Yes

Representation ID: 99630

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Ms Gillian Padgham

agree

No

Representation ID: 99785

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Rebecca Loades

There is already a substantial solar farm in South Wellesbourne. It has not been screened off from the public - no trees have been planted - and is now an eyesore. Please take this into consideration. South Wellesbourne should not be considered for more solar farms.
Plus, there should be a quota set for any new housing with solar panels on their roofs.
Agricultural land in South Wellesbourne should not be considered as suitable land for new solar farms. It will only destory the countryside and push wildlife away from the area.

Yes

Representation ID: 99799

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Stratford District Council Green Group

Community benefits are key to prevent NIMBYISM, also education that agriculture can happen along side wind and solar farms - grazing and horticulture.

No

Representation ID: 99812

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Jonathan Rawlings

Solar and wind generation should NOT be developed on Green Belt land nor on agricultural land.
Both generation types always have a very detrimental visual impact on the areas they are built in and disturb the habitat of local wild life.
Wind generation is noisy. At the end of its life large parts of a turbine cannot be recycled so have to go to landfill.
Solar panels should be mandatory for all new buildings.

No

Representation ID: 99834

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Welford on Avon Parish Council

There should be no large wind turbines close to any residential development.

There should be no wind turbine development that spoils the views in south warwickshire.

There should be no solar farm development on any agricultural land - we need it for food security.

There should be more grants to include solar generation on all commercial buildings and where appropriate on residential properities where the street scene is not damaged.

Other

Representation ID: 99844

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Steven Simpson

I don't disagree with this section.
However we MUST make micro generation standard on all, or as many new build houses as possible.
This should be first choice with large scale generation secondary.
use existing large roof areas (car parks, factories etc. before agricultural land.

Yes

Representation ID: 100018

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Stratford upon Avon District Council

Solar farms should be managed for wildlife e.g. grassland should be managed as wildflower meadows.

No

Representation ID: 100198

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Neil Brooker

No farm land should be given over to solar power, we need to self sufficient in food supply in these uncertain times.

Other

Representation ID: 100344

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Adrian Parsons

I largely agree with the approach with the caveat that more needs to be done within the deign and layout of large scale solar farms to encompass wildlife corridors and environments that support and aid the movement and habitat for a more diverse range of flora and fauna.

Yes

Representation ID: 100346

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Lorraine Grocott

NA

No

Representation ID: 100453

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Ms Aimee Carter

No, this is vehemently not supported.
We need a far greater emphasis on alternative methods: rooftop storage - industrial, housing rooftop, public infrastructure rooftop and Small Modular Reactors.
We need local shared energy storage facilities to create energy close to point of use.
Offshore wind power should be prioritised over developing farmland into large solar farms.

No

Representation ID: 100511

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Geoff Cooper

Totally disagree with this policy. Solar panel technology is still very poor and inefficient, especially in our climate. The electricity produced is patchy, and let us not forget, expensive,. We're currently paying for wind turbines to be idle whilst China, plus others, continue to build coal burning power stations. The UK's efforts are futile. Tourism will be affected, loss of agricultural land will result in additional costs, both in £'s and Carbon emissions, from importing food, all to simply tick a box we cannot afford. South Warwickshire will be left an eyesore.

No

Representation ID: 100626

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Miss Katie Wilcox

I completely understand the need for sustainable energy but think we also need to incentivise people to install solar on / around their properties as was the case a few years back. If there were incentive to do so would this help to mitigate the need for bigger, ugly solar farms which will essentially destroy the beautiful countryside we have in south warwickshire, destroying fields, forest and natural habitat? More needs to be done to protect our environment not just replace it with panels.

Yes

Representation ID: 100638

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Susan Ray

agree

Yes

Representation ID: 100750

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Stratford District Council Green Group

Community benefits should be low cost energy ie. ongoing benefits that are linked directly to energy, not just one off payments that are difficult to trace. This will deflect NIMBYISM.

Other

Representation ID: 101067

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: - -

What are presented as 'renewables' are not necessarily as renewable as is claimed - Nuclear options, for example, poison the earth and cause cancer.

