Published: 5 September 2025
Application 25/00566/FUL Proposed installation of ground mounted Solar PV and Battery Energy Storage System, Lassington, Highnam
This letter represents Highnam Parish Council’s (HPC) formal response to the above planning application as resolved at a well-attended Extraordinary Meeting of the Council held on 21 August 2025.
HPC has resolved to strongly object to this application on the following grounds:
Cumulative Impact: The following Solar Farm development schemes situated within the Forest of Dean district in this immediate locality have recently been consented:
- 24/01062/FUL Maisemore Solar Farm, Land South of Maisemore, Persh Lane, Maisemore GL2 8HH (50 MW). This site lies approximately 500m from the subject site. Construction has recently commenced, and the site is highly visible from the village of Highnam.
- P0265/22/FUL- Highleadon Solar Farm, Highleadon (50MW). Construction is also underway at this site.
HPC is also aware of two other Solar Farm development proposals being worked up within the village boundary, firstly off Two Mile Lane (@59hectares/ 146 acres) and, secondly, at Linton Farm (@ 120 ha/300 acres) both of which have been the subject of pre application discussions with the Borough Council. If all three schemes were to be consented @ 250 ha (over 600 acres) of productive agricultural land within one community would be swallowed up by semi-industrial development, a gross over provision. HPC would strongly urge the Borough Council to give full regard to the impact such a scale of development would have on the locality, and would further request that determination of the subject application is deferred pending the submission of planning applications on the other two sites in order that a strategic overview might be taken of their relative strengths and weaknesses and their likely overall impact on the village.
The Council is directed to critically scrutinise the appeal decision of the Forest of Dean District Council in its recent decision to refuse consent for a solar farm development at Murrells End Farm ( Ref: APP/P1615/W/23/3329458) in this locality on the grounds of over provision stating the County is in danger of becoming “solarshire.” In other words, there is a real risk of solar farm saturation in this locality unless strong, effective measures are taken to keep this under control. In addition, a dismissal on appeal in relation to a scheme at Land North of Stream Lane Upleadon (Ref: APP/P1615/W/23/3331416) is also relevant and should be given due regard to. We would urge the Council to take these appeal decisions into account.
Loss of Prime Agricultural Land: 46% of this site comprises Grade 2 agricultural land, and a further 32.8 % is classified as Grade 3A. That is to say, 78.8% of this site comprises Best and Most Versatile (BMV) Farmland suitable for growing a wide range of crops. This is land which can be used to grow home produced food, reducing the need to import food from elsewhere in the world. The UK is in danger of eroding its stock of productive farmland by continually allowing its development for industrial type uses. National planning policy seeks to protect the most valuable agricultural land, and on these grounds alone this application should be refused.
Borough Council policy states (ENV3Solar Farms) “Proposals located on the best and most versatile agricultural land will only be permitted where there is compelling evidence to justify its use.” It is submitted that no such compelling evidence exists given the number of alternative sites being promoted for similar use. As this application clearly conflicts with Borough policy, this represents sufficient grounds to refuse this application.
Road Access and Safety: The site can only be accessed via Lassington Lane. This is a very narrow single track local road. It provides direct access to about fifteen dwelling houses, provides access into the Lassington Reach and Lassington Grove residential enclaves, both busy, well trafficked junctions. It passes immediately alongside the Village Nursery, where infants are dropped off and collected daily, and Doctors’ Surgery with frequent roadside parking and pedestrian usage. The road is currently of insufficient width: when cars are parked the road is only wide enough to permit single file traffic in either direction, causing tailbacks of traffic near the junction of Lassington Lane and the busy B 4215. Congestion in this area would be exacerbated by this scheme. The junction between this Lane, Maidenhall and Mimosa Ave is a well-known road safety hotspot which GCC Highways are aware of and have been investigating safety related improvement options. The junction with the B4215 is a very busy and relatively narrow one with an increasing volume of passing traffic.
The Lane itself is regularly used by walkers, often with children in pushchairs, older residents, dog walkers, and cyclists. There is no adjoining footway, and walkers would be extremely vulnerable and at risk from the frequent passage of heavy construction vehicles with inadequate passing spaces. Its surface was not designed to carry the volume of heavy traffic envisaged during the extended construction period. Whilst vehicular passing bays are proposed, the sheer volume and size of construction traffic using this Lane represents a real and significant road safety hazard. The road itself is no more than a macadamed coated former track with no kerbing and not designed for the frequency and loads sustained by HGVs serving the solar development during its construction. Breakup and permanent damage not only of the surface, but substructure of the lane is inevitable especially the verge/bitumen macadam areas where the majority of the heavy vehicle wheel load would be carried.
The Lane provides the sole means of access for vehicular access points serving the core village (that primarily confined within Oakridge Road, Lassington Reach and Maidenhall) with a population in excess of 2,000 people.
