Agenda item

The Planning Officer introduced the report, advising that the solar park already had planning permission for 25 years of operation, obtained on appeal, and the proposal sought an additional 5 years of operation.  The site was one field away from the Langport Civil War battlefield which could be open to public view in the future.  Whilst his proposal was to approve the application, it recognised that this could blight any future plans for the historic battlefield site. 

Mr A Lee spoke in objection to the application.  He said the applicant had said they sought more operational security, however, he felt it was only to enhance their profits as they already had 20 years of operational security.  He also referred to the loss of agricultural land and the building of new houses nearby with no requirement for solar panels on their rooves. He said every parish had objected to the original application so it would be perverse to agree it now.

Mrs J Seaton of the Langport and District History Association said the solar site was only one field away from the historic battlefield but battlefields had spread out.  Solar farms had been placed in controversial areas but the preference was now to position them on brownfield sites or on existing buildings.  She said this was one of the few battlefield sites which still looked the same since 1655.

Mr L Lock, a nearby resident, also spoke in objection to the application.  He said the fencing around the solar site was like living outside a prison and the applicant should give an undertaking to dismantle it at the end of the period.  He also questioned why the applicant was asking to extend the length of planning permission so early into the life of the site. 

Councillor Gerard Tucker, the Ward Member, referred to the income generated from the solar site in one year, as stated on their website and said the request to extend the period may not be solely about energy generation but could allow the owners of the site to commodity trade the energy.  He said that as the original application had been granted on appeal, there had been no requirement for community benefit and he would be more comfortable with the application if there was some benefit to the local community. 

During discussion Members expressed their surprise that the applicants were seeking to extend the period of the solar farm so early following its installation when in the near future new technology could supersede it.  They also expressed their concern at its proposed continued siting for a longer period close to the historic battlefield site and said there were no substantiated green energy reasons to request the extension of time.  It was proposed that the application be refused permission on the basis that it was premature and that it would have a harmful impact upon the local heritage assets.  This proposal was put to the vote and was carried unanimously. 

(Voting: unanimous in favour)