Skip to main content

Agenda item

24/01565/FUL University Farm, Witney Road, Hailey

Minutes:

James Nelson, Principal Planner presented the application for the installation and operation of a renewable energy generating station comprising ground-mounted photovoltaic solar arrays and battery-based electricity storage containers together with switchgear container, inverter/transformer units, site access, internal tracks, security measures, access gates, other ancillary infrastructure and landscaping and biodiversity enhancements.

 

The Principal Planner’s presentation addressed the following points:

 

  • The site was split over three parcels. The westernmost and largest comprised most of the panels, the central parcel contained further panels, and the easternmost parcel of the site had no panels proposed. 
  • The site was north of Witney, with Hailey to the west.
  • The land was undeveloped agricultural land.
  • Constraints on the site included: Hailey Conservation Area to the west, Listed Buildings associated with Swanhall Farm and public rights of way.
  • The main site access was on New Yatt Road.
  • The Landscape Strategy showed a significant reduction in panels in Field 1 and 3 from the previous application. Field 4 included a buffer and structural landscaping to screen the site from Listed Buildings and Heritage Assets. Increased screening had also been placed adjacent to New Yatt Road to the west of Field 10. Two eastern fields were reserved for skylark mitigation.
  • The panels had a maximum height of 3 metres. Battery inverter stations had an approximate height of 3 metres. Fencing and gates were timber post and wire and were approximately 2 metres in height. DNO and mast heights were a maximum of 5 metres.
  • The construction compound was in the northern portion of Field 10 for the duration of construction.

 

Robert Gunn, North Leigh Parish Council, addressed the Sub-Committee in objection to the application which raised the following points:

 

  • There had been no changes to the proposed construction traffic route from the previous application.
  • The proposed route for construction traffic was via the A4095 Common Road, Park Road and New Yatt Road.
  • The route proposed for construction traffic provided unacceptable risk to road users. The route included passing houses in close proximity to roads, pinch points, a lack of footpaths and would further damage the carriageways.
  • The impact on views from New Yatt Road were impacted by the site.
  • The biodiversity concerns had been addressed in a superficial way.

 

The Sub-Committee sought clarity from the speaker on the figures provided for traffic near misses and construction traffic road movements, confirmed that the concerns raised by the speaker were for the construction phase only, and clarified the position of the speaker that biodiversity had been addressed superficially.  

 

Bente Klein, Development Project Manager for RWE, addressed the Sub-Committee in support of the application which raised the following points:

 

  • Following the tangible changes made to the proposal put to the Sub-Committee in 2023 the Officer had put the current proposal forward for approval.
  • Projects such as the proposal were crucial due to accelerating climate change and the Governments pledge to create a carbon neutral electricity grid by 2035 and to reach net zero by 2050.
  • The proposal would meet the electricity needs of 15,000 Oxfordshire homes.
  • Ecological enhancements on the site had resulted in a 104% biodiversity net gain for habitat.
  • The proposal included two permissive paths, community orchard and community benefit fund of up to £462k.
  • Tangible changes from the previous application were: additional landscape mitigation which had meant that the Conservation Officer no longer objected to the proposal, reinstatement of historic field boundaries and increased panelled areas on the public right of way.
  • The Highways Authority had provided no objections to the development.
  • All reasons for previous refusal had been addressed.

 

The Committee sought clarity on the following points from the speaker:

 

  • The community benefit fund of £462k was over the lifetime of the project of 40 years. Conversations with Hailey Parish Council as the host Parish were ongoing as to how this fund would be split between up-front and annual payments. The community would decide on the use of the funds.
  • The size of area within the development that related to solar panels, and a comparison for this to the previous application. The site was 98 hectares in total, 17 hectares was for skylark mitigation, otherwise providing a split of the site in this way was a complex process.
  • Electricity would go to the National Grid with no tariff reduction for local communities.
  • The site was low grade soil and there was an intention for sheep farming to take place on the site following development.
  • Shared equity with residents had been considered. However, in order for a PPA to take place, demand had not been reached in West Oxfordshire.
  • Time limitations for construction traffic were put forward as part of the proposal. Construction was limited between 8am and 8pm Monday to Friday, and 8am and 1pm on Saturday. Deliveries would be batched during these construction times. 
  • The site was chosen by the applicant as there was grid capacity available in Witney. The site was chosen with consideration to planning constraints and finding landowners willing to sell.
  • The Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP) covered cabling to Witney. The cabling would need to be new.
  • The application had been given a connection date. The grid queue was currently being reordered with an outcome expected by the end of the year.

