News: Whitestone - the £600m planned investment in Rotherham that would create just 39 long term jobs

Planning documents for one of the largest solar farms in the country have been published - all 159 of them.

Rothbiz reported last year on early stage plans being updated for Whitestone Solar Farm - a generating station with an estimated capacity of up to 750MW connecting to the National Grid Brinsworth Substation in Rotherham.

Whitestone has been given a cost estimate of between £500m and £600m. It is being promoted by Green Nation but operates under Net Zero One Ltd.

Initial consultation documents from Green Nation showed that vast areas of agricultural land in Rotherham and Doncaster, some safeguarded for the now-cancelled HS2 route, could make up the solar farm.

The northern site straddles the Rotherham and Doncaster border east of Hooton Roberts and north of Ravenfield.

Farmland adjacent to the M18 south of Bramley and Wickersley has also been identified to host thousands of solar panels, as has vast areas of fields either side of the M1 south of its junction with the M18. This includes sites near Ulley, Aston and Brampton, out towards North and South Anston, and the other way to land between Treeton and Whiston.

In the south of the borough, sites that are included in the proposed solar farm development are close to Kiveton Park, Harthill and Woodall.

Whitestone is classified as a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project (NSIP), which means that it is applying for a Development Consent Order (DCO) to authorise its construction, operation and decommissioning. The final decision on a DCO application will be made at the national level by the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero.

A three month pre-examination stage has now begun looking at the issues which will need to be discussed at the examination stage. This next stage is where the applicant, anyone who is registered to have their say, official bodies and people whose land is directly affected can comment on the proposed development or answer any of the questions at each deadline.

Advertisement
Documents include numerous environmental statements on things like Landscape and Visual Impact (LVIA), contaminated land and transport, plus outline strategies for landscape and ecology management, surface water drainage and Public Right of Way (PROW) management.

However, much of the details are not yet known. Developers want to "maintain flexibility in the design" and instead specify parameter ranges, including details of the maximum, and minimum, size (footprint, width, and height, technology,) and locations of the different elements of the proposed development.

Plans also show that the developers are enacting a compulsory acquisition of land.

Applicants also say that they are proposing a large scheme due to its bulk generation potential and connection to the national grid that means that benefits are felt more widely. It discounts brownfield and rooftop sites due to thier unsuitability and related "ownership, occupation, and upkeep" issues.

On employment, planning documents say that: "During construction, it is anticipated that there would be 1,616 FTE jobs created as a result of direct, indirect and induced employment opportunities and that 538 of these would be from the local Study Area. Once operational, impacts on local labour market arising from operational and maintenance jobs would be more limited but still present, with 39 FTE direct, indirect and induced jobs created."

Promoters of the scheme, which they want to operate for 60 years, say that the proposed development is located on "grey belt land because the site does not strongly contribute to Green Belt purposes" but go on to say that "even if this position is not accepted, there are Very Special Circumstances that clearly outweigh any harm identified in terms of the five Green Belt purposes."

The applicants conclude: "The significant need for low carbon electricity generation infrastructure to meet the government’s decarbonisation objectives, and wider environmental benefits of the proposal, including the significant increase in BNG and creation of new permissive paths locally, would outweigh any harm identified to the Green Belt."

Rotherham Council does not agree that the site is "grey belt" stating that "this part of the Borough performs an important strategic and local function as open countryside in a relatively densely populated area, helping to maintain separation between settlements, prevent encroachment into the countryside and preserve a sense of openness."

Rotherham Council and the local MPs have raised issues with the scheme's consultation.

Rothbiz has detailed the issues raised by Rotherham Council with the Whitestone proposals.

Whitestone website

Images: Pexels / Giant Asparagus

Read more...

News: Rotherham Council raises issues with Whitestone solar proposals

Rotherham Council's issues with a massive solar farm proposed in the borough have been published.

Plans have moved to the next stage for Whitestone Solar Farm - a generating station with an estimated capacity of up to 750MW connecting to the National Grid Brinsworth Substation in Rotherham.

Whitestone is classified as a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project (NSIP), which means that it is applying for a Development Consent Order (DCO) to authorise its construction, operation and decommissioning. The final decision on a DCO application will be made at the national level by the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero.

Local councils are statutory consultees for NSIPs and a report on Rotherham Council's issues with the proposals has been published with the application documents.

At the earlier stage, the council has commented on 18 separate issues. Proponents of the scheme, Green Nation, address how the latest submission relates to the earlier issues raised.

On the use of Green Belt land, Rotherham Council set out that the solar farm conflicts with the Rotherham Local Plan and national policies, in that "the development would introduce substantial built form and industrialising features into land intended to remain open and to safeguard the setting and separation of settlements."

In response, promoters of the scheme say that the proposed development is located on "grey belt land because the site does not strongly contribute to Green Belt purposes" and go on to say that "even if this position is not accepted, there are Very Special Circumstances that clearly outweigh any harm identified in terms of the five Green Belt purposes."

Advertisement
Rotherham Council has also raised issue with the loss of Best and Most Versatile (BMV) agricultural land which it says is "valuable not only because of its productive capacity for food and other crops, but also because it forms part of a finite soil resource and supports the long-term resilience of rural land use within the Borough."

Applicants argue that the scheme is set to operate for 60 years so any loss is temporary.

On the issue of lifespan, Rotherham Council has raised the issue of the 60 year timescale given that national policy is 40 years. The council said: "Even if the development is technically reversible at the end of its life, the Council considers that reversibility after 60 years substantially reduces the practical weight that can be attached to "temporary" effects in the planning balance.

The council adds that the operation is likely to span more than one generation and that a more nuanced approach would be needed, It said that the "applicant has not yet demonstrated why a 60-year operational life is justified."

Applicants say that in "recent decisions the Secretary of State has confirmed that the 60- year consent lifespan is ""temporary and reversible for the majority of the land.""

Concern has also been raised relating to the "scale, concentration and persistence of significant landscape and visual effects", particularly the impact on settlements such as North Anston, Wickersley, Ulley and Harthill, and various public rights of way and recreational routes. Issues have also been raised with the submitted Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA).

Rotherham Council is also concerned about the harm to the setting of heritage assets and have asked for a robust assessment of setting impacts, including cumulative effects.

The authority is also unhappy with the inclusion of the Local Wildlife Site at Brampton Common within the limits of the scheme. Though applicants say that it is "not being managed to achieve the objectives for which it was designated," a strategy for enhancements has been drafted.

On Biodiversity Net Gain, a way of creating and improving natural habitats, Rotherham Council said that "expressing an intention to achieve a 10% minimum gain does not go far enough." BNG is not currently a legal requirement for NSIPs but applicants say that updated plans show that BNG metrics have calculated that area habitat units would see a 42.52% gain, hedgerow units, a 44.47% gain, and watercourse units, a 10.11% gain.

Rotherham Council has also raised concerns regarding the suitability and capacity of the proposed substation and Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) location, along with issues regarding highways, drainage, glint and glare effects arising from solar panels, noise, and how the proposed cable corridor would interact with areas of landfill and potentially contaminated land.

Rotherham Council will now need to digest the 159 planning documents published with the application.

A three month pre-examination stage has now begun looking at the issues which will need to be discussed at the examination stage. This next stage is where the applicant, anyone who is registered to have their say, official bodies, and people whose land is directly affected, can comment on the proposed development or answer any of the questions at each deadline.

At the examination stage Rotherham Council will submit a Local Impact Report (LIR) which the Inspector must consider.

Images: Pexels / Vitaliy Bratkov

Read more...