Agenda, decisions and minutes

Members are asked to declare any interest and the nature of that interest which they may have in any of the items under consideration at this meeting.

Councillor Roberts declared an interest at Agenda Item 6, WNS.2021/1858 Land at Milton Road, Gayton, and advised that he would leave the room during the discussion and voting thereon.

To confirm the Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 12 September 2022.

RESOLVED:

The minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 12 September 2022 were agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

To receive communications from the Chair.

The Chair advised that only those people who had registered, in line with the Committee’s speaking procedure, could address the Committee. Members of the public were requested not to call out during the Committee’s discussions on any item.

Refused, reasons to be set out in the Minutes.

83.            Construction of a solar farm and battery stations together with all associated works, equipment and necessary infrastructure.

The Senior Manager, Development Management outlined the application for full planning permission for a solar farm through the installation of ground mounted static photo-voltaic (PV) panels and associated infrastructure. Members’ attention was drawn to the committee updates and that the Flood Authority had withdrawn their objections.

Members received a presentation which included maps and photographs from various vantage points of the proposed sites; the measures proposed to mitigate the visual impact on the respective areas and from public rights of way and the means of connecting the solar panels, via a new substation and connection to pylons. Photomontages were shown which illustrated the view with 15 years’ worth of growth of the trees to provide screening.

In response to Member’s enquiries, the Senior Manager, Development Management advised that alternative traffic routes had been explored for construction traffic. The impact on Greatworth conservation area to the north of site had been re-evaluated as the application had been amended from an earlier submission to remove solar panels on 2 fields. The Conservation team now considered that the impact on the conservation area had been greatly reduced. As a consequence, the reasons for refusal were now limited to the visual impact of the proposal. The proposal would ensure a biodiversity of 32.68% net gain for hedgerows/trees units and 70.82% net gain for habitat units; 96 letters of support and 133 letters of objection had been received from the area surrounding the solar farm. The landscape visual assessment classified the landscape as ‘sensitive’.

Veronica Ward addressed the Committee in objection to the application and concurred with the case officer’s findings.  The application would have a significant adverse effect on the landscape and character of the area. 

Mr Foote addressed the Committee in objection to the application and expressed concern that the application constituted an unacceptable loss of productive agricultural land and would have a direct impact on existing wildlife.

Mr Morris from Farthinghoe Parish Council addressed the Committee in objection to the application expressing concerns regarding the suitability of the highway route, the risk of traffic congestion in the village, the size of the solar farm and the estimated megawatt output projected.

Mr Bingham from Greatworth Parish Council addressed the Committee in objection to the application and expressed concerns regarding the siting and size of the solar farm, that the the topography limited the mitigation measures of the visual impact and that Northampton Police had objected to the application.

Connor McAllister, for and on behalf of David Sherborn-Hoare,?the landowner, addressed the Committee in support of the application and advised that the proposed application would provide an income for what was considered poor arable land.  It would provide stability to ensure the continuance of the farm.

Connor McAllister, the applicant, addressed the Committee in support of the application to provide solar power in response to the national climate emergency and the current energy crisis. It  ...  view the full minutes text for item 82.

Refused, reasons to be set out in the Minutes.

Construction of a temporary 49.72MW Solar Farm, to include the installation of Solar Panels with transformers, a substation, a DNO control room, a customer substation, GRP comms cabin, security fencing, landscaping and other associated infrastructure.

Members received a presentation which included maps and plans from various vantage points of the proposed sites and an explanation of the measures proposed to mitigate the visual impact on the respective areas.

The Senior Manager, Development Management outlined the proposed construction route management and arrangements for HGV access during the construction phase and the subsequent storage and supply within the development. Members’ attention was drawn to the amendments set out in the Committee updates.

In response to Members enquiries, the Senior Manager, Development Management advised that the Officer’s analysis of the application had taken into account the proximity of the site to the canal conservation area, landscape value and whether the application would change the character of the landscape. Additional landscaping had been proposed as part of the application; however, the landscape consultant had advised that was insufficient.  Natural England had initially raised objections but since mitigation measures had been secured, they had withdrawn their objection.

