climate change, water scarcity, and population growth.
3. Environmental and Ecological Concerns
- Soil Health and Ecosystem Services:
Agricultural soils provide ecosystem services beyond food production: carbon storage, flood mitigation, and biodiversity support. Large-scale solar developments risk compacting soil, disrupting hydrology, and reducing long-term fertility.
- Landscape and Biodiversity:
While ecological mitigation is promised, solar arrays fragment landscapes, alter habitats, and reduce openness. Visual intrusion and the industrialisation of rural land alter the character of the countryside, with knock-on effects for both wildlife corridors and human restorative use.
- Climate Trade-offs:
While solar energy supports decarbonisation, this must not come at the expense of land that can deliver multiple climate resilience benefits. Distributed solar on rooftops, brownfield land, and urban sites provides renewable energy without displacing food production or open landscapes.
4. Contradiction with Policy Priorities
- National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF): Protects BMV land and requires decision-makers to balance renewable energy benefits with the need to safeguard food security and rural character.
- DEFRA & Food Strategy: Recent government statements emphasise the importance of securing resilient domestic food systems, especially post-pandemic and in response to climate change.
- Local Policy: Bedford Borough's Local Plan also recognises the importance of balancing renewable energy with agricultural protection and countryside character.
This proposal therefore conflicts with multiple strategic aims at both national and local levels.
Conclusion & Recommendation
In addition to the serious mental health impacts highlighted, this proposal threatens domestic food security, soil health, and biodiversity, while contradicting planning principles designed to safeguard agricultural land.
- The proposal would erode local green space, reducing both organised and spontaneous nature access essential for mental health.
- This adversely affects mental wellbeing, health equity, and contradicts national wellbeing and environmental strategies.
- The site currently offers non-medical therapeutic value that supports green social prescribing goals, helping reduce mental health burdens - this value must be preserved.
- Agricultural land is a finite, strategic resource.
- The UK cannot afford to displace food production with energy infrastructure when alternative solar siting options exist (rooftops, brownfield, car parks, industrial land).
- The long-term costs of losing productive farmland far outweigh the short-term gains in renewable energy generation.
For these reasons, I urge Bedford Borough Council to refuse this application.

