Controversial proposals for a massive solar farm on the outskirts of Sunderland have been rejected by city councillors following over 400 public objections. At a recent meeting, Sunderland City Council’s Planning and Highways Committee decided against the development plans for land at Usworth House Farm, located to the northeast of Springwell Village.
The area, which is made up of several agricultural fields, is situated within the Green Belt close to the urban boundary of Gateshead. Boom Power Ltd, the applicant, had submitted plans in January 2023 to transform the site into a renewable energy source with “ground-mounted photovoltaic solar arrays” and related infrastructure.
The project was set to include approximately 59,319 solar PV panels and modules arranged on metal racks, as well as a substation compound featuring “transformer and switchgear infrastructure and tower structures”. The applicant’s design and access statement claimed that the solar farm would have a capacity of up to 27.3 MW, potentially supplying clean renewable energy to more than 11,000 homes annually.
The applicants were aiming for a 40-year ‘operational lifespan’ for the facility, after which it would be decommissioned and the land “reinstated back to the original state before construction”. Given the site’s location within a wildlife corridor, the plans also included landscaping and “biodiversity enhancements” to mitigate ecological impacts, such as new planting.
During a council consultation on the proposed solar farm, public opposition was fierce with 443 objections highlighting various issues. The concerns, as summarised in a council report, included “encroachment into and inappropriate development / overdevelopment of Green Belt”, impacts on the landscape and views, highway safety worries, residential amenity, and potential effects on wildlife.
Some responses criticised the 40-year “temporary” duration for the solar farm and expressed doubts that “no certainty that the land will ever be restored”. Others pointed to alternative locations for the solar farm, such as disused industrial zones and ‘brownfield’ sites.
Additional worries were about the proposed development “merging Springwell Village with nearby settlements, taking away countryside, visual amenity, wildlife habitats and interfering with the setting and character of the village”. However, within the same consultation, there were 32 representations supporting the project, citing the renewable energy benefits and “benefits to people and wildlife”, with some saying the solar farm is “much better than housing” and praising solar power as an “inexpensive and effective measure.”
The arguments for and against the solar farm were presented at a meeting of Sunderland City Council’s Planning and Highways Committee on January 6, 2024, at City Hall.
The committee report, while recognising the proposal as “inappropriate development in the Green Belt” that would “harm” its openness “both spatially and visually”, still deemed the solar farm acceptable under certain conditions. The argument put forward was that the “public benefits” of “substantial renewable energy” and “significant BNG (biodiversity net gain)” on-site could constitute “amount to very special circumstances” justifying the development within the Green Belt.
A considerable number of opponents turned up at the council planning meeting to voice their opposition to the solar farm, with several speakers taking issue with the council’s planning department’s recommendation for approval. Despite acknowledging the importance of renewable energy, those speaking out at the pivotal meeting opposed the proposed solar farm near Springwell Village due to the potential harm to both the Green Belt and local community members.
Objections included complaints about the “intolerable noise” from the “industrial scale” project, the long-term effects on agricultural land and food production, heritage concerns regarding the Scheduled Ancient Monument the Bowes Railway, and doubts over the sustainability of the development. One individual highlighted the challenges in recycling solar panels and related environmental issues, while another critic argued that the solar farm would have a “devastating adverse impact on the local environment and its people”, describing it as a “power plant by any other name”.
Councillor Harry Trueman, Labour representative for Washington West, added green spaces and wildlife were a “natural friend” and that increased planning powers were needed to protect natural assets from developers. “As councillors, we need to be lobbying the government […] to get planning sorted and to give our planning officers more teeth and more power to be minded to reject applications like this, to reject housing and to divert them to the brownfield sites,” he told the meeting.
Councillor James Warne, independent member for Washington West, also registered to speak at the meeting and noted wider climate issues and the future “acceleration” of solar farms, wind power and offshore wind. “I think it’s vital to the very existence of the human race that we proceed with these developments,” he added.
A representative for Boom Power Ltd, speaking at the planning meeting, acknowledged the proposed development was in a “sensitive location” and that local people had raised “many valid concerns”. Developers said the siting of solar farms had to strike a balance between placing developments near available grid connections, and homes that use energy, while avoiding “undue impacts” and that Green Belt sites needed to be considered to meet national net zero and energy security targets.
It was noted that brownfield site schemes would “play their part” but would “not provide the volume required and cannot be delivered at speed”. The representative for Boom Power Ltd maintained that the solar farm near Springwell Village was a “good land use” and would not result in the permanent loss of farmland and said the company works in partnership with landowners to progress such developments, including addressing environmental and planning constraints.
Councillors heard that there had been “minor changes” to the original solar farm scheme, including creating an “adequate separation distance” between the solar panels and Bowes Railway, as well changes to landscaping. During debate on the application at City Hall, councillors on the Planning and Highways Committee quizzed the applicant and raised concerns about the negative aspects of the solar farm scheme flagged by council planning officers, including Green Belt impacts.
Councillor Dianne Snowdon raised concerns about the proposed site access to the development, while Councillor Michael Dixon noted the “stark” conclusions from council planning officers about the “inappropriate” nature of the development in the Green Belt. Councillor Martyn Herron acknowledged the need to “look at energy security and to reduce our dependence on energy from overseas” but added, “we can’t just allow any development anywhere. We need to be more positive about developments as a country as a whole, but we can’t ride roughshod over residents and we can’t make decisions based on what we think an appeal outcome might be,” he said.
Councillor Martin Haswell noted that the solar farm plan went against several of the council’s own planning policies, including those linked to the Green Belt and safeguarding the countryside from encroachment, and moved a motion for the plan to be refused.
Councillors then voted unanimously to reject the solar farm, against the advice of council planning officers, and the decision was met with applause from campaigners at the meeting. A statement from Springwell Village Residents Association, published on Facebook after the planning meeting, welcomed the ruling.
The statement said: “We won!! the council’s planning committee unanimously decided to refuse the solar farm application. Six of us spoke up to save our village and so did councillor Trueman, the councillors listened and agreed the Green Belt is too important to lose. Thanks to everyone who came along to support us.”
For more information on the solar farm application, visit Sunderland City Council’s planning portal website and search reference: 22/02803/FU4
Join our Sunderland WhatsApp community for all the latest news Sunderland news sent direct to your phone.
To join you need to have WhatsApp on your device. All you need to do is choose which community you want to join, click on the link and press ‘join community’.
No one will be able to see who is signed up and no one can send messages except the ChronicleLive team.
We also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners.
If you don’t like our community, you can check out any time you like. To leave our community click on the name at the top of your screen and choose ‘exit group’.
If you’re curious, you can read our privacy notice.
CLICK HERE TO JOIN