Solihull planners have refused a large solar farm despite Birmingham Airport backing the plans, a decision that will be a blow to applicant Total Energies which wanted to construct the solar farm and battery storage units on land at Woodhouse Farm in Catherine de Barnes and Bickenhill.
The land, off Catherine De Barnes Lane, sits south of Birmingham Airport and northeast of Solihull town centre with the scheme split into sections for the panels and storage units.
Green belt objections dominate
There had been 44 objections lodged with Solihull Council raising that it was inappropriate development in the green belt, would cause harm to the countryside and a plan to eventually restore the land to agricultural use after 40 years was criticised as not being "credible, nor enforceable".
The application went before Solihull Council planning committee's latest meeting and in the public speaking section Councillor Mike Kay, chairman of Bickenhill Parish Council, said: "This development covers 63 hectares, 158 acres or 90 football fields. Approval will set a dangerous precedent - this application should be refused."
Residents not against solar parks
Councillor Jane Lamden said: "The residents of Catherine de Barnes, Bickenhill and Hampton-in-Arden are not against solar parks. They understand all the benefits. The most common objections are loss of green belt and inappropriate development within the green belt. The traditional rural landscape will be lost - the green belt should be the last resort."
Planning agent Dale Greetham said: "If you grant us permission the scheme could supply clean energy direct to Birmingham Airport helping to decarbonise one of the region's most significant economic assets. The development is capable of generating electricity to power approximately 14,000 homes, businesses and the local community."
Airport supports net zero journey
And Nikki Bains, head of planning, transport and strategy at Birmingham Airport, said the scheme had the potential to support the airport's journey towards net zero.
The council's planning officers had recommended the scheme be approved subject to conditions and the completion of a section 106 agreement, but over the course of 90 minutes various issues were raised about the scheme.
Highway safety concerns raised
Committee member Councillor David Hoey said his concerns were over highway safety of Church Lane which led to the Bickenhill section. "You have one exit," he said. "The congestion, the difficulties for families getting out - it's going to be a major issue (during construction)."
Councillor Yvonne Clements said: "This application is a little bit worrying for me. The ethos of it, I'm all for it. I'm looking more favourably at the Woodhouse Farm site than the Bickenhill site. I'm finding it difficult to look at this as a whole."
Committee splits on grey belt suitability
Chairman of the committee Councillor Bob Grinsell said: "I'm of a similar opinion", adding he felt the Bickenhill village section did not meet the rules testing it was grey belt suitable for development.
When the committee moved to the vote just two councillors voted in favour with seven against.
The committee then agreed the official reasons for refusal be delegated to the chairman, vice chairman and planning officer Mark Andrews, due to the complexity. The meeting was held at the Civic Suite on July 24.