In summary, Lassington Lane provides a totally inadequate and inappropriate means of access to this site, and on these grounds also this application must be refused.
Size and Visual Impact: The sheer size of this scheme, @ 69 hectares (170 acres), would totally dwarf and overwhelm the core village, being over twice its size in area terms. This is disproportionate in scale terms and will have a profoundly adverse impact on the character of this essentially rural community which gives it its distinctiveness and sense of place. It would disrespect and compromise the attractive views over the whole vista which can be obtained from numerous vantage points around the village and would create a semi-industrial landscape. Because of the elevation of the village and the sloping nature of the site down to the River Leadon many of the attractive rural views enjoyed by generations of residents will be destroyed. A disproportionate amount of open farmland between the village and the River Leadon would be swallowed up by this development. It would totally change and harm the existing strong landscape setting and character. The views and walks around the rural hinterland of the village are what makes it such an attractive place to live notwithstanding plans to relocate a number of the footpaths which traverse the site.
Importantly, the development will have a significant and adverse impact on the setting of listed buildings and other designated heritage assets particularly those situated in the Lassington hamlet, including Church of St Oswald’s Tower, Lassington Court, Adfern, and Rodway Lodge.
The proposed substation would be located close to the River Leadon which is an area prone to flooding. This area was under water for at least three months at the beginning of 2025, and with the likelihood of flooding increasing in frequency in the future this presents a real risk to the safety of this equipment and calls into question this site as a suitable location.
Flood Risk: The Council is urged to give particular weight to the representations made on this application by the Environment Agency dated 19 August 2025, which states in conclusion:” It is considered this application fails to meet the principles of your local plan policy INF2 in relation to flood risk by locating all built development in Flood Zone.” We would fully concur with this assessment.
Planning Policy: The Borough Council’s relevant policy, ENV3 Solar farms states: Where the proposed use of agricultural land is shown to be necessary priority will be given to poorer quality agricultural land. Proposals located on the best and most versatile agricultural land will only be permitted where there is compelling evidence to justify it. “Such schemes should have no unacceptable impact on the landscape and the visual amenity of the locality.”
Highnam Parish Council’s made Neighbourhood Development Plan 2011-2031 states: “Highnam wishes to maintain its character as a self-contained community where people of all ages enjoy good quality of life. To achieve this the NDP includes amongst others, the following objectives:
- Ensures development reflects the nature, character, scale and density of the community.
- Maintains its relationship with its landscape setting.”
The JCS Policy SD6 Landscape states: “All development must, through sensitive design, siting, and landscaping, be appropriate to, and integrated into, their existing landscape setting.”
The Council is encouraged to have regard to JCS Policy INF5: Renewable Energy/Low Carbon Energy Development. This is not quoted in full here, but its provisions are directly relevant to determination of this application.
In all respects this scheme manifestly fails to comply with any of these policy objectives so on these grounds as well this application should be refused.
Mitigation: Notwithstanding and without prejudice to the Parish Council’s strong objection to this scheme, should the Borough Council be minded to grant consent very strict conditions should be applied in relation to provision of enhanced landscape improvements, an opening up of the former Railway Line as a statutory footpath as a compensating measure to provide enhanced public access to unspoilt adjoining land, and to ensuring appropriate financial bonds and measures are put in place to apply the provisions of Part IV of the Highways Act 1980 to ensure full reinstatement and resurfacing of Lassington Lane and any services lying under if damaged by the passage of heavy industrial traffic during the construction period. We would also require very strict working time limits be put in place together with speed restrictions along the full length of Lassington Lane which passes close to existing residential developments.
Community Benefits Fund: Again, without prejudice to the Parish Council’s strong objection to this scheme, we will pursue in parallel to this application negotiations with the scheme promoters to secure a Community Benefits Fund comparable with others secured across the UK over the 40-year duration of the scheme. Whilst appreciating that this is a separate matter from planning, we would request support from the Borough Council in this endeavour.
Representation: The Parish Council would request that the Borough Planning Committee make a site visit to see for themselves the impact this scheme would have on the community. We would also request that this application be determined at Committee rather than under delegated powers given its profile and likely impact. Finally, we would request the right to be represented at Planning Committee to set out our position in relation to this application.
In Conclusion: It is argued that the planning balance is not positively addressed as the benefits of the proposed development are outweighed by its adverse effects and, in particular, the loss of BMV land is not justified. In overall terms the proposal lacks compliance with the JCS, the Tewkesbury Borough Local Plan, the NPPF and the Highnam NDP.
In summary, Highnam Parish Council strongly opposes this application for all the reasons cited and urges the Borough Council Planning Committee to refuse it.
Yours Sincerely
Cllr Charlie Coats
Chair Highnam Parish Council