Skip to main content

Agenda item

Botley West Solar Farm - Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project (NSIP) - Response to Statutory Pre-Application Consultation.

Purpose:

To agree a response to the Botley West Solar Farm (BWSF) statutory consultation, and notification of the BWSF pursuant to Section 42 of the Planning Act 2008.

 

Recommendations:

That the Development Control Committee Resolves to:

1)    Endorse the contents of the draft consultation response;

2)    Agree submission of the consultation response by the consultation deadline.

Minutes:

Phil Shaw, Business Manager – Development Management, introduced the report, which sought to agree a response to the Botley West Solar Farm (BWSF) statutory consultation, and notification of the BWSF pursuant to Section 42 of the Planning Act 2008.

 

Robert Gunn addressed the Committee as a local Parish Councillor, which raised no points of clarification from the Committee.

 

Anthony Thompson of the ‘Stop Botley West’ Campaign Group addressed the Committee in objection to the scheme, which raised points of clarification regarding an external report related to the “Pathway to Net Zero”, and land ownership of the proposed site.

 

Hilary Brown of the ‘Sustainable Woodstock’ Action Group addressed the Committee in support of the scheme, which raised points of clarification regarding offers of compensation to affected residents adjacent to the proposed site, and the site’s intended energy usage and output.

 

Andrew Thomson, Lead Planning Policy Implementation Officer, delivered a presentation, which provided clarification on the following points:

  • Updated Proposals – These included an updates site layout and updated cable routing;
  • The role of the Secretary of State – Government would make the final decisions in relation to the proposed site, and the Council, as the Local Planning Authority, were not the final decision maker;
  • Locational Site Maps and Setting of Conservation Areas – The presentation made reference to the location of the proposed site, which made additional references to listed buildings, values of the landscape in the proposed development area, character and heightened layout of the landscape area, proximity to public rights of way, air quality of the site, potential impacts to human health including recreational areas, flooding and hydrology risks, proposed solar panel locations, implications to the Greenbelt, noise impacts on local wildlife, proximity to the Cotswold National Landscape area, impacts on conservation areas, impacts to agricultural land, proximity to existing residential dwellings, impacts to wildlife and proximity to the Blenheim World Heritage Site.

 

The Lead Planning Policy Implementation Officer gave Members a high-level overview of the characteristics of the proposed development, including details of the draft masterplan and how these related to the characteristics of the West Oxfordshire environment, including historic environment landscape & visual resources. The presentation was framed in the context of the Preliminary Environmental Information Report and covered all thematic chapters relevant to the Council’s proposed consultation response.

 

The Lead Planning Policy Implementation Officer stated that it was apparent that aspects of the environmental assessment were incomplete at this stage. Further detail would be presented through the Environmental Statement when the Development Consent Order (DCO) application was made and he was unable to comment on the suitability and effectiveness of all proposed design and mitigation measures at this point, in the absence of full environmental assessment and landscape and ecology management plans. Furthermore, the Council would make a detailed assessment of local impacts through the preparation of a Local Impact Report should the Botley West DCO application proceed to Examination.

The Lead Planning Policy Implementation Officer further highlighted that both London Oxford Airport and the Civil Aviation Authority were statutory consultees in relation to the wider application, and their expertise surrounding impacts of radar provisions and radio communications would be vital.

 

The Lead Planning Policy Implementation Officer also stated that, if necessary, further site visits could be arranged for Members to become more familiar with the full, proposed site.

 

The Chair guided the Committee through the proposed consultation response paragraphs, which raised the following points of clarity from Members for amendment by Officers.

  • 4.6 and 4.18 – Harry St. John and Nick Leverton – Detail contained within the Proposed Draft Masterplan;
  • 4.16 – Harry St. John and Andrew Prosser – Lack of general information detailed at local exhibition events;
  • 4.18 – Dan Levy – Building Salt Cross Garden Village Area;
  • 4.23 – Harry St. John – Proposed Buffer Zones and Public Rights of Way;
  • 4.27 – Andy Goodwin, Dan Levy – Maps contained within the Preliminary Environmental Information Report, and Projected Lands adjacent to the River Thames;
  • 4.32 – Rosie Pearson – Comparisons to other National Significant Infrastructure Projects and other Solar Farms within the district;
  • 4.35 – Harry St. John – References made to Grade 1 and 2 Listed Buildings;
  • 4.42 – Rosie Pearson, Dan Levy – Specific characteristics of the Blenheim Palace World Heritage Site;
  • 4.43 – Elizabeth Poskitt – Planning Policies related to Blenheim Palace Estate;
  • 4.50 – Lysette Nicholls – Strengthening of wording surrounding Mitigation Measures;
  • 4.61 – Harry St. John – Reference made to burial of Sir Winston Churchill, and specific locations of ‘inverters’;
  • 4.74 – Elizabeth Poskitt – Protection of Skylarks and impacts on general wildlife;
  • 4.111 – Andy Goodwin – Benefits of carbon reduction associated with the proposals;
  • 4.114 – Andrew Prosser – Potential impacts of local agriculture employment;
  • 4.115 – Harry St. John – Employment opportunities within the local area of the proposed site;
  • 4.129 – Harry St. John – Quoting of land grading within mapping contained in preliminary report;
  • 4.145 – Lysette Nicholls, Rosie Pearson, Elizabeth P, Andy Goodwin, – Level of Community Benefits associated with the scheme.

 

The Business Manager and Lead Planning Policy Implementation Officer both committed to re-visiting the points raised by Members, with a further revision of the response shared where appropriate.

 

In general debate, Members of the Committee questioned whether there should be a cost-based analysis associated with the proposals. The Business Manager stated that this would be included in the Climate and Ecological Emergency Implications section.

Members also stated that the response should include reference to other existing consented solar schemes within the West Oxfordshire District.

 

Councillor Julian Cooper proposed that the Committee agree to the recommendations as listed on the report. This was seconded by Councillor Michael Brooker. was put to a vote and was unanimously agreed by the Committee.

 

The Committee Resolved to:

  1. Endorse the contents of the draft consultation response;
  2. Agree submission of the consultation response by the consultation deadline.

Supporting documents:

 

Related Pages