: Last Updated: 14 April 2019

PART 3: Community Comments from Opinion Questionnaire.

Summary of comments.

Size:

Overwhelming view it is way too big.

Location:

This is the wrong location for this project
Open countryside not recommended by government or by community
Too close to residential area

Community Benefit Fund:

Amount offered is not acceptable – it is too little.
Overall view it should be increased considerably.
Suggestions on how to assess the amount include percentage of profit.
Desire to inflation-proof or index link payments if delivered over 30 years

Elgin:

Lack of information

General surprise at paucity of information concerning project
Too many woolly words and aspirations – not enough fact-based data and definitive statement about deliverables
All of the truth about the project and what it entails please
We have loads of questions to which we need honest answers

Q&A meeting with Elgin

Community want to hear from Elgin
Want a community meeting (not exhibition!)
Want to ask questions and get straight and factual answers, with proof.
Involve Landowner and RCC to get full view

Bypass:

Preferred route MUST be protected

Collaboration:

Degree of collaboration between Elgin, landowner and community, to date, poor
Community must be involved in planning and thinking
Views of community MUST be considered
If project gets approval, work with community for benefit of all

Guarantees:

Financial

How will CBF be protected
How to ensure against business going bust
How to protect community if business sold, taken over etc
Detail of Proposal
Where’s the money coming from
Who is going to run the site

Land:

Need proof of land grade and value
Not happy to use arable land
Footpaths should not be diverted
Rural countryside not appropriate for this project

No to Proposal

Some say an absolute no to any solar farm in Langham, no matter what

Sorted data from ‘Comments’ box of Community Opinion Questionnaire.

