Skip to main content

Agenda item

Motion A: Botley West Solar Farm (proposed by Councillor Roger Faulkner, seconded by Councillor Sarah Veasey)

This Council is deeply concerned about the impact that the Botley West Solar Farm project will have on both the local community and countryside.

This Council requests the Leader of the Council to write to the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero objecting to the proposal.

Minutes:

Councillor Roger Faulkner proposed the motion which was;

 

“This Council is deeply concerned about the impact that the Botley West Solar Farm project will have on both the local community and countryside. This Council requests the Leader of the Council to write to the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero objecting to the proposal.”

 

Councillor Dan Levy proposed an amendment to the motion, the amended motion would read as follows;

 

“This Council is deeply concerned about the impact that the Botley West Solar Farm project as currently proposed will have on both the local community and countryside. This Council requests the Leader of the Council to write to the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero objecting to the proposal. as currently promoted by the developer. This Council also recognises the excellent report written by officers as part of its representations to the Planning Inspectorate, which set out the main issues of concern with the current proposal, and supports WODC in its role as a statutory consultee in the inspection of the proposed scheme.”

 

In proposing the amendment, Councillor Levy stated that the amendment recognised the work of officers, and the role of the Council as a statutory consultee. Councillor Levy stated that the amendment removed the political angle to the motion.

 

Councillor Faulkner accepted the amendment to the motion. Councillor Sarah Veasey stated she would be seconding the motion and also accepted the amendment.

 

The motion was debated as amended. The following points were raised;

  • Some members felt that the amendment had improved the motion, and that while there was concern over the impacts that the Botley West solar farm would have on residents, the countryside and heritage, the motion did not identify any specific concerns.
  • It was stated by some that sending a letter would not cause any harm.
  • It was stated that in debate on the Council’s response to the Botley West application on 24 February, the Development Control Committee had asked that an objection letter be sent, but this had not been done.
  • Some members objected the motion on the grounds that the Development Control Committee had already agreed the Council’s response to the application, and that sending a letter would have the risk of contradicting the response, potentially downgrading the role of the Development Control Committee. It was stated that the original report was nuanced and detailed, and that any letter sent would not add anything.
  • The importance of the application in decarbonising the country’s energy supply was also raised by some who opposed the motion.
  • On the other hand, some members in support of the motion stated that the objections that were being raised were to the specific plan, not against solar in principle and that they did not feel it fulfilled the needs of the community.
  • Some Members stated that the amendment had improved the motion, and that it provided recognition of the role of the Development Control Committee and of the response produced by officers.
  • Other Members stated that the debate showed why planning matters should remain matters for the Council’s planning committees.

 

Councillor Sarah Veasey spoke as seconder of the motion. Councillor Veasey stated that the proposed development was too large, and that the Council had a duty to represent its parishes and the district’s residents.

 

Councillor Roger Faulkner summed up the debate on the motion. Councillor Faulkner thanked officers for the report outlining the Council’s response and stated that the detrimental impact of the application outweighed its benefits. Councillor Faulkner stated that the motion clarified the Council’s position and urged members to support the motion

 

Council resolved to approve the amended Botley West Solar Farm motion as set out above.

 

Voting record - For 27, Against 7, Abstention 3, Did not vote 1

Supporting documents:

 

Related Pages