To: Bedford Borough Council Planning Department
Application: 25/01471/EIA & 25/01472/EIA - Change of use of agricultural land for a solar farm (temporary permission up to 40 years) with associated infrastructure, ecological enhancements, landscaping, and access modifications.
I strongly object to this application on the following grounds, particularly concerning mental health and wellbeing impacts:
1. Mental Health and Wellbeing Impacts
1. Loss of Green Space and its Mental Health Consequences
The proposed development will convert valuable agricultural and natural land - currently providing open, green space - into a solar farm with associated infrastructure. Green and accessible landscapes are proven to play a vital therapeutic role in mental wellbeing. Green spaces offer opportunities for psychological restoration, anxiety relief, and social connection.
- Green Social Prescribing (GSP) is a nationally endorsed, evidence-based approach where healthcare practitioners refer individuals to nature-based activities to improve mental and physical health (NHS England, 2020; Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC), 2022).
- A major cross-government GSP pilot (2021-2025) delivered dramatic improvements in mental health: over 8,300 participants experienced significant increases in happiness, life satisfaction, and reductions in anxiety - bringing them in line with national averages (Beyond Greenspace, 2024; Sheffield University, 2024; The Guardian, 2024).
- Participants described nature-based interventions as "better than medication" and more cost-effective than typical therapies like CBT - a green prescription cost about £500 vs. roughly £1,000 for therapy sessions (Sheffield University, 2024; The Guardian, 2024).
By reducing local accessible green space, the proposal undermines public access to environments that support natural mental health interventions. This is especially concerning for residents who may rely on nearby natural areas as part of their mental wellbeing routines or nature-based referrals.
2. Barrier to Access and Health Inequality
Green prescribing initiatives are especially impactful for vulnerable populations - children, people from ethnic minorities, socio-economically deprived areas - who saw notable benefits during GSP pilots (Beyond Greenspace, 2024; Sheffield University, 2024). If local natural space is diminished, it disproportionately affects these groups, exacerbating pre-existing inequalities in access to nature and to accessible non-medical mental health support.
- Surveys show that low-income households and disabled individuals already spend less time in nature due to access and resource barriers (Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC), 2023).
- Removing open, green land in the community further reduces equitable access to mental health-supporting environments.
3. Contradiction with National Environmental and Health Strategy
This site's development conflicts with the objectives of holistic environmental and health strategies.
- The UK's 25-Year Environment Plan and the governmental "Preventing and Tackling Mental Ill-Health through Green Social Prescribing" project aim to harness the natural environment to prevent mental ill-health and reduce demand on the health system (ECEHH, 2025; Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC), 2022).
- Natural England emphasises the healing power of nature and that green spaces are perceived by 90% of adults as supporting mental wellbeing (Natural England, 2022).
- Active GSP frameworks rely on vulnerable people being able to engage with community green spaces - something made harder if such land is reduced or access is restricted.
Therefore, approving a long-term solar site that limits use or connectivity to natural space conflicts with longitudinal national goals for environmental health synergy.
4. Loss of Landscape Connectivity and Informal Therapeutic Use
Even if the application includes ecological enhancements, the landscape connectivity, tranquillity, and sense of escape that people currently obtain from open fields would be altered. Such settings are often used informally for walking, solitude, reflection, or social activities in nature - all key elements of therapeutic benefit - as evidenced in patient and clinician perceptions of GSP (Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC), 2023).
The site's conversion to industrial infrastructure - even if greened - cannot replicate the same restorative qualities that unspoiled, accessible green land provides.
2. Loss of Agricultural Land and Food Security
The proposed site is currently productive agricultural land. Converting this into industrial-scale solar infrastructure raises serious concerns about food security and sustainable land use.
- National Food Security Concerns:
The UK currently imports around 46% of its food supply. The Climate Change Committee and the National Food Strategy highlight that reducing domestic agricultural capacity makes the nation more vulnerable to supply chain shocks, climate instability, and global market fluctuations.
- Best and Most Versatile (BMV) Land:
This site falls within Grades 1-3a agricultural land (BMV), it should be safeguarded for food production. National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF, Para. 174 & 183) explicitly states that development on BMV land should be avoided unless absolutely necessary. Using high-quality farmland for energy generation undermines the UK's resilience and directly conflicts with national planning priorities.
- Local Food Production and Community Resilience:
Productive farmland contributes to local food networks and reduces dependency on imports. Preserving agricultural capacity is especially important as the East of England faces growing pressures from climate change, water scarcity, and population growth.
3. Environmental and Ecological Concerns
- Soil Health and Ecosystem Services:
Agricultural soils provide ecosystem services beyond food production: carbon storage, flood mitigation, and biodiversity support. Large-scale solar developments risk compacting soil, disrupting hydrology, and reducing long-term fertility.
- Landscape and Biodiversity:
While ecological mitigation is promised, solar arrays fragment landscapes, alter habitats, and reduce openness. Visual intrusion and the industrialisation of rural land alter the character of the countryside, with knock-on effects for both wildlife corridors and human restorative use.
- Climate Trade-offs:
While solar energy supports decarbonisation, this must not come at the expense of land that can deliver multiple climate resilience benefits. Distributed solar on rooftops, brownfield land, and urban sites provides renewable energy without displacing food production or open landscapes.
4. Contradiction with Policy Priorities
- National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF): Protects BMV land and requires decision-makers to balance renewable energy benefits with the need to safeguard food security and rural character.
- DEFRA & Food Strategy: Recent government statements emphasise the importance of securing resilient domestic food systems, especially post-pandemic and in response to climate change.
- Local Policy: Bedford Borough's Local Plan also recognises the importance of balancing renewable energy with agricultural protection and countryside character.
This proposal therefore conflicts with multiple strategic aims at both national and local levels.
Conclusion & Recommendation:
In addition to the serious mental health impacts highlighted, this proposal threatens domestic food security, soil health, and biodiversity, while contradicting planning principles designed to safeguard agricultural land.
- The proposal would erode local green space, reducing both organised and spontaneous nature access essential for mental health.
- This adversely affects mental wellbeing, health equity, and contradicts national wellbeing and environmental strategies.
- The site currently offers non-medical therapeutic value that supports green social prescribing goals, helping reduce mental health burdens - this value must be preserved.
- Agricultural land is a finite, strategic resource.
- The UK cannot afford to displace food production with energy infrastructure when alternative solar siting options exist (rooftops, brownfield, car parks, industrial land).
- The long-term costs of losing productive farmland far outweigh the short-term gains in renewable energy generation.
For these reasons, I urge Bedford Borough Council to refuse this application.

