A landscape worth fighting for.
This is not a list of opinions. Each section below sets out a concrete planning reason to object to the application. Material planning considerations, the kind a planning officer is required to take seriously, are clearly flagged in bold. Where you are quoting these in your own objection letter, please put them in your own words.
1. Size and location of the development
The proposed 40 acres sits on a high, exposed ridge between Charlton and Holcombe, sloping north into the parish. The developer's promise of "additional landscape planting" amounts to a small amount of screening for one footpath in the low-lying east corner of the site. It does nothing to address the panoramic visibility from the rest of the parish.
• Significant negative visual impact for residents living adjacent to the site boundary, whose homes look directly onto what will become an industrial installation.
• Negative visual impact for users of the footpaths that cross the site, who will find an enjoyed rural route enclosed by security fencing on both sides.
• Negative impact on the wider landscape character of the parish, the ridge is one of the defining views of the area and is visible from settlements stretching from the north-west to the south-east.
2. Loss of productive arable land
The site has been organic arable land for many years.
The site will jeopardise Best and Most Versatile (BMV) agricultural land. The developer's claim that "continued agricultural use in the form of sheep grazing" replaces lost arable production is not credible. Occasional sheep grazing under solar panels is not equivalent to long-term organic food production. The loss of food production from this land is effectively permanent for at least a generation.
3. Loss of local wildlife habitats
The developer's claim of "significant biodiversity gains" is unsupported. There is no proper allowance in the application for the protected species that already live here (we are developing a list).
4. No real benefit to the local community
The developer presents the scheme as supporting both farming and the wider community. Neither claim survives scrutiny.
We'd love to set up a community-owned solar project for our parish, sensibly sited and with profits staying local. If you have experience of community energy schemes, planning, finance or grants, please contact us.
• Electricity from the site goes to the national grid, not to local homes.
• Profits flow to external investors via a network of related companies. They do not stay in Somerset.
• The scheme does not support the tenant farmer who has been given notice.
5. Extensive traffic and transport impact
Construction of a 40-acre solar farm requires sustained heavy-vehicle access over many months.
• The local lanes were not built for this volume of construction traffic.
• Risks include damage to verges, hedges and the road surface; safety hazards for cyclists, walkers, horses and farm vehicles; and disruption to school routes and emergency access.
• Decommissioning at end-of-life will repeat the same impact in reverse.
6. Unacceptable negative impact on local heritage
The proposed development would harm the setting of nearby heritage assets — including but not limited to Ammerdown Column and Jack and Jill Hill — and erode the rural character on which the parish's identity depends.
The visibility of a 40-acre industrial site from these heritage viewpoints is itself a material harm to their setting and significance.
The visibility of a 40-acre industrial site from these heritage viewpoints is itself a material harm to their setting and significance.
7. Concerning noise, glare and vibration impact
Solar farms are not silent.
• Construction-phase noise and vibration close to homes for many months.
• Ongoing low-frequency hum from inverters and transformers throughout the operational life of the site, audible across rural quiet.
• The cumulative noise footprint of two adjacent solar developments (Phase 1 + Phase 2) has not been properly assessed.
Despite developer assurances that modern panels "don't reflect", glare and glint from low-angle sun are well documented, and a 40-acre installation tilted across a north-facing slope will produce it daily for nearby homes, road users and walkers, with no realistic mitigation.
8. Likely negative effect on tourism and local businesses
The local economy benefits from the area's unspoilt views and walking and riding routes.
A 40-acre industrial installation visible from multiple footpaths, bridleways and viewpoints will measurably reduce the area's appeal to walkers, cyclists, riders and visitors. That, in turn, affects local accommodation, hospitality and rural businesses that depend on visitors.
9. The development is not "temporary"
The application is framed as a temporary use, after which the land will return to agriculture.
• This solar farm will operate for 40 years or more.
• That is more than a generation. Children growing up in the parish today will see this site at retirement age before any return to arable use is even possible.
• Soil compaction, lost crop rotation and biological depletion under decades of panel cover make the impact effectively permanent for the working life of most current residents.
HOW TO OBJECT
This development is in the pre-planning stage. If a planning application is submitted by Tyler Hill Consulting and Zenexa Renewables, here is how you can write an effective objection. A short, well-targeted objection is more powerful than a long emotional one. Anyone living in the parish, and indeed beyond it, is entitled to object. We will keep this page up to date.
• Use your own words. Identical or near-identical objections are often counted as one. Write in your own voice.
• Quote material planning considerations. Use the bold phrases on this page — landscape impact, BMV agricultural land, Special Area of Conservation, heritage setting, traffic, noise, cumulative impact with Ash Farm.
• Be specific to you. What can you see from your home, your morning walk, your school run? Concrete local detail is what carries weight.
• Avoid points that don't count. Property values are not a material planning consideration. Stick to the points above and your objection will be taken seriously.
• Submit before the deadline. [Date TBC — we will update as soon as it is published.]