Solar Farce – Chair who couldn’t even name it shoves scheme through

Home / Blog / Solar Farce – Chair who couldn’t even name it shoves scheme through

17

Sep

Although most speakers were opposed to the controversial 160-acre Pitstock Solar Farm scheme in Rodmersham, it was approved when chairperson Cllr Andy Booth cast the deciding vote.

Cllr Andy Booth who referred to the scheme as “Land at Piestock Farm, Piestock Road, Rodmersham” is also facing criticism of his handling of the meeting, especially the highly unusual adjournment prior to members casting their votes and for berating members, public speakers and even the case officer for discussing items which he did not consider pertinent.

Officers concluded in their report that the 41MWp project being developed by Voltalia UK Ltd would have a negative impact on the rural landscape and would be harmful to the setting of the Kent Downs National Landscape and the adjoining area of high landscape value. However still recommended the scheme for approval.

Local resident Mr. Paul Forshaw

“By the applicant's own optimistic capacity projections, the entire 65 hectares would still produce less electricity than one single offshore wind turbine.”

“The applicants have misled interested parties by understating the impacts of the Pitstock scheme. They've been forced to resubmit nearly all reports under challenge, often on multiple occasions, evidencing complete lack of integrity, credibility, and reliability.”

“The glint and glare survey now in its fifth iteration continues to exclude the affected properties and misrepresent views from the adjacent residential dwellings. Many of the statutory consultees appointed by SBC have produced only desktop reports refusing to visit the site. Given the size of the application, the rural location and the advanced stage of the planning committee, this is unacceptable.”

“The applicant is not a farmer seeking to reinvest into his agricultural business as the case officer baselessly asserts, but a speculator. He has no in-hand farming business, preferring to lease all his land to third party tenants, noting that includes his previous 25 hector solar farm at Tonge, which he did with Voltalia.”

“The proposed Pitstock solar farm has always been an opportunistic and speculative smash and grab raid on the countryside.”

Cllr Duncan Burnett – Rodmersham PC

“The cumulative impact in Swale is intolerable. Between Pitstock and the Highsted Park schemes alone, just under 740 hectares of BMV land—nearly 5% of Swale’s best farmland would be lost.”

“This is the wrong place for such a scheme. The land in question is some of the Best and Most Versatile (BMV) agricultural land—Grades 1, 2 and 3a. Government policy is absolutely clear: our food security is a matter of national security, and poorer quality land should be used in preference to higher quality land. The Secretary of State’s own Written Ministerial Statement last year emphasised that BMV land should be protected, and rooftop and brownfield sites prioritised. This application rides roughshod over that principle.”

“Finally, this is not even necessary. The landowner has diversified into industrial uses at Pitstock Farm, yet none of the existing roofs have solar panels installed. Government grants and tax breaks exist to encourage rooftop solar. It is extraordinary that productive farmland is to be industrialised while perfectly good roof space lies empty. The neighbouring farmland has been planted with new pear orchards, so true agricultural uses of this land haven’t been fully explored."

Cllr Simon Clark – Vice Chair of Planning Committee

“As a general rule it takes 200 acres to generate the same amount of electricity annually as one single offshore wind turbine. This represents a grossly inefficient use of previous land whatever its quality.”

“I found research from lots of inspectors decisions over recent times where planning committees have legitimately refused solar farms on best and most versatile agricultural land.”

“Solar farms at best generate ragged supplies of electricity because of the random instances of cloud overcast skies which reduce electricity generation from the panels, with hardly any electricity produced during the winter, the average energy produced by a solar farm is only 11% of the installed capacity of the panels.”

“The government has already indicated its strong support for offshore wind farm over solar which is supported by the offering of £225 million of incentives for offshore wind and just £3.3 million for solar. This indicates that the government is seven (hundred) times more supportive of using wind power to meet zero carbon by 2050.”

“In conclusion there is no justifiable reason for constructing solar farms on fertile farmland because food security must remain paramount forever. Solar farms should not be approved where best and versatile agricultural land is to be used to install that farm.”

It may then surprise you to learn that following the 10-minute adjournment of the meeting, Cllr Clark returned and voted to approve the application.

Cllr Richard Bush – Bapchild PC

“Panteny Lane and School Lane Bapchild, the only two routes that you can use to move up to the site have already been designated as unsuitable for heavy goods vehicles and Panteny Lane will be the primary onward route that then leads into very narrow rural roads.”

“Currently at peak times, the inability of the Swanstree Avenue junction to cope with the volume of traffic, which was supposed to be resolved as part of the Stones Farm development, is clear. The traffic signalling improvements now installed as part of that scheme, have not delivered the desired free flowing vehicular movements that was envisaged by Kent Highways.”

“Many may have personal experience of the traffic queues that form from Swanstree Avenue and goes nearly back to Teynham each weekday morning.”

“Do members of the planning committee truly believe, if they accept the recommendation to approve this application, but also having contemporaneous knowledge of the traffic situation in the local area and its likely adverse environmental impact, it would not be in conflict with their adopted policies if they approved this scheme?”

