Issue - meetings

Construction of a solar project together with all associated works, equipment and necessary infrastructure to include batteries alongside an Electric Vehicle Charging Station, parking, means of access, landscaping and associated development.

Earlier on in the meeting Members of the Committee had declared that they had received “lobbying” material in writing and by email from the Applicant in relation to this Planning Application.

Members were aware that this application was before the Planning Committee following Member Referral Scheme requests from Councillor Paul Clifton (in support) and Councillor Anne Davis (in objection).

It was reported that the whole application site extended to approximately 23 hectares in size which was comprised of two agricultural land parcels. The larger parcel of land (circa 22 hectares) lay to the eastern side of Halstead Road and would contain the proposed solar farm. That parcel of land was situated wholly within a Strategic Green Gap as indicated in the Local Plan policies map. The smaller parcel of land (circa 1 hectare) lay to the western side of Halstead Road and would contain the proposed Eco Hub, which would include the electric vehicle charging station (including café area), battery storage, substation and grid connection point.

The Committee was informed that the supporting information outlined that the delivered capacity of the Solar Farm and the associated storage batteries would be up to 29MW, producing electricity equivalent to the annual electricity consumption of about 6,370 homes. Whereas, the Eco-Hub would include a covered forecourt and canopy with sufficient capacity to simultaneously charge up to 12 rapid and ultra-rapid EVs with a capacity of 43-350kW.

In this case, subject to conditions, it was considered by Officers that there were no adverse impacts upon ecology, residential amenity, highway safety or flood risk. There was also the opportunity to improve biodiversity. The landscape impact was considered by Officers to be relatively local, contained mainly to the Public Right of Way, which crossed, or passed alongside the sites, and limited views from Halstead Road. The same could be said of the Eco-Hub element of the proposals. The landscape impact was therefore considered by Officers to be of moderate harm. In addition, the heritage harm identified was considered to be at the lower end of ‘less than substantial’. Therefore, the localised impact on the area in terms of landscape and heritage was not considered by Officers to be sufficient to recommend refusal especially given the lack of adverse harm in other respects. The development was considered to comply with the Strategic Green Gap policy in respect of not causing the overriding coalescence of Kirby-le-Soken and Kirby Cross. The benefits in respect of biodiversity and the long term benefits to the landscape (when the site was decommissioned) by the planting mitigation to be retained were positive, and the proposal would also deliver net gains in biodiversity which added moderate weight in favour of approval. There would be economic benefits during construction and during the installation's operation, including those associated with the use of the Eco-Hub, namely: the provision of jobs; the creation a community benefits fund; and additional parking provision for users of the nearby school and adjacent recreation land to alleviate congestion concerns along Halstead Road.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 65