More than 100 objectors have won a battle to stop a massive solar farm being built on farmland south of Eccleshall.

The development, earmarked for two sections of land east of Horsley Hall at Wincote Lane, Wootton, was recommended for approval by planning officers at Stafford Borough Council.

But members of the council's planning committee voted to refuse permission at a special meeting on Thursday (June 25).

Their reasons were harm to the appearance and character of the area when viewed from Cash Lane and Wincote Lane, impact on the amenity of nearby residents and road users due to glint and glare from the panels, for which insufficient mitigation measures were proposed, and harm to the setting of nearby Johnson Hall, which is a Grade II Listed building.

Two sections of land totalling 43 hectares (106 acres) were earmarked for the development, across five fields to the north of Wincote Lane and one field to the northeast of Cash Lane.

The development would be a temporary one, in place for around 40 years.

The committee heard that Stafford Borough Council had received 110 objections to the application. Eccleshall Parish Council also opposed the scheme and there was just one letter "broadly in support, yet raising concerns regarding highways matters", a committee report said.

Colin Graham, who spoke against the application at Thursday's meeting, said objections included "industrial-scale intrusion into unspoilt countryside in Eccleshall Parish".

He added: "You cannot say that 43 hectares of solar panels, framing components, security fencing and CCTV cameras is not an intrusion viewed from surrounding hamlets.

"Great care should be taken to ensure heritage assets are conserved in a manner appropriate to their significance.

The site is overlooked by Grade I Listed High Offley Church, Grade II Listed Cash Farm, Johnson Hall and Johnson Hall Lodge.

"The site covers good agricultural land – 73% is BMV (best and most versatile) Grade 3a or above – and in the 33 years I have overlooked the Cash Lane site it has grown wheat, barley, oats, maize and potatoes.

"Placing an industrial-sized development on agricultural land at a time of food shortage, over-reliance on imports and the war in Ukraine is strategically short-sighted.

"The two lanes are not large enough, with insufficient width and soft verges; passing places and drainage are totally inadequate as things stand now.

Panels should go on planned industrial commercial estates or car parks around hill sites, such as Redhill A34 or WMI at Junction 12 of the M6, not unplanned ad-hoc blocks on agricultural unspoilt countryside."

Louise Chadwick, a planning agent who spoke in support of the application, said: "Stafford Borough Council demonstrated its commitment to tackling climate change by declaring a climate emergency in July 2019.

"In this context, renewable energy developments, such as solar farms, have an important part to play in local and national decarbonisation objectives.

"The proposed development will generate enough energy to power around 9,600 homes every year and offset approximately 12,900 tonnes of CO2 per year over its 40-year lifespan.

"The officers' report demonstrates the principle of development is considered to be acceptable and accords with the overarching policies and principles of the NPPF (National Planning Policy Framework) and the Local Plan.

"Landscape mitigation is proposed which would include maintaining hedgerows to a height of three metres and additional hedgerow and tree planting.

"The construction period would last approximately four to five months and a one-way system is proposed for construction vehicles to reduce the chance of HGVs meeting on Wincote Lane and Cash Lane.

"It is acknowledged the site contains best and most versatile agricultural land; however this equates to just 20% of the landowners' total landholding and this site has been put forward as it is the lowest yielding land, with crop yields 20-30% lower than other land in their holding.

"The installation of solar panels allows for agricultural diversification and during installation the ground could be retained for sheep grazing and planting to provide biodiversity improvements."

Eccleshall cllr Jeremy Pert was unable to attend the meeting, but provided a written statement.

In the statement, read out at the meeting, he said: "Solar should be on industrial buildings and car parks, not on the precious resource we cannot make any more of to satisfy the existing needs of our population today.

"Until solar is on these existing buildings, we should not be choosing to harm Britain's green and pleasant land.

"Solar works well in the summer but poorly in winter, so it does not directly address our key usage periods and wind is a lot less land-hungry.

"The question I would like to pose is whether the public benefits outweigh the harm that would be caused to this particular location.

"This is not ordinary farmland, it is some of the best quality farmland available."

Committee member Cllr Frances Beatty also raised concerns about the loss of productive farmland.

Cllr Jill Hood said: "Nowhere is there any evidence that the local area is going to benefit, yet the impact on 100-odd acres is going to be dire."

Cllr Scott Spencer highlighted the use of farmland to produce haylage and silage for animal rearing as well as crop production.

He said: "I would like to move refusal on a number of issues."