The appeal site was: within the Green Belt; comprised about 50 per cent. best and most versatile agricultural land (BMV); crossed by a number of public rights of way; and surrounded by a number of important heritage assets.

The Council accepted in the run up to the Appeal that the land was grey belt land. The Inspector agreed with that position. As such the development was found not to be inappropriate development in the Green Belt.

The Inspector found that there would be no significant loss of BMV land either on a temporary or permanent basis. Nor would the proposed development have an adverse impact on food security. Although accepting there was no legal requirement to look at alternatives, the Inspector concluded by reference to the Appellant’s site search assessment that it had been adequately demonstrated that the use of the agricultural land was necessary. No weight was applied to the BMV issue in the final planning balance.

On heritage assets, the Inspector accepted that the proposal would not cause harm to any of the nearby Listed Buildings, nor to the non-designated heritage assets, but that, in accordance with the Appellant’s assessment, it would cause less than substantial harm, at the lower end of the scale, to the Scheduled Monument which was close to the Site boundary.

The Inspector gave substantial weight to the benefits of renewable energy generation (and the fact that in this case the grid connection arrangements mean that the scheme could be delivered in a short timeframe), energy security and climate change mitigation. She also gave significant weight to biodiversity enhancements (the scheme has been designed with significant biodiversity net gain); moderate weight to economic benefits; and limited weight to educational benefits (a condition to secure a scheme to provide information about the areas mining history).

Against this, the Inspector balanced the heritage harm and gave moderate weight to landscape and visual impacts – the scheme is, although grey belt, located in pleasant countryside.

The Inspector concluded the benefits outweighed the harms and granted planning permission.

Mark Westmoreland Smith KC acted for Boom Power Ltd, the successful Appellant, instructed by Chris Cox of Corylus Planning and Environmental.