Cllr Terry Thompson

“Just doing a quick assessment, there are over 16 square kilometres of accessible area that could be used. The fact that it's not available because no one's willing to pay the price is a different thing.”

“Employment over a more diverse farming use for the future would mean that the employment levels would be far greater with sustainable farming techniques than it would be with a solar farm.”

“We have a unique opportunity in Kent, especially due to the Thanet beds, that we have one of the highest levels of BMV, therefore we have a duty to protect that BMV."

"The industrialization of our farmland is not acceptable.”

Cllr Julien Speed

“The NPPF says that development on BMV should only happen when clearly justified, demonstrating that other less valuable land is not available. In my view, solar panels should be on rooftops and on brownfield sites, not carpeting BMV, albeit for 40 years.”

“I'm also concerned about highway safety issues particularly for pedestrians, for cyclists, for horse riders, of which there are a lot in that area because there's going to be a massive increase in vehicle movements caused by the construction traffic. We're going to see is the site being accessed via Church Street seven days a week for six months with huge solar panels on HGVs.”

“We've also got our own policy DM26, which covers rural lanes, and that states that planning permission should not be granted for development would either physically or as a result of traffic levels significantly harm the character of rural lanes. And I think the level of vehicle movements that we would see would significantly harm the character of Panteny Lane, Church Street, Green Lane, and Pitstock Road.”

Cllr Monique Bonney

"This is what I would consider greenwashing. It's look at this but ignore what's going on around you."

"One thing that has been omitted tonight is the decision from Vigo Lane. The parish council and I have read the he decision there and throughout your paper are many references to the VIGO lane and it's unfortunate that some chunks of that report seem to be a cut and paste job into this report tonight. And it's not the same. It is completely different."

"Pitstock Farm represents a 40% increase in the loss of the very best farmland over Vigo Lane, has significantly greater landscape sensitivity, presents far higher risk to nationally important heritage assets, poses greater traffic and heritage disturbance and has materially higher ecological sensitivity."

"With no confirmed Distribution Network Operator grid-connection approval which would require a huge power cable and pylons connecting to a substation and with a significant national backlog, connection to the grid could take years and therefore this application carries an additional risk of non-delivery because the power cannot yet be exported."

"Vigo Lane by comparison can connect straight into the sub station by Key Street roundabout."

"The Vigo Lane application was initially refused, then members including Cllr Booth agreed to amended the plans which weakened the refusal by Swale Borough Council. The analysis of alternative sites was far more in depth and the inspector was critical of sites using high grade agricultural land and with landscape designations."

Cllr Paul Stephen

"My concern here is the the views from some of the properties that are around this site. It's a huge site and the topography of the land is highs and lows, valleys and hills, and I cannot see how they can mitigate the views by planting hedge rows and trees."

Cllr Tony Winckless

"I find it quite amazing actually that this application has come before us before we've actually got the results of the of the Highsted Park inquiry."

"The road access down there is very bad for construction traffic. So I haven't totally made my mind up."

Cllr Derek Carnell

"What worries me more than anything in the future is we can't feed the nation we've got now. The population will increase and we're just chucking good land away to build something that doesn't do much to be quite honest."

"So I personally will be voting against this application."

Cllr Peter Marchington

"The UK can no longer produce enough arable food for our population. Therefore, that's why we have to import food from other countries who can and they can produce at far lower cost than the UK."

"We have to rely heavily on government farm subsidies in order to keep the farms going as best we can, therefore farmers have to diversify to improve their income in order to survive."

Cllr James Hunt

"I think it's helpful to to hear about the Vigo Lane one because that is very very similar. It had exactly the same issues with land, the look of the land, the heritage assets and it was along a similar size as well as 40 megawatt compared to 41 megawatt that we're looking here."

"It should be noted that we lost that appeal and that has been now been approved. Exactly the same issues."

"And when you go through that, all the objections that have been raised here this evening have all been hit back on that appeal."

Cllr Ann Cavanagh

"Highways don't think there's a problem with the roads. We've discussed this with so many other applications. If highways, the statutory authority says there's no problem, we haven't got a leg to stand on."

The final vote

Given that nine of the fourteen speakers had clearly signalled that they were not in favour of approving the application and that of the other five, one was undecided and one was the applicant, themselves it came as a complete surprise to everyone spectating that the final vote, after Cllr Booth had called his impromptu adjournment to address matters privately behind closed doors, was split with six councillors voting in favour and six voting against the plans. Two members elected to abstain.

The chairman who had spoken at length about going against the officers recommendation just prior to the vote, then had the final say.

For approval

• Andy Booth (Con) – Chair – casting vote
• Peter Marchington (Con)
• James Hunt (Con)
• Anne Cavanagh (Lab)
• Simon Clarke (Lab)
• Hayden Brawn (Lab)

Abstained

• Tony Winckless (Lab)
• Karen Watson (Lab)

Against

• Paul Stephen (Swale Independent Alliance)
• Derek Cornell (Swale Independent Alliance)
• Julian Speed (Con)
• Terry Thompson (Green)
• Peter MacDonald (Reform)
• Lloyd Chapman (Reform)

Andy Hudson
Sittingbourne.Me

BACK

ADD COMMENT

Comments

There are currently no comments.