Agenda item
24/03278/FUL Land (E) 431186 (N) 208772 Witney Road
Minutes:
James Nelson, Principal Planner, presented the application for the construction and operation of a ground-mounted solar farm with battery energy storage system (BESS) and associated infrastructure
The Principal Planner’s presentation addressed the following points:
- Listed building around the site included Grove Farm and Caswell House.
- The site would be over 6 agricultural fields of varying sizes with access from Witney Road.
- Proposed landscaping included mitigation and fencing with panels set back for landscaping interventions to include green planting to act as a buffer.
- Panel design would be on racks, 3 meters in height and orientated to face South / West.
- Fencing would enclose a control building of 5 meters in height with security cameras to monitor the site.
Amanda Matthews and John Sutton, spoke in objection to the application which raised the following points; an independent assessment for the impact on the water system to Caswell House had been done and concerns were raised on chemical contamination from the control building in an event of a fire. A hand out was given to the members.
Michael Breslaw, agent for the application addressed the Sub-Committee which raised the following points; the land to be used was low grade agricultural land, there would be a 79% biodiversity net gain from planting including woodland planting and the local parish councils would have a community benefit from the scheme. Robust measures had been taken to protect the natural spring on the Caswell House site.
The Principal Planner’s presentation addressed the following points:
- Policy EH6 supports renewable energy applications. The proposed site would provide energy for 12,000 homes in the area.
- There would not be an adverse impact on best and versatile land. An independent review had been submitted regarding landscape and visual impacts. Wildlife would be supported with the planting of woodlands.
- The benefits of the application outweighed the harms. Environment and Drainage officers had reviewed risks to water and had secured conditions with a risk management plan.
- No comments had been received from the MOD or highways. The application was for approve subject to S106 agreement being finalised.
The Chair then invited the Sub-Committee to discuss the application, which raised the following points:
- The members raised concern that not enough time was available to read the handout circulated by the objectors.
- A detailed Construction traffic plan be submitted as a condition due to concerns of damage to roads and dirt churned up by HGV vehicles. The Principal Planner confirmed there had been no request from highways for this.
- A recommendation for the S106 agreement to secure monitoring costs of the site was clarified by the Principal Planner.
- Concerns were raised about water safety and drainage issues, the impact on the water source in the area if contamination occurred.
Councillor Liam Walker proposed that the Sub-Committee defer the application to enable further consideration of the potential water pollution concerns arising from the location and design of the proposed BESS facility. This was seconded by Councillor Steve Cosier and put to the vote.
Voting Record- For 10 Against 3 Abstention 0.
The Sub-Committee Resolved to:
- enable further consideration of the potential water pollution concerns arising from the location and design of the proposed BESS facility.