Reference List:

Beyond Greenspace. (2024) Green Social Prescribing 'Test and Learn' Pilots: National Evaluation Final Report Published. Beyond Greenspace Blog, 4 September. Available at: https://beyondgreenspace.net/2024/09/04/green-social-prescribing-test-and-learn-pilots-national-evaluation-final-report-published/ (Accessed: 9 September 2025).

DEFRA. (2019) Therapeutic Nature: Nature-Based Social Prescribing for Diagnosed Mental Health Conditions. Project Code PH0509. London: Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. Available at: https://randd.defra.gov.uk/ProjectDetails?ProjectId=20772 (Accessed: 9 September 2025).

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA). (2021) The National Food Strategy: The Plan. London: DEFRA. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-food-strategy-for-england (Accessed: 9 September 2025).

Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC). (2023) National Planning Policy Framework. London: DLUHC. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-planning-policy-framework--2 (Accessed: 9 September 2025).

Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC). (2022) Green Social Prescribing: Delivery and Capacity Assessment. London: DHSC. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-green-social-prescribing-delivery-capacity-assessment (Accessed: 9 September 2025).

Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC). (2023). Exploring perceptions of green social prescribing among clinicians and the public. London: DHSC. Available at: Exploring perceptions of green social prescribing among clinicians and the public - GOV.UK (Accessed: 9 September 2025).

European Centre for Environment & Human Health (ECEHH). (2025) Therapeutic Nature: Nature-based social prescribing for diagnosed mental health conditions in the UK. University of Exeter Medical School. Available at: https://www.ecehh.org/research/therapeutic-nature-nature-based-social-prescribing-for-diagnosed-mental-health-conditions/ (Accessed: 10 September 2025).

Natural England. (2022) Social Prescribing: The Power of Nature as Treatment. Natural England Blog, 12 April. Available at: https://naturalengland.blog.gov.uk/2022/04/12/social-prescribing-the-power-of-nature-as-treatment/ (Accessed: 9 September 2025).

Natural England. (2025) Green Social Prescribing and Mental Health. LinkedIn post, 8 August. Available at: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/natural-england_greensocialprescribing-socialprescribing-ugcPost-7359164814968954882-ieej/ (Accessed: 9 September 2025).

NHS England. (2020) Green Social Prescribing. London: NHS England. Available at: https://www.england.nhs.uk/personalisedcare/social-prescribing/green-social-prescribing/ (Accessed: 9 September 2025).

Sheffield University. (2024) Prescribing Nature Can Improve Happiness and Reduce Anxiety, New Research Shows. Sheffield: University of Sheffield News, 4 September. Available at: https://www.sheffield.ac.uk/news/prescribing-nature-can-improve-happiness-and-reduce-anxiety-new-research-shows (Accessed: 9 September 2025).

The Guardian. (2024) 'Better than Medication': Prescribing Nature Works, Project Shows. The Guardian, 4 September. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/sep/04/better-than-medication-prescribing-nature-works-project-shows (Accessed: 9 September 2025).

OBJECT

I strongly object to this application
25/01471/EIA

The development of this will have a detrimental impact on all surrounding areas family's and wildlife

The site will industrialise a vast space currently regularly walked by many in the local area
The physical and mental health benefits of this activity will be lost as a result of this development.

The disruption caused by the construction and operations will have a huge impact on surrounding areas

We already suffer the impact of a large power plant and solar farm in the village causing vast amounts of odour and traffic.

We the local people will see no benefits what so ever yet have to suffer all of the associated hardships our rural locations will be ruined by a development 5 times the size of the the village

Our homes will almost definitely be de valued by this development. Having grown up in wymington and having just purchased my own home in poddington I am worried this could even have an effect on my ability to pay my mortgage imagine who would care of another young couple got pushed in to negative equity and lose there home.
The developer of this site won't.


Alone from that the environmental impact will be vast
Affecting all of the wildlife in the area
We bost a wide range of wildlife all of which will be disrupted during the development and operation of the site.

