Agenda item

Recommended for Approval.

The Head of Planning and Building Control recommended that in respect of application 3/24/1275/FUL, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions set out at the end of the report.

The Principal Planning Officer said that a consultee response had been received from the fire safety team at Hertfordshire County Council, and their comments had been noted and condition 6 had been amended.

The Principal Planning Officer said that Officers had received some advice regarding the community facilities provision that was included in the application and paragraph 9.4 of the report had been amended.

Members were advised of the location of the site and were provided with a detailed summary of the proposed development including details of the energy generation in the context of the overall energy demands of the nearby GSK site. 

The Principal Planning Officer presented a series of visuals and plans in respect of the proposed development. She said that there had been no objections from statutory consultees and Officers had received 39 representations of support and 12 objections.

The Principal Planning Officer said that in respect of biodiversity net gain there would be an 89 percent increase on area habitat across the site and a 1500 plus percent increase in hedgerow.

Members were advised that the applicant had engaged in depth with Hertfordshire County Council highways and a construction traffic management plan which was required to be submitted and approved. The Principal Planning Officer said that Hertfordshire Highways were satisfied that the development could be implemented without harm to motorists using the highway, or to cyclists and pedestrians. She said that the site would be very well screened by existing woodland and the panels were quite low in scale. Members were advised that the landscape team had examined the submitted information and were satisfied that the most sensitive receptors of the visual impact were covered.

Sarah Lapsley and Paul Holmes-Ling addressed the committee in support of the application. They were asked questions by the Development Management Committee.

Councillor Stowe asked if there was to be a decommissioning bond for this site. The Principal Planning Officer said that there was no decommissioning bond but there were extensive conditions requiring a scheme for remediation of the land and there were measures in place to make sure that the land was made good.

Councillor Devonshire said that the Westmill Site was elevated, and he asked if there were any views to demonstrate to Members whether the development site could be seen from Westmill Site from the north.

The Principal Planning Officer said that the landscape and visual impact assessment that was submitted with the application set out the guidelines and methodology and Officers were satisfied that this was sound in terms of identifying the sensitive receptors. Members were advised that the development would be very well screened.

Councillor Burt asked for some clarity as to whether the location of the proposed solar would make the site a brownfield site and therefore more probable for housing to be approved on the site in the future.

The Principal Planning Officer said that this was a concern that had been raised and Officers had to report this as a concern. She said that the proposed development of a solar farm did not change the classification of the land at all and there was an emphasis on remediation of the land if it were not to be used for a solar farm in future.

Councillor Estop asked for some clarity in terms of the proposed appearance and visibility of the solar panels. The Principal Planning Officer said that there was a quite a bit of informal guidance about glint and glare and she said that when details were submitted under condition 3, officers would have the powers to ensure that would not be excessive glint and glare from the solar panels.

Councillor Stowe asked if there would be a bund around the site of the battery storage to ensure that the ground around the site was not contaminated by water in the event of this being used to fight a fire. The Principal Planning Officer said that there were regulations covering the fire risk and battery energy security systems and this was covered by a condition requiring the applicant to submit details for an emergency plan in the event of fire.

Councillor Stowe said that there was limited detail about how a bund could be provided around the battery energy storage in the event of a fire to contain the water. The Interim Team Leader (Strategic Applications) said that officers had recommended a condition in discussion with Hertfordshire Fire and Rescue and this condition had to be necessary and the detail that was being sought would be available when the conditions were discharged and this was a much smaller battery energy storage facility.

Members had a general discussion around the conditions and Officers responded to questions about the proposed conditions. Councillor Dunlop proposed and Councillor Devonshire seconded, a motion that application 3/24/1275/FUL be granted planning permission subject to the conditions set out at the end of the report.

After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, the motion was declared CARRIED.

RESOLVED – that application 3/24/1275/FUL be granted planning permission subject to the conditions set out at the end of the report.