Solar farm rejected for Lincolnshire site after strong opposition to the plans

Plans to build a new solar farm have been rejected after strong opposition from residents and politicians.

East Lindsey District Council's planning committee formally refused a controversial proposal from Push Energy to construct the 49.9MW solar farm on land next to Sotby Woods on Sturton Road in Hatton, near Horncastle.

The applicants said that the development would have powered about 21,000 homes per year and removed the equivalent of 12,500 tonnes of CO2 from the atmosphere annually, which the developers argued would help ELDC meet its net zero targets.

The plans stated that permission would last for only 40 years from the date of first generation. However, the 132kV substation and associated infrastructure would be kept on a permanent basis.

Residents in the surrounding parishes have publicly opposed the plans for some time, with a petition against it reaching 474 signatures and prompting 378 formal objections on the council's planning portal.

Conservative MPs Victoria Atkins (Louth & Horncastle) and Sir Edward Leigh (Gainsborough) also expressed opposition to the plans.

In a letter dated September 12, Mrs Atkins wrote: "I am supportive of placing solar panels on rooftops to get more power to the grid. Overall, I hold that our transition to net zero should be done in a proportionate and practical manner."

Ultimately, the committee chose to refuse the application based on its potential impact on the Grade II listed Sturton Harden Corner Farmhouse and curtilage listed farmstead, as well as the surrounding landscape.

Councillor Ruchira Yarsley (Independent), from the Hatton Action Group, said she was "absolutely ecstatic" after hearing the news of the meeting held on Thursday morning (October 3).

"We’re not against renewables; nobody can be in this day and age," said Councillor Yarsley.

"This part of Lincolnshire does not have a lot of grade listed buildings, so we have to protect what we’ve got."

The independent councillor also noted that a number of local businesses rely on "rural tourism" and that spoiling the scenic countryside views would impact these.

"If you are going to surround those assets with solar, no one is going to come," she added.

"I think the refusal was correct. I’m glad the councillors saw the merit in protecting our heritage assets.”

What do you think? Let us know in the comments below…