This GRADE 2 agricultural land is ideal for growing cereal crops
Not grade 3 -4 as claimed

Farm land should be to feed the population

With 200 acres of solar panels being equivalent to just 1 North Sea wind turbine this in not green at all
And to add to that when the site is eventually retired the matiral used will all have to go to landfill due to not being able to recycle them.


We as a local area already do our bit for green energy

We have as previously mentioned a large power plant producing odour noise and traffic. ( ACL at goosey Lodge)

We have a second smaller plant also another food waste anerobic digester is situated just up the road ( biogen Westwood)

We also bost a solar farm at goosey loge and further solar farms and wind farms in a wider radius

The installation of this infrastructure will open the way for more and more of our valuable farmland to be destroyed.

There has been no plan put in place to reinstate the land in the future and will likely be lost forever

In 40 years this technology will likely have been left behind for far more efficient alternative but our farmland will be gone.

And to top it all off the profits money we pay in our taxes will go abroad not even supporting our economy.

If you have made it to the end of this document you will see I am not the sort to write very often but this development would be a disaster for all of us in the locality

And no benefits

I hope this shows the strength of my matiral objections to this development.

Regards
Curtis turff
Local resident for my entire life
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS 10/09/2025
With reference to the above planning application, I wish to lodge my object for the following reasons:

Firstly, it is five times the size of the village, totally swamping it, this alone is unreasonable. The villagers,and other locals walk this area, the public rights of way are used a lot. The benefits from countryside walking for mental health are unquestionably huge. Walking in a sea of glass will not have the same positive effect. Almost all the village footpaths are in this western side of the village. This brings me to the point that the Public Rights of Way were omitted from the planning application. Why?

This area is walked to enjoy varied views and wildlife. What effect will it have on the wildlife? The vast fenced area will without doubt effect the movement of the many deer, foxes, badgers (which obviously are a protected species), rabbits and hares, just to start. There is an abundance of bird life, including more protected species such as Red Kites and Buzzards.

The land is Grade 2 agricultural, ideal for growing cereal crops, NOT 3 - 4 as claimed. With 200 acres of solar panels needed to generate the same power as one north sea wind turbine, this is not efficient green energy. Infact I dispute that it is green at all. Given that the solar panels will almost certainly be shipped from China, where they will be manufactured in a carbon polluting manner, and will have to go into landfill when disposed of, as they are not recycleable. Not reducing carbon footprint, but exporting it.

All roads leading to the area are country lanes with height restrictions on railway bridges, Wymington side, and narrow, tight bends from Podington.

The planning application is for up to 40 years. If we are still using this solar farm in 40 years then in reality our technology has gone backwards. In all probability the solar farm will be obsolete long before this. Why are there no plans for land restoration, such as with quarries.

There are no benefits to the local community, we will not receive discounted energy, our homes will likely loose value, but we have to suffer all the losses incurred by its development.

Wymington is already surrounded by multiple solar farms, the fact many are in Northamptonshire does not make them invisible to us. Wymington already has a very high capacity anaerobic digester, that is ungoing expansion right now. We regularly suffer bad odours and noise from this facility, which also already includes a solar farm.

It is a disgrace that the development of this solar farm could even be considered, given that there is no capacity to add it to the National Grid until 2031.

In short this is nothing less than industrializing our countryside and open spaces. We invested in the village for a rural enviornment, not a industrilized sprawl.

Once the infrastructure is in place to finally connect to the National Grid, it will be like building a village bypass, allowing for more development of further solar farms on our precious farmland and countryside.

And to rub salt in the wound, the profits, largely paid for from our taxes all will be going to Spain, as the only profit in so called green energy comes from government grants.

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS 10/09/2025
With reference to the above planning application, I wish to lodge my object for the following reasons:

Firstly, it is five times the size of the village, totally swamping it, this alone is unreasonable. The villagers,and other locals walk this area, the public rights of way are used a lot. The benefits from countryside walking for mental health are unquestionably huge. Walking in a sea of glass will not have the same positive effect. Almost all the village footpaths are in this western side of the village. This brings me to the point that the Public Rights of Way were omitted from the planning application. Why?

