Issue - meetings

RESOLVED: That application 22/03231/FP be REFUSED planning permission, contrary to the officer recommendation, subject to the following reasons:

(1)   The proposal would be inappropriate development within the Green Belt that would be harmful to its openness.  The Council considers that the benefits of the scheme, including the wider environmental benefits associated with the increased production of renewable energy (pursuant to paragraph 156 of the National Planning Policy Framework December 2023), would not amount to very special circumstances sufficient to outweigh the harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness and other harm. As such the proposal would be contrary to paragraphs 152 and 153 of the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy SP5 of the North Hertfordshire Local Plan 2011-2031.

(2)   The proposal would result in harm to the rural character and appearance of the application site and the surrounding area with a cumulative impact as a result of other major development in the vicinity. Whilst measures are proposed to mitigate the impact of the proposed development, and the proposal would not be permanent, there would nevertheless be harm over a long period to rural character and appearance of the area, including the visual amenities of users of the local public footpaths. The proposal would therefore conflict with Policies NE2 and NE12 of the North Hertfordshire Local Plan 2011-2031, which seek to avoid unacceptable harm to landscape character and appearance.

Audio recording – 9 minutes 50 seconds

The Senior Planning Officer provided an update that:

·       There had been four representations from neighbouring residents and Kings Walden Parish Council.

·       In relation to the map showing major developments in the area, the land associated with Luton airport is actually detailed as being allocated for replacement open space and habitat creation, as detailed in paragraph 4.10.40 of the report.

The Senior Planning Officer presented the report in respect of application 22/03231/FP supported by a visual presentation consisting of photographs and plans.

The following members asked questions:

·       Councillor Ruth Brown

·       Councillor Tom Tyson

·       Councillor Michael Muir

·       Councillor Elizabeth Dennis

·       Councillor Amy Allen

·       Councillor Nigel Mason

·       Councillor Sadie Billing

In response to questions, the Senior Planning Officer advised that:

·       The solar panels would be visible from a localised context, but not from a distance. 

·       The solar panels, batteries and water tanks would all be between 2-3 metres high.

·       The solar panels beyond the yellow field would not be visible, with Darley Wood in the distance, from footpath 43.

·       There would be security wire fencing with posts 2.2 meters high and a 10cm clearing at the bottom for wildlife.

·       There would be 30-meter-high CCTV poles with restricted movements as detailed in Condition 16 of the report.

·       No lighting would be installed.

·       The electricity produced from the solar panels would go into the National Grid.

·       The right of way between the fencing would be 10 meters wide with open sides where possible as detailed in Condition 13 of the report.

·       Fire safety had been incorporated into Condition 14.

·       The land at present was being used for arable rotation.

In response to questions, the Highways Officer advised that:

·       Construction vehicles would come from the Luton area, arriving via Darley Road and Wandon End Road and would be kept away from Tea Green.

·       As the construction period was only for 6-9 months any impact to the area would be limited.

·       Deliveries to the site would be regulated throughout the day.

·       Details of the variety of vehicles and number of traffic movements were set out in Table 5 of the report. 

·       A condition could be added if required to limit vehicles entering or leaving the construction site to ensure the safety of children being taken to and collected from school.

The Chair invited Mr John Humphreys to speak against the application. Mr Humphreys thanked the Chair for the opportunity and provided the Committee with a verbal presentation, including that:

·       He had lived in Tea Green for 47 years and was the Director of a family business which employed 53 local people.

·       No consideration had been given to his staff as the construction company entrance was close to his staff car park.

·       There would be 2,300 HGV two-way movements over the 6-9 month construction period. There would also be 242 daily movements from all his vehicles.

·       The width of the road near the construction site would cause problems with the passing of traffic.

·       This application was a conflict with the strategic  ...  view the full minutes text for item 27