Forncett Parish Council response to 'Tasway Solar Park' - first consultation

Written by Brian Frith.

Forncett Parish Council response to the first consultation (ending 5th December 2025) on the Tasway Solar Park proposals.

At the recent meeting of Forncett Parish Council (attended by 11 members of the public and four Councillors) all present registered rejection of the Tasway scheme as currently presented. The overwhelming scale of the 700MW plans will completely change the character of our neighbourhood for decades to come. Some residents reported that with current plans their homes will be surround by solar panels on three (or even four) sides, and some routes in the area will have field after field of unbroken solar arrays.

The majority of those present at the meeting declared that their own response to the consultation would be an outright rejection of any plans for the development and that they would not be making any comments seeking 'downsizing' or mitigation, believing that the developer would do nothing to make any proposals acceptable.

A different view was taken by the majority of voting Parish Council members: Whilst there is unanimous opposition to the scheme as presented in the Phase 1 consultation, it was agreed by that majority that simply saying 'No' would give no chance of influencing the scheme as it moves to Phase 2, and if we did not take the opportunity to say what is wrong and what could be done to stand a chance of winning over any form of community approval, we would have lost a valuable opportunity.

The following points were made to bring to the attention of the developer:

This project is far too extensive for our small area: 700MW will require a huge proportion of available land, is about three times larger than the total of current Aukera UK projects, and nearly double the size of the only other 'in early development' scheme in Rutland. The project should be scaled back - very substantially - resulting in the requirement for a smaller areas of panels and less inverter / BESS and connection infrastructure.
The reduced requirement for land for the actual solar arrays will allow the introduction of more separation between sites and, crucially, separation from homes and residential areas. Whilst there seem to be no mandated distances, it seems to be generally accepted 'good practice' that figures in the order of hundreds of metres are a minimum. Only when detailed plans are available showing precise locations of arrays, fencing, hedging will there any possibility of a change in public opinion.
With more flexibility of use of land (after downsizing the scale of the generation) will come more opportunity for 'wildlife corridors', environmentally friendly margins and other bio-enhancement. Particular concern has been expressed about potentially disastrous effects on wildlife of all kinds. There are plenty of references in the consultation materials to Aukera's desire to introduce these measures and mitigate problems: hard evidence is needed when Phase 2 consultation is underway.
There is mention in the consultation materials of 'Community Benefits'. At this stage, the Council agreed that the best community benefit would be for Aukera to allocate every penny they have to revising the project to create space, hedging, wildlife friendly areas, footpaths etc. Such things as 'supporting local projects and community groups' are, at this stage, secondary to ensuring minimal impact on our community for the coming decades.

It will not have escaped the notice of Aukera that there is huge public backlash against this project. Most will have been convinced over recent years that 'something has to be done about the burning of fossil fuels, global warming, climate change etc', but projects such as the current 700MW proposals for Tasway undermine any support for those ideals because there is, understandably, a feeling that our neighbourhood and community will be changed beyond all recognition.

All members of the public are encouraged to submit their own comments (using the online form, freepost or by sending an email to ) before the deadline for the receipt of comments at 11.59 pm on Friday December 5th 2025.