September 27, 2012

Inazin Appeal Tedburn St Mary Solar Farm Planning Decision

On July 9th Teignbridge District Council planning committee voted to refuse planning permission for the 40 acre Fulford Solar Park at Gold's Cross Hill near Tedburn St. Mary. In a not entirely unexpected turn of events the developer of that project, Inazin Solar, have now appealed against that decision. Not only that, but they have also simultaneously applied for planning permission for a remarkably similar new project, together with the requisite screening opinion. Consequently there are now three new entries on our interactive map and list of large scale solar PV projects in South West England, all at the same location!

According to Inazin's grounds for appeal against the decision on their original proposal:

The proposal, by reason of its scale, location, elevation and appearance will not have an unduly adverse impact on the character or visual amenities of the Area of Great Landscape Value (AGLV). Furthermore, the proposal will not be in conflict with policies of the Teignbridge Local Plan 1989-2001 and the Devon Structure Plan 2001-2016.

The provision of energy from renewable sources is encouraged by national and local policies and it can be demonstrated that the development, the subject of this appeal, will provide a valuable contribution towards meeting the targets of the District, which at present produces very little of its energy from renewable sources. It is considered therefore that the benefits resulting from the supply of renewable energy substantially outweigh any limited harm to the AGLV, in a District with a significant shortfall against national and local renewable energy targets.

According to the Planning Inspectorate, in their letter to Teignbridge District Council:

The appellant has requested the written representations procedure. We have applied the criteria and considered all representations received, including the appellant's preferred choice. We consider that the written representations procedure is suitable and we intend to determine this appeal by this procedure.

The following documents must be sent within this timetable.

By 26 September 2012:

You must notify any person who was notified or consulted about the application in accordance with the Act or a development order and any other interested persons who made representations to you about the application, that the appeal has been made.

By 24 October 2012:

Please send me 2 copies of your statement if the appeal questionnaire does not give full details of your case.

By 14 November 2012:

You and the appellant must submit 2 copies of any final comments you and they have on each other's statement and on any comments from interested persons or organisations.

Site visit:

We will arrange for one of our Inspectors to visit the appeal site. If it is decided that the Inspector should be accompanied by the main parties, we will send you details of these arrangements nearer the time. If, however, an unaccompanied site visit can be made you will not be informed in advance.

Costs:

The appellant has been directed to our advice pamphlet 'Costs awards in planning appeals'. You should also be aware that costs may be awarded to either party.

This does all sound like a rather expensive and long winded procedure, so maybe the decision on Inazin's new planning application will be made before the planning inspector determines the appeal on their previous one?  According to Teignbridge Planning Online that decision will be delegated to a planning officer, with a target date of  December 11th 2012.

Finally I should perhaps point out that today is September 27th, and that I only discovered the information outlined above whilst browsing the Teignbridge DC web site rather than via any other form of communication from Teignbridge council.

Filed under Renewables by

Comments on Inazin Appeal Tedburn St Mary Solar Farm Planning Decision »

October 2, 2012

Jim @ 9:37 am

I've just received an email from Teignbridge District Council. Amongst other things it says that:

I contacted the Planning Inspectorate and they confirmed that as you spoke at Planning Committee, you should have been notified of the appeal as an interested party.

I apologise for this error and have put procedures in place to ensure that in future, anyone that speaks at Planning Committee, but may not have sent in a letter of support/objection, will be notified of any future appeal.

Leave a Comment

Fields marked by an asterisk (*) are required.

Subscribe without commenting