Benefit	All the village should benefit from cheaper electricity if allowed.
Benefit - comment	No benefit to the community.
Benefit - comment	I've heard of the development scheme where village community bought the land and built solar farm on it. Then it was paid rent by the company every year - £150.000 exactly.
Benefit - comment	I think Q6 [how much CB should we get]is irrelevant, yes more money would be nice, but realistically how much would Langham see!!
Benefit - more	A much bigger contribution to the community and
Benefit - more	but contribution needs to be much larger than proposed.
Benefit - more	The Community Benefit offered is derisory.
Benefit - more	community benefit increased.
Benefit - suggestion	Community benefits should be a yearly % of profits
Benefit - suggestion	Community Benefit could be % of profits or index-linked.
Benefit - suggestion	The community benefit should be a percentage of profit made and linked to inflation over the 30 years.
Benefit - suggestion	At least £600-750 per acre per year
Benefit - suggestion	The community benefit should be calculated as a percentage of Elgin's profit not a fixed sum which will be quickly inflated away
Benefit - suggestion	Community Benefit should be a percentage of profit generated by this form, subject to independent review
Benefit - suggestion	Community benefit should be percentage of any profits.
Benefit - suggestion	On a percentage basis of profits paid yearly.
Benefit - suggestion	Community Benefit needs to be going-rate.
Benefit - suggestion	Index-link any payment proposals
Benefit - suggestion	Share profits with village.
Benefit - suggestion	Inflation needs to be taken into account (Community Benefit) percentage profit.
Benefit - suggestion	Allowing for inflation.
Benefit - suggestion	Community benefit could be a percentage of profit - that way community shares in success of project,
Benefit - suggestion	C. benefit percentage of profit.
Benefit - suggestion	Percent of profit
Benefit - suggestion	Partially fund bypass?
Benefit - suggestion	They should also pay for road improvements such as traffic calming measures.
Benefit - suggestion	In favour of percentage of profits.
Benefit - suggestion	Percentage of profit.
Benefit - suggestion	Percentage of profit better than lump sum.
Benefit - suggestion	Revenue should either be index linked or percentage of profit.
Benefit - suggestion	Community benefit should increase each year
Benefit - suggestion	Should CB not be linked to their sales price/profit?
Benefit - suggestion	Index linked payments.
Benefit - suggestion	Annual payments should be index linked.
Benefit - suggestion	Percentage of profits an alternative.
Benefit - suggestion	Perhaps a bond to guarantee this.
Benefit - suggestion	Rather than a Community payment, a reduction of electricity charges of village residents should be considered so it benefits everyone rather than just a few.
Benefit - suggestion	The community benefit should be a percentage of the yearly profit and paid yearly.
Benefit - suggestion	Payment possibly for planning purposes and more likely to receive it.
Benefit - suggestion	Inflation proof community benefit.
Benefit - suggestion	money for Community Benefits paid for the duration of project and inflation increases
Bypass	Route of bypass must be preserved.
Bypass	and in reducing by around 50% this would enable the bypass plans to NOT be compromised. ie. important to protect the bypass plans.
Bypass	[loss of]any chance of a bypass;
Bypass	Do not ingress on line of bypass proposal.
Bypass	Bypass route must be protected.
Bypass	*BYPASS NEEDED.
Bypass	Most important is the bypass
Bypass	the most important issue is the bypass and the future of that.
Bypass	I am very supportive of the bypass and do not want to see that stopped.
Bypass	Route of bypass preserved.
Bypass	Protect the route for the bypass at all costs!
Collaboration	The application must reflect the views of the community.
Collaboration	If permission given, Elgin must work with community in order that we optimise the benefit to the community.
Collaboration	With lack of details from the developer I am unable to agree with their plans because - are the surrounding trees, hedges and wildlife protected, especially as the area is to be surrounded by a 2m deer fence;
Ecology and environment	Not acceptable to cut down all the trees.
Ecology and environment	loss of wildlife; farming;
Ecology and environment	Do not destroy the ecology of the area
Ecology and environment	The sheer destruction of trees and birds and insects;
Ecology and environment	Too much impact on environment - trees, views etc
Ecology and environment	(save our trees)
Ecology and environment	I do not want trees cut down.
Ecology and environment	and the environmental damage is too great
Ecology and environment	We would not want to lose any trees and wooded areas.
Ecology and environment	No trees or hedges should be removed - utilise unshaded acreage only.
Ecology and environment	Environmental issues,
Elgin - Community views	Planning permission should not be sought until Elgin is better informed about our village and our opinions
Elgin - information	Elgin are a small player in the industry - why were they chosen?
Elgin - information	The roads will not be safe with all the extra heavy traffic.
Elgin - information	We do not have enough information to make an informed decision.
Elgin - information	Three months sounds like a very long harvest?
Elgin - information	We need to be better informed.
Elgin - information	Delay planning until more information available.
Elgin - information	Consider where is the access road.
Elgin - information	How much noise will be generated
Elgin - information	Much more information needed from Elgin with build details, timing, routes etc.
Elgin - information	There are insufficient details given by Elgin re placement of cables, construction, decommissioning, traffic disruption, lighting, who is funding and running the farm.
Elgin - information	are cables surface or sub-surface;
Elgin - information	will land be able to be used for animals grazing etc;
Elgin - information	who is funding and running/maintaining and cleaning panels etc;
Elgin - information	is Elgin just fishing!;
Elgin - information	I have found this form very difficult to complete as I find I don't have nearly enough information.
Elgin - meeting	Not completed because need a further meeting with Elgin preferably.
Elgin - meeting	We do need to hear from Elgin.
Elgin - meeting	Elgin should be present at a Q&A session and reply to their e-mails.
Elgin - meeting	Exhibition in village hall as suggested please.
Elgin - meeting	Village meeting with Elgin.
Elgin - meeting	I would strongly support a meeting with Elgin with the request for honest imagery and reporting.
Elgin - meeting	I feel I need to hear from Elgin energy at a future meeting
Elgin - meeting	We would like to have a meeting with Elgin.
Elgin - meeting	I would like to see the Elgin presentation in the village hall.
Elgin - meeting	We would like to have more meetings before the planning application goes ahead.
Elgin - meeting	More open discussion with Elgin, LPC. RCC etc necessary
Elgin – meeting	More time and another meeting with the locals of Langham.
Elgin – meeting	Meeting with Elgin needed before submission of plans.
Elgin – meeting	Must have a meeting with Elgin before the application is submitted
Elgin – more information	We definitely need more time in order to gather more information & hear from Elgin themselves about their proposals.
Elgin – more information	More information please - very definitely before any planning application is made.
Elgin – more information	Essential to delay planning application whilst the Parish Council and COMMUNITY get more info from Elgin.