 

The Principal Planner’s presentation addressed the following points:

 

  • Policy EH6 of the Local Plan supported the principle of renewable energy developments however such developments would be located and designed to minimise adverse impacts, with particular regard to conserving high valued landscape and the historic environment.
  • The NPPF had been updated since the application was submitted, strengthening support for renewable energy developments.
  • The July 2024 Written Ministerial Statement and the 2024 Clean Power Strategy 2030 Action Plan stated that solar energy played a key role in the transition to renewables.
  • The proposal would provide electricity for 17,000 homes and offset 44,000 tonnes of CO2 per year.
  • The principle of development was supportable and significant weight proportionate to the scale of the scheme must be awarded in favour of granting consent.
  • The application follows a refusal at the December 2023 meeting of the Sub-Committee. The application had overcome the three reasons for refusal at that meeting; landscape and visual impact, heritage and biodiversity.
    • Heritage: Changes in the proposal included the reinstatement of historic hedgerows, reduction in extent of panels, increased tree-belts to provide buffers to heritage assets, increased undeveloped offsets. The changes had successfully mitigated the level of harm previously identified and the Conservation Officer and County Archaeologist had raised no objections on heritage grounds.
    • Biodiversity: The scheme would provide 105.18% increase in area habitat units, 28.6% increase in hedgerow units and 23.85% increase in water course units. The Biodiversity Officer had raised no objections subject to securing BNG monitoring costs via s.106.
    • Landscape and visual impact: an independent review of the submission was commissioned and had endorsed the findings of the submitted LVA. The layout and landscape changes had significantly reduced the extent of built form.
  • The impacts of the scheme would be contained to a site and localised level and the proposal sought to mitigate impacts in accordance with policy EH6.
  • Construction traffic operational limitations had been given. However, Oxfordshire County Council (OCC) had stated the times should be amended to avoid school pick up times in North Leigh. Further traffic management had been required. OCC are satisfied requirements could be secured by an updated CTMP by condition.
  • Extensive benefits were considered sufficient to justify approval of the application. Therefore, the application was recommended for provisional approval subject to s.106 agreement covering BNG monitoring costs.

 

The Chair then invited the Sub-committee to discuss the application, which raised the following points:

 

  • An updated CTMP was required by OCC, and OCC were satisfied that this could be managed through condition. West Oxfordshire District Council would have the ability to enforce the CTMP. Requests for contributions towards traffic management through s.106 were not normally made.
  • It was noted that the updated CTMP included access routes and showed clearly which roads would be impacted by construction traffic. Smaller routes would not be impacted by HGV movement.
  • The route of the construction traffic in the CTMP was discussed with reference to North Leigh. The factors raised were: the number of trips for construction traffic, the location and suitability of the proposed temporary traffic lights, the existing and future housing development in North Leigh as a contributor to traffic, the lack of pavement and tight junctions. The dangers of these factors were highlighted.
  • It was noted that the reasons for refusal on the previous application had not included highways.
  • The Swept Path Analysis had been undertaken at the entrance to the construction site only.
  • The option of an alternative route, particularly for HGV vehicles, was discussed. The B4022 through Hailey was suggested. It was noted that condition 13 required an updated CTMP to be submitted, and re-routing could be considered under the discharge of that condition. The possibility of adding an informative comment to the condition was discussed. It was noted however that there was no mention of re-routing in the response from OCC Highways.
  • S.106 agreements could cover the cabling that was required to run under the road into Witney. Government guidelines for compensation for overhead cabling was cited as an example.
  • In terms of the biodiversity monitoring condition, it was noted that this needed to be a reasonable annual fee over the lifetime of the project. It was noted that the fee was to cover the cost of officer time and had been calculated by the Principal Ecologist. It was discussed that money should be sought through the s.106 agreement to cover this.
  • The Council had declared a climate emergency, the scheme was important in tackling this.

 

Councillor Dan Levy proposed to defer the application, in order to consult OCC Highways indicating that the route was an issue and proposing an alternative route via B4022. This was seconded by Councillor Steve Cosier and put to the vote.

 

Voting record – 12 for the proposal, 0 against, 0 abstentions. 1 did not vote.

 

The Sub-Committee Resolved to:

Defer the application in order to consult with Oxfordshire County Council Highways and indicate that an alternative route for construction traffic via the B4022 would be required in the CTMP.

Supporting documents:

 

Related Pages