Solar farm and battery storage at Land East of M6 Motorway, Shap

The site and surroundings

The site covered about 31 hectares of upland pasture beside Jackson Lane and the M6, within an open countryside landscape of drystone walls.

“The site and its surroundings is agricultural/pastoral open countryside characterised chiefly by a patchwork of drystone walled field enclosures set across an undulating upland landscape interrupted by wooded stands and occasional hedgerows. The site itself covers c.31ha and comprises grassy pasture.”

“Aside from the immediate residence at ‘Trainriggs’, as the crow-flies the next nearest residences are the ‘Cow House’ located some 700m to the east along Jackson Lane, with the hamlet of Hardendale some 560m at its closest to the site away to the south east. Shap is c.1.1km to the west; and, Crosby Ravensworth some 4.2km to the east.”

Officer report

Earlier planning history

The site had previously been considered for environmental impact screening, with the earlier project judged unlikely to cause significant environmental effects.

“Prior to the current application, the site’s planning history includes just the application lodged in 2023 for a Screening Opinion the outcome of which was ‘negative’ as outlined earlier: that the then envisaged project should not be regarded as EIA Development by reason that on the basis of the available information it was unlikely there would result significant environmental effects.”

“Otherwise there have been a number of minor proposals submitted in connection with existing nearby properties at Trainriggs and Hardendale but nonesuch are considered material to the assessment of the present case by reason of their relatively minor scale, nature and limited, highly localised impact. CONSULTATIONS”

Officer report

Who spoke

Objectors discussed landscape, habitats and tourism; the applicant’s representatives supported the scheme; the parish council opposed its industrial effect; and a councillor supported refusal.

The committee vote

Members unanimously adopted the shadow HRA and voted five to two to refuse planning permission.

“The vote then took place on recommendation (ii) To REFUSE to grant planning permission for the reason set out at the end of the report.”

“(ii) agrees to REFUSE to grant planning permission for the Reason set out below…”

Minutes

The final decision

Planning permission was refused because the major industrial-style development would cause significant and demonstrable harm to a historic and valued landscape.

“The proposal would introduce a major industrial-esque development across an exposed and undulating area of open countryside displaying a perceptively historic landscape still dominated by a patchwork of drystone walled field enclosures conveying a strongly characteristic sense of stark upland rurality, thereby causing significant and demonstrable harm to this historic and valued landscape.”

Minutes