Elgin – more information	We need much more info!
Elgin – more information	We need clarity of how power is to be distributed.
Elgin – more information	Need more information from Elgin to make a proper discussion.
Elgin – more information	Unable to complete question 6 because of uncertainty about whole project.
Elgin – more information	I am in favour of a solar farm, but simply do not have enough information.
Elgin – more information	I can’t answer the questions fully as I don't have all of the information
Elgin – more information	Is there a regulatory body for solar farms?
For the proposal	It's such important development and really doesn't compare to the damage we are doing to our planet if we do nothing.
Guarantees	All of the developer's proposals need to be fully assessed and checked.
Guarantees	Elgin are not necessarily friends of Langham and a co-operative approach may not deliver acceptable results for Langham.
Guarantees	Is possible 'we' should try to insist on 'good' use being made of the area under the panels.
Guarantees	Could we make this an example to others of really 'good' use of this area?
Guarantees	Ensure the lease is only for 30 years max not to allow extension
Guarantees	I would expect to see an EIA for the proposal.
Guarantees	What are the deliverables?
Guarantees	Guarantees null and void in the event of bankruptcy or change of business.
Guarantees	Decommissioning costs?
Guarantees	Very concerned about decommissioning.
Guarantees	Legal guarantees sought and
Guarantees	We must have guarantees before planning application submitted.
Guarantees	More information as to money transactions taking place before land commissioned.
Guarantees	Decommissioning costs? Who pays? RCC?
Guarantees and clarity	Concerned about changes in the technology impacting on proposed installation over 30 years.
Guarantees and clarity	Need lots more detail of exact proposal & legal guarantees especially if scheme were to be sold on.
Guarantees and clarity	Any planning proposal should be delayed until lots more detail & in conjunction with LPC & after another proper presentation by Elgin with lots of experts there (& Oliver Hemsley), & after LPC research views of other parish councils where solar farms have been built.
Guarantees and clarity	Good point raised re. where their finances come from.
Help offered	I would be happy to be involved in any way to help thwart this
Help offered	Contact T. Appleton re. wildlife
Land - character	no amount of financial benefit on offer could compensate for such a loss of this beautiful area which would, as we understand, destroy the best place for the public footpath and would certainly have the Ramblers' Association on the warpath.
Land - quality	Been better to have said at the presentation what existing use of land is & therefore 3a.
Land - quality	If the land is not 3b this project should not go ahead.
Land - quality	Not on good agricultural land
Land - quality	Should be on brownfield site not on agricultural land.
Land - quality	Should be on brownfield site not on agricultural land
Land – loss of footpath	[loss of] public walkways etc
Location	Why in Langham?
Location	Are we aware of new location of Solar Farm site proposed at Empingham/ Sykes Lane? Is this Elgin also?
Location - suggestions	away from the village could be acceptable
Location - suggestions	Sahara Desert seems a better option [for location].
Location - suggestions	It should not be built on the hillside.
Location - suggestions	There must be better location.
Location - suggestions	Why not on warehouse/supermarket roofs?
Location - suggestions	Woolfox - site seems a good idea
Location - suggestions	But fundamental there are better sites in Rutland.
Location - suggestions	There should be alternative locations.
Location – too close to residential area	Not appropriate close to Langham community.
Location – too close to residential area	Approve of Solar Parks in but current proposal is not appropriate in proposed location.
Location – too close to residential area	Should be put further away from civilisation.
Location – too close to residential area	Far too close to residents at Ranksborough, who, though retired, are still alive and interested in where they live and their community.
Location – too close to residential area	and too close to Langham
Location – too close to residential area	Too close to the village.
Location – too close to residential area	Not on good agricultural land so near to the village.
Location – too close to residential area	not so near a village
Location – too close to residential area	The proposal seems to be in the wrong place.
Location – too close to residential area	The location is too close to the village.
Location – too close to residential area	Too near
No to proposal	Having listened to Austin, am now thinking a solar farm is a bad idea for Langham.
No to proposal	Not acceptable in present terms.
No to proposal	Think again and go back to your drawing board
No to proposal	I'm totally opposed to this proposal.
No to proposal	I am totally against this solar farm –
No to proposal	I object strongly to change of land use.
No to Proposal	Proposal is unacceptable.
Other	It's got to be somewhere and I assume there is always a good reason not to have it near where people live.
Other	There are plenty of solar panels in fields, and wind turbines on the hills in Devon, especially North Devon and the solar panels are not an eyesore but the wind turbines are. The solar panels work even with the Devon climate (wet)
Other	As a point I felt the LPC presentation was biased against.
Other	Put tonight's presentation on the website so people who didn't/couldn't attend see it.
Other	It should be nothing to do with LPC. They did not pay anything to the purchase for the land or the upkeep over the last 60 years.
Other	More information needed from villages with solar farms nearby.
Other – community knowledge valuable	In retrospect very impressed with Austin Healy's contribution.
Other – community knowledge valuable	Thank goodness for Austin Healey and his expert opinion 'like harvesting?' and 'like building a small town'.
Other – community knowledge valuable	But, thanks to Austin we are forewarned
Other – general concerns	If the planning permission is not granted will the land be another 'Barleythorpe'
Other – general concerns	the disturbance to the village;
Other – general concerns	Langham has already been impacted by large housing developments!
Other – general concerns	What happens to property prices?
Other – general concerns	Will it decrease our house prices?
Other- County Councillor	Very unimpressed that local councillor failed to attend!
Other- County Councillor	Where is OLIVER!
Other- County Councillor	I am very disappointed that Mr Helmsley did not attend the meeting - this is a very important decision and I want and expect the council to be well informed.
Size – too big	a much smaller site.
Size – too big	Happy for it to go ahead art smaller capacity ie around half the size proposed so that it is not as close to the village as proposed
Size – too big	If it is 3b land then a smaller version of what has been proposed would be better.
Size – too big	Too Big for Langham
Size – too big	Too big by far in comparison with size of village
Size – too big	The proposal seems to be too big.
Size – too big	Question 3b [lose countryside for 30yrs] only if a smaller area.
Size – too big	It's a big site which will have a massive change to our village.
Size – too big	I am not anti-solar but the site is too big.
Size – too big	It could work as a smaller site to the south west of the airfield.
Size – too big	Moderation is the key.
Size – too big	Only in favour if size smaller.
Size – too big	Too big.