Please take this into serious consideration and review all plans accordingly.

No

Representation ID: 101114

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Garry Rollason

Whilst I agree that more solar and wind energy generation is needed I do not agree that solar panels should be installed on agricultural land. There are other options which should b considered initially - such as installing solar panels above supermarket and public car parks where they would also provide shade. Policies should also be more specific about limiting noise from renewable energy sites and visibility from residential properties.

No

Representation ID: 101204

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Dr Chris Clews

This needs a thought-out integrated approach which must (sadly) be mandated by Westminster.
And this brings all sorts of deliberate distractions ... to many to mention.

Yes

Representation ID: 101491

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Bart Slob

Yes, I agree with the approach laid out in Draft Policy D: Large Scale Renewable Energy Generation and Storage. The policy strikes a balance between promoting renewable energy generation and ensuring environmental, social, and economic benefits are considered. The criteria for solar, wind, and energy storage schemes are comprehensive, addressing potential landscape impacts, biodiversity, and local amenity concerns. Additionally, the focus on community benefits such as profit-sharing or local ownership is commendable. The policy also emphasizes the need for sustainable land use and effective mitigation strategies, ensuring that renewable energy schemes contribute positively to the environment and local communities

No

Representation ID: 101648

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Vincent Rollason

This development is not good for the area

Yes

Representation ID: 101851

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Simon Quick

We should accelerate development of wind generation

Other

Representation ID: 101941

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Bishop's Tachbrook Parish Council

Support with reservations

Bishop's Tachbrook Parish Council believes that large scale generation and storage is essential. The policy, as written, seems to give a lot of opportunity for ‘not in my backyard’ objections that will take up time and resources to resolve, this is especially true of Wind Energy which, as worded, is very restrictive. Could the wording be toughened up to stress that applications will be strongly supported?

No

Representation ID: 102220

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr George Taylor

Ground mounted solar energy should not be allowed on any agricultural land, whether that be crop producing or animal grazing. There should be a compulsion for a solar/battery combination to be installed on all new houses, and on the roof tops of existing industrial buildings, car parks, etc.

No

Representation ID: 102319

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Hatton Parish Council

The use of agricultural land for solar power cannot be justified due
1. Loss of carbon sequestration by the vegetation shaded by the panels
2. Carbon cost of importing the food that the land would not then produce
3. Loss of food security in an increasingly unstable world
It seems there are going top be a lot more roofs in South Warwickshire and that is where the solar panels should go.

Other

Representation ID: 102714

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Jem Brown

The policy should take opportunities to be more prescriptive in directing this type of development through encourage of rooftop solar, co-location of agriculture with these sites, co-location of battery storage with generation sites and much higher targets for BNG and habitat improvements.

Other

Representation ID: 102887

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Turley

Clarification sought on what is meant by large scale? Profit sharing/community ownership not considered appropriate for energy generating development on the University of Warwick campus. Flexibility regarding the precise squares shown on figure 16 is required. Will not be possible to provide solar PV's on all development within the squares. Suggest wording amends to part 3 re wind energy. Clarification on part 2 requested. Note that co location of energy storage facilities with renewable energy development not always most appropriate/achievable.

Yes

Representation ID: 102906

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr David Bailey

The Climate Emergency and Ecological Emergency both require us to strongly encourage sustainable energy generation through solar farms.

Yes

Representation ID: 103599

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Laura Nicholas

We need to generate more renewable energy and store it.

No

Representation ID: 103668

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Philip Wall

this is far too big an impact on agricultural land - where there is a need to protect national food security
Must not use green belt for solar.
Look to Uk policy in offshore wind and small modular reactors to delivery energy security.

No

Representation ID: 103757

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Deborah Carter

By prioritising sustainable, non-Green Belt sites, energy can be delivered responsibly—without destroying the countryside, harming biodiversity, or overwhelming local services.
Also review impact of gov't policy on offshore wind and Small modular reactors for energy security.
Protect agricultural land at all costs.