Roger Clarke from Gayton Parish Council addressed the Committee in objection to the application and advised the residents had significant concerns at the magnitude of the development and that 85% of them had voted against it.  In response to the development the parish had produced a document outlining 11 major areas of concern, many of the concerns remain unaddressed by the applicant. 

Councillor Cooper, the ward member for Bugbrooke addressed the Committee in objection to the application whilst acknowledging the importance of renewable energy. Councillor Cooper raised concerns that the applicant had not satisfied the question of how the power generated would be fed into national grid.  The application would adversely effect the landscape and the renewable energy that would be provided was not sufficient to outweigh the harm it would cause.  The land was productive in agricultural terms as it was classed as grade 3a and 3b. The area provided a quintessential rural landscape. Residents considered that both of the proposed developments sites were contentious and each would have a significant impact on the grand union canal.

Dr Jonathan Taylor, addressed the committee and read out a statement which provided the opinion and sentiment expressed by Mr Jens Buus, a supporter of the application. Mr Buus expressed concerns regarding the handling of the application, omissions, inconsistencies and errors in the committee report and asked that the decision be deferred. In response to Members' queries, the Senior Manager, Development Management advised that the concerns referred to in Mr Buus’ statement had been addressed on Page 8 of the written updates.

Laura Murphy, the applicant, addressed the Committee and advised that the application would improve energy security and was consistent with the government targets for carbon reductions. The land had been carefully selected, it was not a sensitive site in landscape terms, and additional  ...  view the full minutes text for item 83.

Refused, reasons to be set out in the Minutes.

Hybrid application for detailed approval for site access, provision of petrol filling station with convenience store, two food & drink units (with drive-thru lanes), retail units & 119 parking spaces & public access routes. Outline application (with matters of scale, access & layout to be determined) for an employment unit; a nursery, 21 parking spaces and public access routes

The Major Projects Officer explained that the application fell within Overstone Leys local centre, however it was outside of the parameters of the 2015 outline consent.  It was a standalone hybrid application, with a mixture of a full and outline application. 

Concerns had been received from residents with regards to this application including highway safety, proposed uses and sustainability, and a petition containing 234 signatures had been received.

The Major Projects Officer advised that whilst provision had been made in the outline consent for ‘hot food outlets’ it had been envisaged that these would be small retail units. West Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy, (WNJCS) Policy N3 defined a ‘local centre’ as including local retail facilities of an appropriate scale (including a convenience store), health care services and community facilities. It was noted that the Highway Authority had withdrawn their objections. However Public Health Northamptonshire had objected due to the proximity of the proposed takeaways to the new school.

Insufficient evidence had been provided as to whether the application would result in unacceptable noise levels. There was also insufficient evidence that the proposal would result in a net gain of biodiversity and therefore was contrary to the Daventry Local Plan (Part 2).

John Austin from Overstone Parish Council addressed the Committee in objection to the application as it would not provide a local community centre.  Concern was expressed for the risks associated with the sustainability of a second service station in the area and the resultant contamination of the land. There was already considerable traffic congestion in the area.

David Arrons from Moulton Parish Council addressed the Committee in objection to the application and raised concerns regarding the proposed fast food outlets which would be in close proximity to the new school opening in the following year.

Sophie Drury, the Agent, addressed the Committee and advised that the mix use components of local centre would be deliverable in the short term, as businesses had already expressed an interest. A detailed noise assessment had been carried out to assess the impact on residents and the opening hours reduced.  The applicant would work with the Wildlife Trust to increase biodiversity.

The Agent, in response to members queries, advised that no expressions of interest had been received for the provision of a public house on the site and therefore the application had been amended to remove it.

Councillor Bignell invited Councillor Shepherd, Ward Member for Moulton to address the Committee.  Councillor Shepherd considered that the application was not in line with provision of a local centre as required in the outline application.

Councillor Shepherd proposed that Officer’s advice to refuse the application be accepted.  The  ...  view the full minutes text for item 84.

The Chairman to advise whether they have agreed to any items of urgent business being admitted to the agenda.

There were no items of urgent business.