Agenda item

Further to minute 24 of the North and East Plans Panel meeting held on 25^th June 2015, where Panel deferred determination of an application for the installation of ground monitored photovoltaic panels and associated infrastructure for additional information, to consider a further report of the Chief Planning Officer

(report attached)

  Further to minute 24 of the North and East Plans Panel meeting held on 25^th June 2015, where Panel deferred determination of an application at Two Hoots Farm, Harewood, for the installation of a 150kW ground mounted photovoltaic (pv) array consisting of 654 pv panels on a site located within the Green Belt and a Special Landscape Area, for additional information, Members considered a further report of the Chief Planning Officer

  Plans, photographs and drawings were displayed at the meeting

  The Panel’s Lead Officer presented the report and referred to the additional information which had been provided in the report before Panel.  He advised Members that there was nothing in the planning history to prejudice this development from taking place, nor was there anything in the proposed development which prejudiced the existing land uses

  The concerns raised that there was a planning condition attached to a previous planning permission that required slurry generated from the use of the permitted pig shed be spread on the site.  The planning history had been checked and the actual condition required slurry to be taken off site

The view of the Council’s Agricultural Surveyor had been sought who was of the view that the proposals would not prejudice the farming of the land

  Although detailed at the last Panel, the policy context of the proposals was highlighted for Members’ information

  The extent of the existing screening and proposed additional planting was also outlined

  In respect of the enforcement history, Members were informed that as part of a previous application for a pig shed, a condition had been attached that required details of a landscaping scheme, including a bund, to be submitted for approval.  However, the bund had been put up without any formal approval, although an application had now been received for the discharge of that condition.  Concerning the planning application for an agricultural worker’s house on site, discrepancies had come to light between what had been built and what had been granted approval for with a revised application being submitted, although this had not yet been validated as further information was being sought from the applicant

  Members discussed the proposals, with issues raised relating to:

·  the appearance of the panels; their colour; whether any light reflecting on them could impact on passing aircraft and that an artist’s impression of the panels would have assisted Members in considering the application.  Members were informed that the panels were described as non-reflective and were similar to those panels found on newer houses where they had been purpose-built into the roof

·  Government subsidies for the pv technology and when this would be paid.  The Chair advised that Officers would provide Councillor R Grahame with this information

·  the visual impact of the proposals in view of the open nature of the site and whether views of the panels would be seen by pedestrians.  Members were informed that glimpses across the site from Harrogate Road would be possible through any gaps which occurred in the screening

·  the other considerations referred to in the report to outweigh the harm to the Green Belt and the nature of these.  The Panel’s Lead Officer advised that it was the view of Officers that the application should be recommended to Panel for approval, having given significant weight to the benefits arising from renewable energy, this being backed up by Central Government’s view, set out in the NPPF, however it was for the Panel to reach its own view on the application

The Panel considered how to proceed

RESOLVED -  That the application be granted subject to the conditions

set out in the submitted report