Residents are relieved after major plans for a 185-acre solar farm near their conservation village were rejected, but they fear an appeal may be on the horizon.
Foxholes Solar Limited, which is part of SSE Renewables, had been looking to build a solar farm on farmland near Norwell, a small conservation village in Newark and Sherwood.
It would have covered an area roughly equivalent in size to more than 100 football pitches and generated clean, renewable energy for about 16,580 UK homes.
Serious concerns for the environment and the impact on the small rural village were raised, however, with more than 150 objections submitted.
The developer’s agent had argued the solar farm would have increased the overall biodiversity of the land with wildflowers, new hedgerows, and more waterways, while 16 skylark nesting spots would be built.
However, the plans were unanimously rejected at a Newark and Sherwood District Council planning meeting on Thursday (7 May).
John Hobson, of the Norwell solar farm steering group said he was feeling “incredible relief”.
“We’ve been working on this since 2020, we’ve produced so many reports, and we thought we had really good grounds for suggesting the planning committee refuse it,” he said.
“So we were very worried when the planning officers decided to recommend approval. To have a unanimous decision today to reject this application has made the village very happy.
“There have been four schemes rejected by Newark, and they have all been approved on appeal, so obviously we have concerns. We’ll fight.”
Lynne Johnson, of Norwell Parish Council, added: “We are delighted, especially as it was unanimous.
“It gives you faith back in the democratic process. We think the appeal will be inevitable, but we have always felt strong about the grounds we were opposing this on, and it is not based just on emotion and personal feeling; there are good reasons why this is a poor application.”
The applicant was aiming to build the solar farm across fields next to Bathley Lane, and it would have been secured by a 2.4-metre security fence around the perimeter.
The council’s own conservation officer had concerns over the scheme, and the fencing and work could have significantly altered the natural open landscape and setting of the heritage assets in the village, “creating a dominating and alien feature”.
There would have been a six-month construction period, with 14 heavy goods vehicles travelling along Bathley Road every day.
While the applicant had pledged to widen the road, it didn’t prove enough to sway councillors.
Councillor Sue Saddington (Con), who represents the area, said: “We’ve heard the conservation officer has concerns, and the report states this development would cause harm.
“So I may ask, why are we sitting here discussing such a ridiculous application in a rural area? The impact on the heritage of the village, the environment, conservation, and listed buildings will have a huge effect on the surrounding area.”
The chair of the committee, Cllr Andy Freeman (Lab), added: “I am a great believer in renewable energy, but I say time and time again, not at any cost. For me, this cost is too high.
“The impact on the conservation and heritage assets, for me as your chairman, is just too hard to bear.”
