|
|
site visit attendance
PRESENT: Councillor Barnicott (Chairman), Councillor Prescott (Vice-Chairman), Councillors Mike Henderson, Ben Stokes, Ghlin Whelan, Alan Willicombe and Jean Willicombe.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Philippa Davies, Ross Mccardle and James Wilson.
ALSO IN ATTENDANCE: Councillors Gerry Lewin and John Wright, Graham Addicott and Paul White (Hartlip Parish Council), Mr Brown, Mr Cooper, Mrs Mariner, Mrs Penny, Mrs Ratcliffe, Mr and Mrs Rayment, Mrs White, and Mr and Mrs Yerburgh (local residents).
APOLOGIES: Councillors Bobbin, Andy Booth and Pat Sandle.
|
|
185
|
sw/13/0583 (2.8) - land on the south east side of yaugher lane, hartlip, sittingbourne, me9 7xe
The Planning Officer reported that the proposal was for the construction of a solar farm and the erection of ancillary brick equipment/storage buildings for a period of 25 years on 4.9 hectares of land. The development would have a peak capacity of two megawatts, sufficient to meet the requirements of approximately 1,600 dwellings. The Planning Officer explained that each panel would measure 1.96 metres by 950mm by 50mm thick. The panels would be mounted on steel frames, at a maximum of 2.5 metres above the ground. Connection cables would run underground to the inverters, housed in 27 brick-built structures, then to a substation at the northern end of the site, measuring 5.3 metres by 2.6 metres by 2.8 metres high. The panels would be set in from the boundary by seven metres and a new native species hedge would be planted along the boundary.
The Planning Officer reported that Hartlip Parish Council had objected to the proposal, especially with regard to the site being within an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). The Kent County Council Biodiversity Officer considered the proposal would have little impact on the bordering Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). Kent Downs AONB Unit had objected; and five letters of objection had also been received; the views were outlined in the report considered at Planning Committee on 1 August 2013.
The Planning Officer explained that, in light of the comments of the Council's agricultural advisor, it was unclear what category the agricultural land on the site was, but advised that Planning Policy was in support of this type of development. With additional screening, few views of the site, and it not being too close to residential areas, the Planning Officer considered there were limited detrimental impacts of the proposal.
A representative of Hartlip Parish Council spoke in objection to the proposal. He considered a more suitable site could be used instead. He explained that the site was within beautiful countryside, the development was not sustainable and it was not supported by local residents. He also argued that it was contrary to Local Plan Policy U3.
Ward Members raised the following points: Paragraph 116 of the National Planning Policy Framework stated that planning permission should be refused for major developments in designated areas, including AONBs, except in exceptional circumstances; the adjoining woodland was open to the public and used by many; there was a rural lane nearby; the area was valued for scenic beauty; it was not screened sufficiently; coppicing was carried out in the adjacent woodland, which would become flattened, making the development more visible; the solar panels would be visible from Queendown Warren, and from the roads; hedgerows would only screen the development if they were evergreen, otherwise the site would be visible from November to March; there were many visitors to the AONB; no benefit for local people; disbelief that this development was proposed in an AONB; a substantial reason was needed for why this site was being used, rather than another site; supported solar energy, but this needed to be in the right place; screening would not make any difference, this was still an AONB; the site was en route to Queendown Warren and could not be hidden; and this could set a precedent.
Local residents made the following comments: this was not the right place, there were better places for this type of development; the site was of ancient, historical interest, there was a Roman Villa site nearby, the development would disturb the land; adjacent walks to the site would be ruined; there was a shortage of food, crops should be grown on the land; light reflection from the solar panels would effect wildlife in the woods, particularly dormice; concerns about wider infrastructure issues, and how the power left the substation; the roads from the development were very narrow and dangerous; this would set a precedent; there was no need for this; the supply of energy on the site would help local businesses, which could then expand and this would help the local community; the screening around the field was reasonably good already; access to the site would be from Spade Lane, not from the other direction where the lanes were more narrow; this would not set a precedent as developments should be assessed on their own specific planning merits; coppicing did not result in woodland being totally taken down; this would provide employment opportunities; support solar energy, but location for this was wrong; would this benefit the village as well; the soil should be tested and other uses for the land should be looked into.
In response to questions from Members, Officers confirmed the following: the whole site was within the AONB, and it abutted the SSSI, the woodland beyond the application site belonged to a third party and this was potentially subject to coppicing being carried out, the type of fencing around the site was still to be decided and Maidstone and Medway Councils had raised no objection to the proposal.
Members then toured the site with Officers.
|
