Solar farm at Land Opp Marten Farm, St. Mary's Road, Romney Marsh
Summary of planning committee decision
Decided by Shepway Planning and Licensing Committee on 20 Jan 2026.
What was proposed
The application proposed a 40-year solar farm generating about 16MW, with panels, substations, fencing, security measures, access works and landscaping.
“Figure 2: Site Location Plan 3. Proposal 3.1. Planning permission is sought for the installation of a solar farm comprising ground mounted photovoltaic solar arrays together with inverter/transformer units, substations, onsite grid connection equipment, fencing/access gates, security measures, other ancillary infrastructure, and landscaping and biodiversity enhancement. 3.2.”
“Photovoltaic Arrays and Ancillary Infrastructure 3.4. The proposed photovoltaic solar panels would be south facing, fixed tilt arrays mounted on metal support frames, arranged in rows between 7m and 9m apart on an east/west alignment. The lower edge of the panels would be located 0.6m above ground level, with the upper edge of the panels proposed to be located 2.65m in height above ground level. The following ancillary infrastructure is included in the application:”
Officer report
The site and surroundings
The site is about 40 hectares of flat, open arable farmland in the countryside, crossed by a public footpath and surrounded by drainage ditches.
“The site comprises an irregular shaped parcel of arable farmland approximately 40ha in size located within open countryside, approximately 0.7 miles north east of St Mary in the Marsh.”
“The site lies within an area of archaeological potential and is within Floodzone 3 which has a 1 in 100 (1%) or greater annual probability of flooding. A network of drainage ditches surrounds the site, with the Clobsden Sewer, located adjacent to the western and southern site boundary, and the Eastbridge Sewer, a Romney Marshes Area IDB drain, located along the northern site boundary.”
Officer report
Earlier application
An earlier screening opinion concluded that an environmental impact assessment was not required for the proposed temporary solar farm.
“Relevant Planning History 4.1. The relevant planning history for the site is as follows:”
“24/1885/FH/SCR EIA Screening Opinion under the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017 in respect of the proposal for the development of a temporary solar farm producing renewable energy, including the installation of ground-mounted solar panels together with associated works, equipment, and necessary infrastructure, such as sub-stations, access arrangements and security fencing on the site.”
Officer report
Main planning concerns
Officers identified residual adverse effects on local landscape character, while finding the proposal acceptable in principle and subject to mitigation on other main issues.
“Policy CC6 at criteria 1 sets out that proposals for the erection of solar farms, must not have an adverse impact on the landscape character or have any adverse visual impact on the scenic beauty of the Kent Downs NL or other sensitive local landscapes or heritage assets. 7.17.”
Officer report
What consultees said
Highways, ecology, flood, drainage, contamination and environmental consultees raised no objections subject to conditions, while some parish councils raised construction concerns.
“Dymchurch Parish Council: No objections to the principle but raise significant concerns regarding the potential impact on the community during construction. Conditions are requested in relation to construction access routes and traffic restrictions and restricted construction working hours to avoid night time hours.”
“There are no objections to the granting of planning permission on land contamination grounds subject to the imposition of the standard land contamination condition (parts B onwards) which would secure the proposed intrusive site investigation.”
Officer report
What residents said
Eighty-seven objections raised concerns including agricultural land, food security, wildlife, traffic, flooding, landscape, cumulative effects, visual impact and residential amenity.
“Loss of agricultural land. • Solar should be located on brownfield sites, car parks and rooftops. • The site is located on prime grazing/farming land. • Land use classification is based upon an outdated system and metrics. • Impact on wildlife. • The development would not benefit local people. • Impact on tourism. • Negative impact on jobs and the economy. • Inefficiency of solar. • No decommissioning plan has been submitted.”
“Permanent destruction of the environment. • The development is not needed. • The development would not generate much employment. • Impact in food security. • There are too many solar farms in the Romney Marsh. • The development would attract vandalism. • The development would be contrary to planning policy. • Harmful to residential amenity. • If solar is needed it should be located at Dungeness. • Unacceptable construction noise and mess.”
Officer report
Who spoke
A local resident spoke against the application, while representatives of Newchurch Parish Council, the ward member and the applicant spoke on it.
Points raised at committee
The applicant addressed the grid connection, cumulative infrastructure, drainage and traffic concerns, stating that technical matters and construction traffic could be controlled.
“Further, in response to comments from objectors that the drainage strategy is lacking and existing field drains have not been considered, the applicant stated that the scheme has been developed with the active participation of the landowner, and that such matters are addressed through the agreed technical framework that would be overseen by statutory consultees.”
“The applicant further stated that whilst objectors consider the traffic impact would be severe, this is not a view shared by KCC, who have stated that solar farms do not generate significant traffic movements and notes that a construction traffic management plan can be secured by a planning condition.”
Minutes
The vote
Councillors voted eight to four to grant permission, with no abstentions; an alternative motion to refuse was not carried.
“That planning permission be granted subject to the conditions and informatives set out at the end of the report and the addition of a condition securing details of a Soil Management Plan and that delegated…”
“An alternative motion was raised to refuse the application, proposed by Councillor Goddard and seconded by Councillor Cooper, however this fell as the original motion was passed.”
Minutes
Sources
- Shepway Planning and Licensing Committee minutes, 20 January 2026
- Agenda and papers (council website)
Source: Plota analysis of Shepway's committee minutes and officer report. Quotations are the council's own words; headings and summaries are Plota's.
Committee decisions and nationwide planning applications, in one API
The Plota API returns planning applications from every council we cover, each with its decision, whether a committee or officers decided it, and the committee date. Build it into your own tools.
See the API →At the meeting
- Council
- Shepway
- Date
- Tuesday 20 January 2026
- Recommendation
- Officers recommended approval
- Committee decided
- Approved
- Vote
- 8 for, 4 against
- Minutes
- The council's minutes
- Meeting
- Agenda and papers (council website)
- Application
- The application (council website)
- All decisions
- Shepway committee decisions →
Source: Plota analysis of the minutes.
This committee's year
17 decisions in the 12 months to this meeting, 1 against officer advice.
Source: Plota analysis of the committee's minutes.