PERTH and Kinross councillors have refused an application for a solar farm on prime agricultural land near Coupar Angus.
The plans – which went before the Planning and Placemaking Committee on Wednesday, July 9 – had been recommended for approval by council officers.
It was refused by a single vote after objectors raised fears about going from living in open countryside to being in the middle of an industrial site.
Elected members in the SNP administration – who voted to approve the application – were outnumbered by opposition councillors who voted for refusal.
Milton Keynes-based Greentech Invest UK (9) submitted plans to develop a 22MW solar farm on 46 hectares of land 320m north-west of Peattie Farm, Kinnochtry near Coupar Angus. The solar panels themselves would occupy around 24 hectares of the site.
PKC received 44 letters of objection to the application and just one letter of support.
Kettins Parish Community Council and Burrelton And District Community Council both objected to the proposal.
Campmuir resident Dave Ritchie, addressed the council on behalf of local residents opposed to the proposal.
He said: “While we all recognise the requirements to produce green energy, the use of prime agricultural land is a real concern, particularly in light of the recent political and economical uncertainties when arguments for food security are stronger than ever.
“There’s only eight per cent of Scotland that’s prime agricultural land, so there must be plenty more room on other land to put these solar farms on. We’ve got brownfield sites, rooftops and plenty of unproductive sites.”
He highlighted concern about the swathe of renewable energy developments in the Coupar Angus area.
Ritchie said: “There’s a gathering pace of solar development – all on prime agricultural land.
“Of particular concern to residents is the prospect of being sandwiched between two separate developments – one which is at Markethill, 250 acres, (which is awaiting a decision from Scottish Ministers) and this one here at Peattie which is 110 acres.
“Before long, we’ll no longer be living in the countryside but on a solar farm.”
He told councillors the arable land was used every year to grow crops such as potatoes, barley, carrots and turnips.
Objector Polly Jones’ home neighbours the site.
Addressing councillors, she said: “My concern, I believe, is shared by all of my neighbours and many of the residents of Campmuir.
“We were actually really shocked to hear this was being considered for approval, given the size of it and the impact it’s going to have on all of us.
“Currently, we look at a wide open expanse of beautiful agricultural land. We bought our properties due to their location, at a price which reflected that setting and we pay our council tax to reflect that value and setting.
“If this proposal is allowed I and my neighbours will be faced directly with a minimum six-metre wall of solar panels.”
With the application site opposite her home being on a slope she explained they were “very sceptical the screening will have any effect and even once the screening is fully grown, we’re still going to be dwarfed by the panels that are visible higher up the hill”.
She added: “As developments – like these – crowd in and around the substation there is a risk in Coupar Angus (with multiple developments proposed) that if they go ahead we won’t be living in the countryside any more but in an industrial site.
“I feel, in Scotland, we don’t have to have the trade-off between energy and food because we have a lot of land that is not prime agricultural land.”
Greentech senior planning manager James Jenkins told councillors: “We estimate the project will deliver over £4.5 million of construction work that can be delivered by local contractors and specialists.”
He said rent paid to the landowner would “ensure they could continue investing in their farming enterprise and maintain it as a viable operation” and the community would benefit from around £500 per MW (£11,000).
When councillors questioned the use of prime agricultural land, PKC’s Major Applications and Enforcement team leader Sean Panton told councillors: “The loss of prime agricultural land is regrettable but national planning policy does allow it.”
National Planning Framework 4 permits development on prime agricultural land for “essential infrastructure and there is a specific locational need and no other suitable site”.
Blairgowrie and Glens councillor Bob Brawn moved to refuse the application.
The Conservative councillor said: “This part of the world, Coupar Angus, has already lost prime agricultural land to battery storage at Pleasance Road; last month we, as consultees, agreed to battery storage at Kettins on prime agricultural land; Markethill is still in abeyance and could happen (but we can’t use that as a justification); there’s also a solar farm development at Keithick.
“The exception for the use of prime agricultural land is for essential renewable energy. I would argue that Coupar Angus has done its bit for renewable energy already and I don’t believe this is now classed as essential in this area.
“I feel the need for prime agricultural land outweighs the need for renewable energy in this area.”
Conservative councillor Ian James seconded the motion for refusal.
SNP councillor Ken Harvey moved to approve the plans and claimed the land was “in a poor state and doesn’t appear to have been used for anything other than silage the past few years”.
Following a brief recess, he corrected himself and said: “I said it was getting used for silage. Obviously not, there are potatoes and what looked like turnips being grown.”
He added: “The loss of prime agricultural land is outweighed by the benefit of solar energy we’re getting. We are constrained by where the substations are for such developments and we need to take due cognisance of that going forward with the other developments but I think this development is reasonable.”
It was seconded by Bailie Mike Williamson.
Six Conservative, independent and Liberal Democrat councillors voted to refuse the application and the five SNP councillors on the committee voted to approve the application. It was refused by one vote.
