THURROCK councillors this evening (Thursday, 8 June) rejected an application for a massive solar farm in the borough green belt in Fobbing.

Thurrock News reported in advance of the meeting how council officers believed the scheme should get the green light, despite significant opposition from more than 40 local residents but councillors rejected the argument.

The application was first put to the committee in March when it was decided to have a site visit and councillors said that the visit was extremely beneficial and showed the environmental value of the site near Marsh Farm in Fobbing.

Officers believed the benefits of the energy generating scheme outweighed the harm to the green belt, but councillors unanimously disagreed and put forward their reasons why.

They summed up by saying it was inappropriate development in the greenbelt and there were not enough 'special circumstances' to merit building the solar farm.

The meeting can be viewed via this link

Summing up, committee chair Cllr Tom Kelly said: "We have had a couple of solar farms come to us that have been approved so we have been encouraging these sorts of development in Thurrock so far.

"Whether we like these solar farms or not this is the direction that the government wants us to go in so in that sense there is a lot to be positive about.

advertisement

"Looking at it from the other side of the fence there doesn't appear to be too much community support here, which is interesting, I remember the development at Ockendon was quite well supported by the local councillors. This one not so much.

"And there doesn't seem to be a huge amount of funds for community, those previous applications did have something. Again, this one not so much.

"I can see the positives and negatives on this one."

Cllr Paul Arnold said: " We did have a site visit, it was hugely beneficial to the decision process.

"I'm not in favour of this proposal, what we are dealing with here is a quite ancient viewpoint over marshland.

"I sincerely believe this would destroy that view. I know everyone says there is no right to a view, but I think in this case it is quite unique. We owe it to the residents of Thurrock to protect this viewpoint.

A view of the site.

"Solar farms can be put in many, many places but I think this site is a view that needs to be protected for generations to come. If the development were to proceed it would be lost forever.

advertisement

Cllr Georgette Polley said: "It is imperative that we protect this site. If there was anything else proposed on this green belt site of this enormity, I don't think we would be entertaining it at all.

"I find it overwhelming. Though they say it's a temporary permission for 40 years I don't see how you could ever recover that land."

"Non voting member Steve Taylor, representing the Countryside Charity, formerly known as the Council for the Preservation of Rural England said: "Visually this will look appalling.

"This is the largest remaining area of coastal landscape within the borough. we have a big waterfront and it's used in the industrialisation of the area and to slap this on what's left will be an absolute mess.

"The whole site is in my opinion, boils down to lazy farming. People are taking the revenue for the power that's generated, they don't have to work hard at all."

Countering the argument that it was essential to generate energy locally to avoid being held to ransom by suppliers, Mr Taylor said the land could equally contribute to helping grow our own food.

He said: "If you think about what's going on the world with, like in the Ukraine I this is a hell of a big area for agriculture and grazing. There's another view of it."

Cllr Kelly acknowledged that point, saying: "This idea of energy security, while we put substantial weight to that, I think it's not just a case of wind farms and social farms, we have other options. Bio diversity net gain, citing the loss of farmland and the green belt is a counter to the claim that generating power is essential."

Cllr Polley backed a recommendation to reject the application, saying: "There is erosion to the green belt. This land is a significant part of our green infrastructure."

Though councillors rejected the scheme unanimously, it is likely to come back to another meeting of the committee for ratification under the council's constitution because elected members overruled an officer recommendation.