Council rejects solar farm rule change could have allowed panels to stand 'derelict'

JBM Solar Projects Ltd won permission to place panels on 300 acres of farmland north of the B5062, southeast of Mytton’s Coppice, near Roden, in March.

A condition, imposed by planning officers at the time, limited the site’s working life to 40 years and ordered it to be taken down if it ever “ceased to generate electricity for a period of 12 months”.

In June, the company applied to allow the panels to stay in place if grid problems caused the stoppage, saying this change would stop “a third-party issue outside of its control” from “threatening” the site.

Ercall Magna Parish Council objected and Telford and Wrekin Council refused, saying the original rules were in line with those used around the country.

Writing on behalf of JBM, planning agent Chris Cox, of Pegasus Group Ltd, told the authority the solar farm involved a “large up-front capital investment” to be recouped through long-term sales to the National Grid.

The 12-month decommissioning trigger – the third of 15 listed conditions – “represents a threat to that model because circumstances outside the applicant’s control, however unlikely, could result in decommissioning”.

This threat “could have implications for the funding investment required to build the solar farm, and potentially jeopardises the scheme”, Mr Cox added.

He said the Pegasus has gained planning permission for approximately a tenth of all UK solar farms, and “similar conditions have not been placed on other projects”.

In a report explaining their refusal, planning officers acknowledged that a JBM project at Stanton Fitzwilliam solar farm was approved by Swindon Borough Council without an equivalent condition.

“However,” they added, “this was granted in 2014 when such conditions were not as common”, and similar requirements are in place at a majority of approved solar farms now.

Other JBM schemes, in Mid-Devon and East Riding of Yorkshire, for example, trigger decommissioning after six and three months of non-generation respectively, it said.

“It is unclear why the circumstances in this case are so significantly different that an alternative approach is required,” the report said.

The report added that “the potential for the infrastructure to be left without an appropriate decommissioning strategy in place” caused concern in the neighbouring community.

If, it said, the change were approved then a “permanent problem with the grid” occurred early in the farm’s operation life, the equipment would be “left in place for the duration of 40 years – exactly the scenario the residents and parish council were keen to avoid”.

Summarising the parish council objection, the report said: “Members were clear in the view that the conditions on any application are included for good reasons. They are there to balance the proposals and ensure fairness between the landowner, applicant, locality and community.”

It notes that members were in favour of the original clause, as worded then, at the time of the application and were “wary” of the proposed change.