Appeal: 

Appeal number APP/G3115?W?24?3350890 - Installation of a ground mounted solar photovoltaic array, co-located battery energy storage scheme (BES) together with associated infrastructure, security fencing, CCTV, access gate and on-site biodiversity net gain.

Burcot Farm, Burcot Solar Farm Limited

Our Response:

Oxford Preservation Trust ("OPT") welcomes this opportunity to submit further comments to the Planning Inspectorate on the above appeal. OPT strongly objects to the scheme on a number of issues including impacts on the Green Belt and surrounding landscape and loss of high value agricultural land.

The proposed development will result in the loss of a large swath of Green Belt land. It cannot be disputed that the proposal constitutes inappropriate development in the Green Belt. This is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt. The site performs well in relation to the Green Belt purposes, including preventing the neighbouring settlements merging, protecting the countryside and preserving the wider green setting of the Wittenham Clumps which are designated as both a SSSI and a Special Conservation Area (SAC).

The harm to the Green Belt should attract substantial weight against the proposal.

The appellant has put forward a case for very special circumstances. All of those put forward are applicable to any site intended for the proposed use. No case has been put forward to set out the very special circumstances (VSC) which make this site the only site that a scheme of this nature could be accommodates. The fact of the matter is this is a speculative application and the VSC case has been put together after the site was selected for the development and contain generic arguments that could equally be applied to other sites not located within the Green Belt.

Whilst the appellant has put forward examples of appeals where similar developments have been allowed in the Green Belt, a similar number of cases can be found where schemes have been dismissed. A few examples are set out below:

  • APP/N1920/W/22/3295268 - Land west of Hilfield Lane, Aldenham. Dismissed April 2024

    "Paragraph 28. In line with paragraph 153 (formerly 148) of the Framework, the Secretary of State has considered whether the harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harms resulting from the development is clearly outweighed by other considerations. Overall, he considers that the other considerations in this case do not clearly outweigh the harm to the Green Belt and the other identified harms relating to impact on landscape character..."

  • APP/A1910/W/23/3317818 - Little Heath Lane, Little Heath, Berkhamstead. Dismissed November 2023

    "Paragraph 28. The parties agree that the proposal is inappropriate development in the Green Belt. This is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt. In addition the proposal would result in moderate harm to the openness of the designated area and conflict with three purposes of Green Belts. The harm to the Green Belt arising from these matters attracts substantial weight against the proposal."

For Convenience OPT's comments on applications P23/S4132/FUL and P22/S0960/FUL are attached.

Planning permission was granted for a solar farm in Nuneham Courtney (a few miles from the appeal site and also in the Green Belt) for a scheme of approximately 120ha, and there is also a current application immediately adjacent to the above site for a further 57ha. Alongside the 13ha solar farm at Berinsfield - this could equate to a loss of nearly 200ha of Green Belt land within an area of approximately 6 square miles from the appeal site. The loss of such a huge amount of Green Belt land already should make the remaining land even more significant as it is all to serve the functions of the Green Belt.

OPT strongly object to the appeal proposals and politely request that the appeal be dismissed due to its failure to comply with relevant policy framework, and the clear harm it will cause to the Green Belt.