A DEVELOPER has launched an appeal to the Scottish Government following the unanimous refusal of plans for a renewable energy project.
On December 13, Perth and Kinross Council’s Planning and Placemaking Committee denied planning permission for a solar farm – the size of 90 international rugby pitches – less than half a mile from the centre of Coupar Angus.
Objectors told councillors the development would create a “very bleak industrialised landscape” in what is “the jewel of Strathmore”.
Applicant Vickram Mirchandani of Coupar Two Ltd submitted an application to Perth and Kinross Council to develop a 49.9MW solar farm on 91 hectares of land 130m South East of Coupar Angus Substation, Pleasance Road, Coupar Angus.
The proposal comprised ground mounted solar arrays, inverters, transformers, a substation, security fencing, CCTV cameras, cabling, access tracks and associated works.
A previous proposal – submitted by the same London-based developer – for a solar farm at the same site was unanimously refused by councillors in February 2023 and attracted 145 objections.
The latest application received 173 letters of objection and seven letters of support.
Objector and Coupar Angus resident Andrew Valentine is the spokesman for the campaign group SORE – Save Our Rural Environment.
He told the Local Democracy Reporting Service: “You would think people who had written in the first time would not bother the second time – but there were even more. There is a lot of real anger.
READ MORE: Scottish ministers reject plans for wind farm at English Border
“The second application was very similar to the first. We all feel we have been put through it once, then there was a second application and now have to face it a third time through the appeal. There is fury.”
At last month’s planning meeting objector, Galloway told councillors the plans were “wholly inappropriate”.
Chris Button, another resident, described it as “one of the most outrageous solar farm proposals that has ever been made”.
His wife Roz Button said the “static bleak sea of infrastructure” would create a “very bleak industrialised landscape”.
After hearing the deputations from local residents, Conservative councillor Ian James suggested the new application was “just the old application dressed up a bit better” and moved for refusal.
LibDem Bailie Claire McLaren seconded and the committee unanimously refused the plans upholding the reasons for refusal recommended by council planners.
READ MORE: Planning approval granted for new onshore windfarm in Highlands
The four reasons for refusal outlined in the report of handling were: the negative visual impact due to its size, appearance and location; “inadequate” measures to offset landscape concerns; the conclusion it “will erode the local distinctiveness of landscape character at this location” and “significantly impact” its appearance; and the loss of prime agricultural land.
But developer Coupar Two Ltd has now launched an appeal to the Scottish Government’s Planning and Environmental Appeals Division.
In their appeal statement Coupar Two Ltd said: “The Report of Handling has both overstated the extent and nature of the landscape and visual effects and has also failed to properly balance the new considerations created by NPF4 [National Planning Framework 4].”
It describes the project as “close to being a national project which has highly localised effects”.
The developer added: “In addition, the Report of Handling and the council decision have failed to reflect the very meaningful and positive benefits that will flow to landscape character arising from both the mitigation proposed as part of the scheme, but also the reinforcement of the existing landscape framework.
"These are all characteristics that repeated landscape character studies have identified as being harmed by intensive agriculture. At the same time, the appellant has produced, as part of that mitigation strategy, a strategy to also benefit ecology. That too is positively recognised by the biodiversity officer’s response.”
Coupar Two Ltd argued “there is an overwhelming case in support of sustaining this appeal”.
The developer has submitted 78 documents supporting its appeal against Perth and Kinross Council’s refusal decision.
The appeal has been registered and PKC approached for a response. Members of the public have until February 2, 2024 to make representation.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel