Agenda item

Proposal Description: Installation, operation and decommissioning of renewable energy generating station comprising ground-mounted photovoltaic solar arrays together with transformer stations, site accesses, internal access tracks, security measures, access gates, other ancillary infrastructure, landscaping and biodiversity enhancements. temporary permission for 40 years.

The application was introduced, and members were referred to the update sheet which provided consolidated, detailed information regarding cumulative impacts. In summary the update concluded that having regard to the points set out that cumulative impacts resulting from the solar development in combination with the nearby Ash Farm would be very modest and would reduce in the longer term to negligible. The cumulative impacts of the development had therefore been assessed and would not justify refusal in this case.

It was noted that the committee had visited parts of the application site on 23 September 2025 to enable members to observe the site in context and to gain a better appreciation of the proposals.

During public participation, Sharon Queeney, and Philip Silk spoke in support of the application, Councillor Broad, and Councillor Rappe spoke on behalf of Wickham and Knowle Parish Council, Councillor Ogden, and Councillor Byrne, spoke on behalf of Shedfield Parish Council in objection to the application and answered members' questions.

Cllr Culter spoke as a ward member and expressed several points on behalf of residents which could be summarised as follows.

1.     He advised that he had direct experience of both the construction phase and of living with a solar park of a similar capacity to the one proposed.

2.     It was noted that the proposal was unusual due to its many widely spread parcels of land, which made a comprehensive assessment of the land's value difficult. While some plots had limited agricultural value, others had been consistently used for crop production, and it was his belief that the outdated land classification model did not provide a realistic view of the land's inherent agricultural worth.

3.     Concern was expressed that the construction phase could cause disruption for up to five years due to the disparate nature of the plots, with particular reference to substantial cabling work on Titchfield Lane and the A334. He remained unconvinced that an effective traffic management plan could reduce the disruption to an acceptable level over such a long period.

4.     He highlighted potential substantial cumulative effects from other concurrent developments in the area, as raised by the Parish Council.

5.     Drawing on personal experience where promised biodiversity enhancements on a similar project had not materialised, he suggested a condition be applied requiring the developer to fund independent monitoring of the land management requirements for the lifetime of the development. He also assumed a bond for reinstatement would be a key condition.

6.     He raised concerns about poor community engagement and questioned why a concept master plan was not required for a scheme of this scale. It was felt that there had been no substantial offer of community benefit and that an enforceable commitment to a contribution should be negotiated.

The committee proceeded to ask questions and debate the application.

RESOLVED

The committee agreed to grant permission for the reasons and subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the report and on the update sheet, subject to two amendments to existing conditions, the final wording of which to be delegated to officers in consultation with the Chair as follows:

1.     Condition 3(A) to be amended to require the removal of all associated solar farm infrastructure, both above and below ground, at the end of the development's operational life.

Condition 12 to be amended to include an additional bullet point requiring the submission of a construction phasing plan for approval by the Local Planning Authority.