This area is walked to enjoy varied views and wildlife. What effect will it have on the wildlife? The vast fenced area will without doubt effect the movement of the many deer, foxes, badgers (which obviously are a protected species), rabbits and hares, just to start. There is an abundance of bird life, including more protected species such as Red Kites and Buzzards.

The land is Grade 2 agricultural, ideal for growing cereal crops, NOT 3 - 4 as claimed. With 200 acres of solar panels needed to generate the same power as one north sea wind turbine, this is not efficient green energy. Infact I dispute that it is green at all. Given that the solar panels will almost certainly be shipped from China, where they will be manufactured in a carbon polluting manner, and will have to go into landfill when disposed of, as they are not recycleable. Not reducing carbon footprint, but exporting it.

All roads leading to the area are country lanes with height restrictions on railway bridges, Wymington side, and narrow, tight bends from Podington.

The planning application is for up to 40 years. If we are still using this solar farm in 40 years then in reality our technology has gone backwards. In all probability the solar farm will be obsolete long before this. Why are there no plans for land restoration, such as with quarries.

There are no benefits to the local community, we will not receive discounted energy, our homes will likely loose value, but we have to suffer all the losses incurred by its development.

Wymington is already surrounded by multiple solar farms, the fact many are in Northamptonshire does not make them invisible to us. Wymington already has a very high capacity anaerobic digester, that is ungoing expansion right now. We regularly suffer bad odours and noise from this facility, which also already includes a solar farm.

It is a disgrace that the development of this solar farm could even be considered, given that there is no capacity to add it to the National Grid until 2031.

In short this is nothing less than industrializing our countryside and open spaces. We invested in the village for a rural enviornment, not a industrilized sprawl.

Once the infrastructure is in place to finally connect to the National Grid, it will be like building a village bypass, allowing for more development of further solar farms on our precious farmland and countryside.

And to rub salt in the wound, the profits, largely paid for from our taxes all will be going to Spain, as the only profit in so called green energy comes from government grants.

I object to this application.

As a Podington resident it is quite beyond my comprehension that this site is considered suitable.

All construction traffic, for what we are led to believe will be for 9 months, will travel in excess of 5 miles from the nearest A road.
The first hurdle these likely large articulated vehicles will encounter, is a downhill approach to an ancient, single lane bridge, currently awaiting repair from the most recent, and frequent of collisions.
Then the approach to the "Santa Pod" crossroads, already congested causing access issues for residents during many large events during the year - these are not just at weekends.
On to the village, past the Primary school of some 75 pupils with no pedestrian crossing and garden centre with it's own supply of large delivery vehicles.
The juggernauts will then proceed along the quaint, thatched, Domesday Book mentioned High Street, before a severe narrow blind corner which often sees vehicles in the middle of the road to oncoming traffic causing many, many accidents over the years.

This is a very popular route with cyclists who will be at increased danger and these roads, as with many other Borough wide, are already in the most disgraceful state of repair with golf bunker sized potholes being patched and bodged without real improvement.

I fully support all other objections with regard to the wildlife and loss of public footpaths.

To whom it may concern,
We wish to state our OBJECTION to the planning applications proposed in our village and surrounding fields, Ref 25/01471/EIA & Ref 25/01472/EIA.
We feel that the impact on wildlife and the land usage is highly detrimental to our community.

of these Planning applications of a gigantic area to be turned into solar panels!

It will DESTROY LIFE of ALL the WILDLIFE that lives in this HUGE area which NEEDS protecting not destroying
It will ruin the look of the area
This whole area is so BEAUTIFUL and PEACEFUL
To WALK around this area is good for all the people who love being out in the fields to just spend time with nature and be able enjoy such a beautiful place !
People come from all over the surrounding area just to walk around this beautiful area and find peace not just the local villages who love walking our footpaths in this area
We are soo very lucky to be living in such a beautiful place and have all the wildlife and to have all thiis so close to us why Ruin Our beautiful land ?
It will be so depressing having all we have destroyed
People love this area! People in the future should be able to love this area and be able to walk here and enjoy this beautiful land as it is!
I TOTALLY OBJECT to both of these Planning permissions to go ahead!
Very sad regards

This solar farm is incredibly large and will change the nature of the countryside around Wymington and Poddington. The view and enjoyment of the countryside from the public paths involved should be considered.