Agenda item

The SPO – JB introduced the Officers report and recommendation for approval subject to conditions. He established the location of the site, its relationship with neighbouring businesses, site plan, elevations and dimensions of the car ports. It was considered that the impact of the Norfolk Coast AONB was minimised with the proposal being suitably obscured by the Reef Leisure Centre.

Whilst the application may not be valued for its visual merits, it was considered significant for its positive impact and alignment with the Councils Climate Emergency declaration and green aims, offering environmental and renewable energy benefits. The energy provided to the Reef would be weather dependent, and subject to demand from the reef at any one time.

Members’ questions and debate

1. Cllr L Withington – Local Member for Sheringham North speaking on behalf of Local Member Cllr C Heinink (Sheringham South) - spoke favourably of the application, noting that the Town Council had not objected to the application and that they too had declared a Climate Emergency in June 2019. She agreed that placement of the Reef aided to shield the carpark from the AONB, minimising the visual impact and harm caused.

2. Cllr J Rest asked how many panels the proposal would consist of, and if the panels would be larger than the conventional sizes used on domestic roofs. The DM advised there would be 966 PV modules of standard size (referenced in the design access statement) with a combined surface area of 1896 square metres. 

3. In response to questions, the SPO – JB advised that there would be no storage facility proposed as part of the scheme.

4. Cllr N Lloyd advised that whilst the proposal would not offer the full complement of electricity to operate the Reef, when at full demand all power would be diverted to the Reef though there were some electric vehicle charging points associated with the application with the wiring already installed. Acceptance of the proposal had the potential to have a significant reduction on the running costs of the Reef, and an arrangement would be put in place with the operator (Everyone Active) to ensure a reasonable price for the energy produced. Having attended several similar sites across the UK, he considered such proposals as being very popular, offering shade to cars in the summer, and protection from inclement weather at other points of the year. Cllr N Lloyd affirmed that these types of project were essential to meet the Councils net-zero pledge in 2030, and so proposed acceptance of the Officers recommendation.

5. In response to questions from Cllr G Mancini-Boyle, the DM advised that the panels would be anti-glare.

6. Cllr R Kershaw seconded the Officers recommendation for acceptance.

7. Cllr P Heinrich expressed his support for the recommendation and commented it was a pity that solar panels could not be insisted upon all new developments.

8. Cllr H Blathwayt considered this a positive proposal which would have the added benefit of offering shade to cars, and dogs waiting in cars. He agreed with Cllr P Heinrich that he would be supportive of such a scheme being used in all supermarket car parks as in Spain and France.

9. Cllr A Brown commented in support or the application, though considered the design could be improved. He noted that typically a condition was added to such applications to ensure the removal of the solar panels when asked by the Council, and considered this too should be conditioned with this proposal. With reference to dark skies, Cllr A Brown asked that the lighting condition require state of the art lights which minimise light pollution, and asked if the details provided were the maximum which could be conditioned.

10. The DM advised that the Council had applied conditions on similar applications when they no longer were required for electricity generation. It was therefore not unreasonable for this condition to be applied. With regards light spill, as the relevant Officer dealing with the Reef application, the DM advised light spill on the AONB had been a primary consideration. The DM considered the proposal an enhancement due to the removal of light columns and replacement with down lighting under the solar panels.

11. Cllr L Withington reflected of issues in Sheringham with birds occupying themselves underneath panels, she asked what would be the likelihood of nesting birds underneath the panels and what could be done to avoid this.

12. The DM advised that matters nesting birds would be best managed by the Property Services team, rather than the conditioned.

13. Cllr J Toye considered there to be additional benefits to having solar panels beyond electricity generation, noting that the shade offered by the panels would keep all vehicles whether they be electric or not, cool in summer and this therefore resulted in less energy being used to cool the vehicles down. Conversely in winter vehicles would be shielded from the elements and would therefore warm up quicker.

IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY RESOLVED by 12 votes for.

That Planning Application PF/22/2901 be APPROVED subject to conditions to cover the matters listed below:

 · Time Limit for commencement (3 years)

· Development in accordance with the approved plans

Final wording of conditions to be delegated to the Assistant Director – Planning