Construction of a solar farm comprising the installation of (circa) 40,000 ground mounted solar panels; 8 inverters; electricity substation; 2.4m high security fencing (revised description)

The Planning Officer (Technical Specialist) introduced the application for the construction of a solar farm, comprising the installation of (circa) 40,000 ground mounted solar panels, 8 inverters, electricity substation and 2.4m high security fencing (revised description), confirming that the Committee had undertaken a site visit that morning to assess the impact of the proposed development on the surrounding area.  Members’ attention was drawn to the schedule of additional letters which contained additional comments from an objector and an additional email of objection that had been received from a resident of Hindford. 

Mr Brian Case, on behalf of local residents spoke against the proposal in accordance with Shropshire Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees.

Councillor Ellis, on behalf of Selattyn and Gobowen Parish Council spoke against the proposal in accordance with Shropshire Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees.

In accordance with Rule 6.1 of the Council Procedure Rules contained in Part 4 of Shropshire Council’s Constitution, Councillor Charmley addressed the Committee as the local ward Councillor, during which a number of points were raised including the following:

·         There had been a lack of consultation with the residents of Whittington;

·         The proposed development was inappropriately located and on good quality agricultural land;

·         The site was not appropriate for this type of development; and

·         The solar farm would be visible from the Oswestry Hillfort.

Mr Nick Williams, Agent on behalf of the applicant spoke in support of the proposal in accordance with Shropshire Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees.

In accordance with the Local Protocol for Councillors and Officers dealing with Regulatory Matters (Part 5, Paragraph 15.1) Councillor David Lloyd, as local ward councillor, made a statement and then left the room, took no part in the debate and did not vote on this item. During his statement, the following points were raised:

·         He had received a large number of objections to the proposals from local residents;

·         The proposed development did not create additional jobs for the area, the development would result in heavy traffic along narrow lanes, the loss of habitat for a variety of wildlife and the loss of good quality agricultural land; and

·         The proposed development would have detrimental impact on an area that was well used by walkers, families and local residents. 

During the ensuing debate, Members acknowledged the need to generate renewable energy, however concern was expressed at the scale and mass of the proposed development and its detrimental effect on the surrounding landscape and the public rights of way which ran alongside and through the site.  Additionally it was felt that the proposed hedgerow and planting scheme did not adequately mitigate against the detrimental effect on the surrounding landscape.  Concern was also expressed at the loss of productive agricultural land.

Having considered the submitted plans and listened to the comments made by all of the speakers, the majority of Members expressed their objection to the application, contrary to the Officer’s recommendation.

          RESOLVED:

That planning permission be refused against the Officer’s recommendation for the following reasons:

It was acknowledged that substantial weight should be given to the generation of renewable energy proposed by the scheme, noting local and national policies, however very significant weight was given to the scale and massing of the development which would introduce an alien and discordant element to the landscape causing significant detrimental visual impact to the landscape character of the surrounding area.  Recognising the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside, the Committee were concerned that the proposed hedgerow and tree planting scheme in conjunction with the existing trees and hedgerows did not adequately mitigate against the detrimental impact of the development on the surrounding countryside. The Committee also felt that the proposed development would result in diminished enjoyment of the public rights of way which ran alongside and through the site.  Although the available evidence was that the site was not best and most versatile agricultural land, nevertheless it had been productive and was not brownfield land where it was considered that such developments would be better sited, this being a further albeit minor, negative factor weighing against the scheme. Accordingly it was considered that the impacts of the scheme were not and could not be made acceptable. For these reasons it was felt that the proposed development was contrary to Shropshire Council Core Strategy Policies CS5, CS6 and CS17 and paragraphs 17, 98, 111 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

          (Councillor Gerald Dakin requested that his vote against this resolution be recorded.)