News
downsmail.co.uk Solar farm plan turned down
MAIDSTONE Council’s planning committee has refused a proposal for a large solar farm scheme near Staplehurst to protect theWealden countryside.
Sunsave 22 wanted to introduce
63,888 solar panels on a 72-hectare site at Great Pagehurst Farm, bor- dering Marden Road, Pagehurst Road and Park Road. The scheme, which would have
met the electricity needs of an esti- mated 4,200 homes for the next 25 years, drew support from five councillors. However, six voted to refuse and three abstained, spark- ing celebrations from some mem- bers of the public who observed the Town Hall meeting. It would have become the second
major solar farm in the borough – after the completion of a 14.58- hectare scheme near Lenham two years ago. Council officers had urged the committee to support the applica- tion, claiming potential harm to the countryside would be outweighed by the benefits of renewable energy generation. Grazing would have still been able to take place on the land. Cllr Tony Harwood said: “There
has never been a more desperate need for clean energy and the Low
Protestors celebrate the decision to refuse the solar farm proposed for land at Great Pagehurst Farm
Weald experiences both extreme wet and dry spells. “The solar farm in Lenham is
closer to an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and there has not been a hue and cry – there has been an uplift in biodiversity and hedgerows there. “A 25-year permission will allow
the land to recover. The alternative, polytunnels, could be worse, with issues with hydrology, soil com- paction and pesticides. “Maybe growing electricity, as
well as the grazing, is the best thing for this land.” However, the committee took
heed of a plea from Cllr Joan Buller of Staplehurst Parish Council. She said: “A renewable energy scheme must not be at the cost of views of the countryside. Our open rural character is the ‘wow’ factor of Sta- plehurst; don’t ruin this. “This site is the size of 36 football pitches. There will be employment but not for locals; the panels will be shipped in from Europe, so Kent
will not gain an ecological benefit – just heavy vehicles. “Rain cascading from the panels
will alter drainage on this site. We don’twant to become the solar city of the Maidstone borough.” Cllr Richard Ash, one of the com-
mittee members who voted to re- fuse, said: “If every house being built in south Maidstone, in Mar- den, Staplehurst and Headcorn, had solar panels on themwe would not need this major blot on our landscape.”
20,000 panels to power 1,000 homes Concern for
A SOLAR farm containing more than 20,000 panels is to be intro- duced on countryside near Marden after Maidstone Council gave the go-ahead. The planning committee felt the proposal for nine hectares of land at Widehurst Farm (pictured), off Thorn Road was acceptable – but the vote was marginal, with six members for and five against. The scheme will produce enough energy to power the needs of 1,000 homes for the 30 years in which the solar farm is operational.
But committee member Cllr Harper felt it was acceptable. He said: “Unless we limit climate change to an increase of two de- grees in a short length of time then the future of the planet is not good for humanity. “Schemes like this go a longway
Cllr Annabelle Blackmore said:
“Solar energy has its place but not at any cost to local communities. “If thiswas used for a nuclear en-
ergy plant it would be unaccept- able. Thirty years is not temporary; it is a generation and a half.”
towards addressing this. “This site seems more suitable for
solar power than the others, with two and a half acres of the site sur- rounded by woodlands. There are hedgerows elsewhere screening the site.”
Traffic report ‘is awaste of money’
A REPORT into traffic flows in Willington Street, Maidstone has been condemned as a waste of time and money if no action is to be taken. Some councillors had asked of-
ficers to investigate putting an 18- tonne weight limit on the already-busy road to prevent HGVs using it as a cut through to the M20. But KCC’s highways depart-
ment had received another re- quest that the route be proactively signposted to encourage lorries to use it and keep them out of the town centre. The report concluded no action
22 Maidstone South March 2016
should be taken, as either option could have a significant impact on residents in theWillington Street area. But Cllr Marion Ring told Maidstone’s Joint Transportation Board she felt that the “do noth- ing” option was unfair. She said: “This is a complete waste of money and officers’ time.We are seeing the facts and saying ‘do nothing’. Unlesswe have a Leeds- Langley bypasswe will see an in- crease in traffic on Willington Street.” Cllr Gary Cooke said the road
was already comparable to the M25 at peak times, with traffic
log-jammed, but he argued the re- port had not been awaste of time. He added: “The solution is the
very early implementation of a Leeds-Langley relief road.” Councillors Dan Daley and
Clive English questioned the sur- vey data and said it contained in- sufficient evidence about vehicle movements. Board chairman Cllr David Bur-
ton said he hoped a cost benefit analysis would be built into any future decision about the need for a Leeds-Langley relief road, tak- ing into account the misery of res- idents in the Willington Street area.
countryside Continued from page one
landscaping officer. No hedgerows and trees will be removed. The extra hedgerow and wildflowers will en- hance ecology. “This would be able to meet the energy requirements for 1,084 homes.We know the countryside is important and the proposal strikes a satisfactory balance.” Cllr Richard Ash said: “This will
only produce enough energy for 1,000 households. We need 18 of these just for the new houses being built in Maidstone. What about for the old houseswe have already?” Cllr Tony Harwood was the only committee member in favour of the development, claiming the polytun- nels at Hill Farmwere a greater eye- sore. He added: “If we do not keep global temperature increases to below 2C then the whole world is in trouble, and if we can’t allow 11 hectares with solar panels then I de- spair for the future of this planet.” But Cllr John Perry countered:
“This is not a solar farm but an in- dustrial installation. If this is going to be around for 25 years what is stopping them extending it for an- other 25 years?” The committee voted overwhelm- ingly to refuse the proposal.
Formore local news
www.downsmail.co.uk
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48