Proposal for Cornwall’s Largest Solar Farm Denied

A proposal for what would have been Cornwall’s most extensive solar farm has been turned down. Residents living near the 210-acre site, located close to the A30 at Carland Cross, argued that it would negatively impact the landscape, consume valuable agricultural land, and heighten the risk of flooding. Developers disputed these assertions, maintaining that the project could supply power to 12,000 homes annually and assist the UK in achieving its renewable energy targets. At an extraordinary meeting of Cornwall Council’s Strategic Planning Committee, councillors voted 8-1 to reject the plan due to concerns it would adversely affect the area. During a well-attended session, campaigners insisted that the Trispen site was fertile farmland necessary for food production. Worries were also expressed regarding the cumulative effect of establishing another solar farm near existing ones in mid Cornwall. Councillor Karen Glasson, who represents Probus and St Erme, welcomed the scheme’s rejection. She stated: “We don’t want this development in this area. We are not against renewable energy but these solar farms need to be in the right place and not taking away from local businesses and excellent farmland.” Nick Dymond, a farmer from St Erme, spoke against the proposal and expressed his delight at its refusal. He said: “The whole farming industry is going to become more organic in its approach so our production is going to drop and we are going to need more land. We cannot afford to lose farmland to industrialisation.” He added that the issue of food security should be given greater importance in light of the push for more renewable energy projects. “We are building houses and delivering solar faster than any other county in the country all at the expense of farmland. We’re walking into an abyss,” he warned. Downing Renewable Developments, the company behind the scheme, commented: “We take the concerns of local communities and stakeholders extremely seriously.” It further stated that the site was not currently used for food production and that an assessment had indicated no significant flood risk from the project. “In order to minimise the visual impact, we provided additional screening measures as agreed with local residents,” it added. The developers retain the right to appeal the council’s decision, which would then be reviewed by a government planning inspector.