Agenda item

Some Members had visited the site the previous day.

The report was presented by the Planning Officer who outlined the reasons for refusal as set out in the report.

The following spoke under the public participation at meetings scheme:

·         David Swindale, Applicant

Some Members suggested the breaking up of the panels rather than one solid block in order to reduce the visual impact of the development. The Planning Officer was unsure if this was technically achievable with solar panels and it was noted that this may affect the efficacy of the energy generation due to landscape constraints.

Some Members noted that to refuse the application was contrary to the Authority’s position regarding climate change, and considered that the landscape and heritage impacts of the proposal were low enough to merit approval.

A motion to approve the application was proposed and seconded.

Members discussed ways to soften the visual impact of the development, namely some low-level planting (which was deemed to negatively impact the efficacy of energy generation by restricting exposure to sunlight) and the use of solar panels with a matte finish to reduce glare. The Planning Officer confirmed that matte finish solar panels are available and that this could be added as a condition, if Members were to approve the application.

The motion to approve the application subject to conditions was put to the vote and carried.

RESOLVED:

To APPROVE the application subject to the following conditions:

1.    Statutory time limit

2.    Adopt plans

3.    Matte finish on the panels

4.    Panels are parallel to the ground

5.    Removed when no longer required for the purposes of energy generation