Agenda item

Construction of a temporary solar farm, to include the installation of solar photovoltaic panels, with substations, inverters, perimeter fencing, landscaping and other associated works.

With the aid of a visual presentation incorporating plans and aerial photographs, the Case Officer identified the site and outlined the proposal, explaining the relevant planning policies to Members. Updates to the report were provided, including additional information from the applicant and clarification emails. The site’s location, application boundary, and proposed construction access were identified, and it was noted that the site was sloping, with ground levels increasing towards the upper areas. Key designations and constraints were highlighted, including its location within the Dorset National Landscape, the presence of public rights of way, scheduled ancient monuments, listed buildings, ecological networks, and Flood Zone 1. Site photographs illustrated the extensive panoramic views from various points, and details were presented of the applicant’s proposal for a new recreational route and picnic area, along with visuals and details of the solar panel arrays, four transformers, a customer substation building, DNO substation building, fencing, CCTV, and a proposed landscaping scheme with new hedgerow planting.

The Case Officer outlined the design evolution and summarised the proposal’s key benefits, including renewable energy generation, ecological enhancements, economic contributions, recreational opportunities, and soil and farm diversification, as well as other non-material benefits. Key planning considerations were addressed, particularly landscape and visual impacts given the site’s extensive visibility. Exceptional circumstances and the planning balance were highlighted, and the Case Officer concluded with a recommendation to refuse planning permission.

Public Participation

Antony Warren highlighted significant changes to the original application, noting that the 44-acre site was located within an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, which government policy stated should be protected. He argued that the land was unsuitable for the proposed development and warned that approval could set a precedent for similar projects elsewhere. He emphasised the need to resist proposals motivated primarily by financial gain. Mr Warren also referred to the impact on neighbouring farms, including one surrounded by flower fields, and noted that the site had produced maize this year, demonstrating its agricultural importance. He concluded that the potential loss of valuable farmland and landscape character outweighed any proposed benefits.

The applicant stated that the need for the scheme was critical. He explained that only one viewpoint would experience any significant visual impact, and panoramic views would be possible from the 1.5ha picnic area. He emphasised that refusing the application would represent a missed opportunity, noting the scheme’s alignment with carbon neutral targets and the urgency of the matter. Mr Bainbridge referred to page 53 of the committee report, stating that any harms had been fully addressed, while the benefits—particularly in relation to renewable energy—were substantial. He highlighted the grid connection as an improvement to a rare asset and argued that the economic benefits should be given greater weight. He added that the proposal supported the Energising Dorset strategy, would deliver employment opportunities, and provide significant benefits for Dorset.

The Local Ward Member stated that the parish council had almost unanimously supported the application, recognising the parish’s desire to play its part in addressing the climate crisis and acknowledging the direct benefits that the proposal would bring. Cllr Eysenck noted the reality of living within a national landscape, which was subject to constant change, and observed that various features were already visible from the site. He highlighted that the parish had experienced significant flooding in recent years and referred to the National Planning Policy Framework, emphasising that great weight should be given to climate change considerations, which were often overlooked. While acknowledging that the proposal would have an impact on the national landscape, he noted the 40-year timescale and expressed hope that, within that period, alternative energy sources would become available.

Members questions and comments

• Asked whether any flood mitigation measures had been proposed.
• Referred to the parish council’s submission regarding a local benefit fund and sought clarification on the weight given to this in the decision-making process.
• Thanked the officer for a comprehensive report and detailed presentation
• Noted that the council had declared a climate emergency.
• Some members expressed support for the proposal, referring to the impact section in paragraph 2.1 of the report.
• Others opposed the proposal due to its impact on a sensitive landscape, noting the 40-year timescale and the lasting change to the landscape, which they did not consider acceptable.
• Acknowledged that the parish and local residents supported the proposal, citing public interest and the need to mitigate climate change.
• Highlighted the benefits of the development, including supporting many homes and contributing to net zero targets, and noted the potential to review the development in 40 years as technology advances.
• Some members felt a balance had been reached and were minded to support the proposal due to its contribution to addressing climate change.
• Noted that some members were influenced by parish council and local ward member support, recognising the special landscape but stressing the urgency of transitioning to clean energy.
• Asked whether further screening conditions could be applied to reduce landscape and visual impacts.
• Acknowledged the difficulty of balancing climate change objectives with the protection of the national landscape.
• Stated that local support did not necessarily mean the location was appropriate.
• Referred to the council’s commitment to renewable energy, decarbonisation, and Dorset Council targets, but noted the officer’s advice that there were no exceptional circumstances.
• Emphasised the need to work within the planning framework to make a robust decision.
• Queried what other opportunities existed within the local plan for renewables.

Having had the opportunity to discuss the merits of the application and an understanding of all this entailed; having considered the officer’s report and presentation; the written representatives; and what they had heard at the meeting, a motion to APPROVE the officer’s recommendation to REFUSE as recommended, was proposed by Cllr Spencer Flower, and seconded by Cllr Ridout, for the reason set out in the officer report.

Decision: To refuse for the reasons set out in Section 17 of the officer’s report.