1. Home
  2. Council and Democracy
  3. Your Councillors

Issue - meetings

15/503884 Land at Pullen Farm

 

 

Meeting: 17/03/2016 - Planning Committee (Item 316)

316 15/503884 - USE OF THE LAND TO PROVIDE A SOLAR FARM AND ITS ENCLOSURE BY FENCING; WITH THE ERECTION OF SOLAR PANELS, ALONG WITH THE PROVISION OF ASSOCIATED TRANSFORMERS, SWITCH GEAR HOUSING AND A SUBSTATION - LAND AT PULLEN FARM, STAPLEHURST ROAD, FRITTENDEN, KENT pdf icon PDF 118 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Councillors Brice and Munford left the meeting when this application was discussed (see Minute 308 above).

 

All Members stated that they had been lobbied.

 

The Committee considered the report and the urgent update reports of the Head of Planning and Development.

 

Mrs Holroyd, for objectors, Councillor Buller of Staplehurst Parish Council (against), Councillor Pyman of Headcorn Parish Council (against) and Mr Duncan, for the applicant, addressed the meeting.

 

Contrary to the recommendation of the Head of Planning and Development, the Committee agreed to refuse permission.  In making this decision, Members considered the proposed development to be unacceptable by virtue of its adverse effect on the character of the landscape and the visual amenity of the Special Landscape Area, contrary to the aims and objectives of the National Planning Policy Framework 2012 and saved policies ENV28 and ENV34 of the Maidstone Borough-Wide Local Plan 2000, and the planning harm that has been identified would not be outweighed by the planning benefits of the development.

 

RESOLVED:  That permission be refused for the following reason:

 

The proposed development is considered to be unacceptable by virtue of its adverse effect on the character of the landscape and the visual amenity of the Special Landscape Area, contrary to the aims and objectives of the National Planning Policy Framework 2012 and saved policies ENV28 and ENV34 of the Maidstone Borough-Wide Local Plan 2000, and the planning harm that has been identified would not be outweighed by the planning benefits of the development.

 

Voting:  6 – For  2 – Against  3 – Abstentions