Agenda item

Consideration was given to the report which outlined proposals for the large-scale Solar Farm, designated as a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project (NSIP), known as Whitestone.  

The Whitestone Solar Farm was primarily located within the administrative boundaries of both the City of Doncaster Council (CDC) and Rotherham Borough Council. As such, both Councils were considered host authorities and statutory consultees. Under the Act, a host authority was defined as a local authority within whose area the application land was wholly or partly situated.

Further information was provided on NSIPs and how they were developments of specific types and scales that the Government considered to be of such national importance that consent for their construction was granted at the national level.  

On this basis instead of seeking planning permission from the Local Authority, developers must apply to the Planning Inspectorate (PINS) for a Development Consent Order (DCO).

PINS, the Government agency responsible for managing NSIP applications, appointed the Examining Authority (ExA) with the agreement of the relevant Secretary of State to assess the proposal and make a recommendation to the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy. Under the Act, the final decision on the application rested with the Secretary of State. If approved, the Secretary of State would issue the DCO. The relevant Local Authority (or Authorities, in the case of cross-boundary applications) would then be responsible for discharging and monitoring the requirements of the DCO and any associated legal agreements.

By way of a presentation the Planning Board were advised:-

·              The NSIP Process.

.     NSIP Overview.

.     Governing Bodies and Roles.

.     Six Stage Process

·              Whitestone Proposals.

.     Project Scope and Location.

.     Energy Generation Capacity.

.     Grid Connection and Infrastructure.

.     Community Environmental Considerations.

·              Rotherham Borough Council’s Progress to Date.

.     Active Pre-Application Engagement.

.     Delegated Decision Making.

.     Environmental and Consultation Feedback.

.     Dedicated Page on Website.

.     Member Briefing Session.

.     Cumulative Impact – Legal Advice.

·              Next Steps.

.     Stakeholder Engagement.

.     Awaiting Key Documents.

.     Drafting Critical Reports.

.     Transparency and Oversight.

It was further pointed out that to date the Council had actively engaged in the pre-application phase, providing detailed feedback on environmental and technical aspects. The Council had also taken proactive steps to ensure governance arrangements were in place to meet the demanding timelines set by the Planning Inspectorate, including the delegation of responsibilities and the establishment of quarterly reporting to Planning Board.

While the project had evolved in response to initial consultation feedback, concerns remained regarding biodiversity, landscape impact and cultural heritage. The Council would continue to advocate for improvements and safeguards through its contributions to the Local Impact Report (LIR), Statement of Common Ground (SoCG), and ongoing dialogue with the applicant.

As the project progressed towards formal application submission in Spring 2026, the Council remained committed to ensuring that environmental standards were represented, and the development aligned with both national policy and local priorities.

On this basis further reports on progress would be presented to Planning Board on a quarterly basis.

The Chair invited questions which drew attention to:-

·              Adequacy of the consultation by Whitestones and whether further evidence was required to confirm the threshold had not been met.  Officers were keen to receive any feedback and suggested this be done by residents through their Ward Members for ease of collation.

·              Access to the NSIP webpage on the website and inclusion of the details within the Members’ Portal.  Further information to be shared via the Members’ Briefing.

·              Complaints by residents of the dates/times of the drop-in sessions and the lack of quality interaction.

·              Highway infrastructure and impact on smaller communities such as Treeton who were likely to be affected by three major developments.

·              Lobbying Members of Parliament and interested party registration once the application had been accepted.

Officers outlined their ongoing involvement in the technical process particularly around highway infrastructure.

The applicant had also indicated their intention to issue a newsletter once they had evaluated the consultation responses and any changes along with a further newsletter once the application had been accepted.

Resolved:-  That the update report and presentation be received and the contents noted.