Springwell residents 'save village' as solar farm to power 11,000 homes blocked by Sunderland planners

Sunderland City Council’s Planning and Highways Committee, at a meeting this week, voted to block plans for land at Usworth House Farm to the north east of Springwell Village.

The site comprises a number of agricultural fields and sits within the Green Belt near the urban edge of Gateshead - with a residents group boasting it had won and saved the village after the decision-making meeting.

Proposals from applicant Boom Power Ltd, submitted back in January, 2023, aimed to use the site for the generation of renewable energy by installing “ground-mounted photovoltaic solar arrays” together with associated infrastructure.

Plans included around 59,319 solar PV panels and PV modules mounted on metal racks and laid out in multiple arrays, along with a substation compound housing “transformer and switchgear infrastructure and tower structures”.

According to a design and access statement from the applicant, the solar farm would provide an output of up to 27.3 MW and could “generate clean renewable energy for the equivalent of more than 11,000 homes a year”.

Applicants were seeking an ‘operational lifespan’ of 40 years for the solar farm, and said the site would then be decommissioned and “reinstated back to the original state before construction”.

As most of the site lies within a wildlife corridor, landscaping and “biodiversity enhancements” were proposed to reduce the ecological impacts of the development, including new planting, hedgerow creation and additional nesting and refuge/overwintering habitat for wildlife.

During a council consultation exercise on the plans however, the solar farm sparked public opposition with 443 objections raising a range of concerns.

The objections, summarised in a council report, included “encroachment into and inappropriate development / overdevelopment of Green Belt”, landscape and visual impacts, as well as concerns about highway safety, residential amenity and wildlife impacts.

Some comments criticised the 40-year “temporary” time period for the solar farm and said there was “no certainty that the land will ever be restored”, while others suggested alternative sites for the solar farm, including former industrial areas and ‘brownfield’ land.

Other concerns included 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”.

In the same council consultation exercise on the solar farm, there were 32 representations in support, with comments noting the renewable energy benefits and “benefits to people and wildlife”, as well as the solar farm being “much better than housing” and solar power itself being an “inexpensive and effective measure.”

Arguments for and against the solar farm plan were made at a meeting of Sunderland City Council’s Planning and Highways Committee on January 6, 2025, at City Hall.

Council planners, in a committee report, acknowledged that the development would be “inappropriate development in the Green Belt” and would “harm” its openness, “both spatially and visually”, but said the solar farm would still be acceptable, subject to conditions.

It was argued that the “public benefits” of “substantial renewable energy” and “significant BNG (biodiversity net gain)” within the site would “amount to very special circumstances” to justify development within the Green Belt.

A large group of objectors attended the council planning meeting to speak against the solar farm and several speakers criticised the recommendation from the council’s planning department for approval.

While acknowledging the need for renewable energy, those speaking at the crunch meeting objected to the proposed solar farm near Springwell Village and the associated harm to both the Green Belt and local residents.

Concerns raised ranged from the “intolerable noise” from the “industrial scale” development, to the long-term impacts on agricultural land and food production, as well as heritage impacts on Scheduled Ancient Monument the Bowes Railway and concerns about the sustainability of the development.

One speaker cited the difficulties around recycling solar panels and associated environmental problems, while another objector claimed the solar farm would have a “devastating adverse impact on the local environment and its people” and was 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