Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 15 January 2014 ______

Application Number 13/01074/AS

Location Kenardington Place Farm, Appledore Road, Kenardington Ashford, TN26 2LZ

Grid Reference 97202/32875

Parish Council Kenardington

Ward Isle of Oxney

Application Construction of a solar park to include the installation of Description solar panels, inverter stations, central station, security fencing, landscaping and other associated infrastructure and works.

Applicant Kronos Solar Projects, c/o Laurence Associates, Lemon House, 14-15 Lemon Street, Truro, Cornwall, TR1 2LS

Agent Mr James Lee, Laurence Associates, Lemon House, 14- 15 Lemon Street, Truro, Cornwall, TR1 2LS

Site Area 14.47 hectares

a) 67/ 10R, 2 S (b) Kenardington R (c) KCC Arch X, NE X, SW X, (Adj.) Brenzett R EA X ,PO X, KWT X KH X

Introduction

1. This application is reported to the Planning Committee because it is a major application.

Site and Surroundings

2. The site lies in open countryside located on the north side of B2067 which runs between Kenardington and Woodchurch. It is approximately 100 metres to the west of the junction of the B2067 and Appledore Road which serves Kenardington Village. The site comprises 2 fields, just over 14 ha in total, used for agriculture, this being classified as 3 b land. The land slopes down generally towards the B2067 with a change in ground level from the highest point at 31m AOD in the centre of the eastern field down to 13.5m AOD in the south west corner.

3. Part of Hunt’s Wood Local Wildlife site falls within the application site, running between the two fields and encompassing a central wooded track/ditch which 2.1 - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 15 January 2014 ______

is lined with broadleaf trees and part abuts the western section of the northern boundary. The whole of the northern boundary of the application site abuts

Figure 1: Site Location

ancient woodland. The southern boundary is characterised by hedgerows with trees in places, which vary in height between 1.5 and 4m. Much of this southern boundary is higher than the adjacent road.

4. The site is accessed via an existing field access in the south–east corner of the site directly from B2067 and a track running along the southern edge of the field will enter the western field through an existing field access break in the central wooded strip.

5. The nearest residential dwellings to the west are approximately 125m away, and to the east approximately 140m away. Directly to the east of the site and outside the control of the landowner is a large greenhouse complex used for the intensive growing of soft fruit.

6. The site lies in the Old Romney Shoreline Settlements landscape character area where the key characteristics are the undulating landform which slopes southwards towards the Marsh, mixed land use, higher wooded ground to the west, numerous small settlements along the former shoreline and distinctive stone churches are prominent landscape features.

7. A further site location plan is attached as an annex to this report.

2.2 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 15 January 2014 ______

Proposal

8. The application is for the construction of a solar park to include the installation of solar panels, inverter stations, central station, security fencing, landscaping and other associated infrastructure and works.

9. The solar PV panels will be mounted on steel frames with a pile driven foundations. As the site is not flat, the height range of the panels varies and rises to 2.494m on the level site and 2.738m on the north slope. The arrays would be set at varying distances between the rows depending on the slope angle of the field, but would generally be in the range of 5.54m to 7.65m.

10. There will be a central station on the southern boundary of the site, which comprises of a transformer measuring 1.5m x 1.5m x 2.85m with switch gear 4.13 x 2.5m x 2.85m and a DNO cabinet 5.33m x 6.68 rising to a height of 4.88m under a pitched roof.

11. 6 inverter stations are proposed throughout the site and these comprise of a transformer unit 2.5m x 3.2m rising to 2.16m and 2 inverter units 1.296m x 3.18m and 2.66m in height depending on the slope angle and aspect. These will all be flat roofed.

12. Surrounding the site and along the central wooded track/drainage ditch set at a minimum of 2m from the face of the hedge would be a 2.03m high security fencing, this would be weld mesh and powder green coated. There will also be an all-weather access route and circulation route for maintenance works, the surface being loose aggregate.

13. The fixed panels are set at an angle of 20 degrees from the horizontal with the front edge set at 800mm above ground and the rear edge varying in height. Perimeter surveillance is in the form of sensor cables which are integrated into the fencing to detect movement from climbing or being cut. There are no alarms or lighting proposed for the site.

14. Construction is expected to take 12 weeks with HGV’s bringing the modules, steel structures and other components. Further details of the access and highways implications are detailed below.

15. The land under and around the arrays will be sown with grass and then grazed by sheep on a seasonal basis.

16. The applicants suggest that average lifetime for a solar farm is 25 years, when the panels and buildings would be dismantled and the land retained for grazing or returned to arable.

17. A cable will be laid in a trench to connect to the overhead electricity line that runs to the north of the application site.

2.3 ______Planning Committee 1 Ashford Borough Council

5 January 2014

–

Report of Development Control Managers

2 . 4

Figure 2: Site Layout

Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 15 January 2014 ______

Access and traffic

18. The existing field access off B2067 will be used for the construction vehicles, with vehicles coming from A2070 via . HGV’s will be either rigid lorries or articulated lorries of up to 40T and all vehicles will be no more than 4.6m in height.

19. Construction of the site is expected to take 16 weeks. It is expected that up to 300 HGVs deliveries (600 HGV traffic movements) to the site spread over 3 months’ construction period. The peak period of construction would occur

during week 4, when a total of 48 HGV‘s would require access to the site, resulting in 96 HGV movements (arrivals and departures) equalling to 16 HGV movements per day.

20. Approx. 50 construction workers will be on site, they will be transported to

and from the site by bus. Once the solar farm is operational, traffic generated by it will be limited to occasional maintenance work.

Noise Assessment

21. The centre station, switch gear and transformers do not emit any significant noise. The proximity of the inverters to the nearest residence are all lower than 25 dB (A).

Biodiversity

22. An extended Phase 1 Habitat survey was submitted with the application. The conclusions of the report were that the majority of the site is arable land, with boundary vegetation comprising hedgerows or woodland. The arable land is considered to be low value for wildlife. A pond which lies between the 2 fields is of poor quality for great crested newts and no other evidence was found for

use or likely use of the site by protected species.

23. All existing hedgerows, trees, woodland, ponds and other features will be retained, with a 2m+ m buffer between them or any associated infrastructure and any existing field boundary, tree, pond or other feature.

Archaeological assessment

24. The conclusion of the report is that the development proposals are not likely to result in any adverse impact on heritage assets. There are two listed buildings in the vicinity but the development is unlikely to result in any impact on these. There is an archaeological interest within the site in particular

2.5 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 15 January 2014 ______

relating to features associated with the post medieval and later agricultural practises. It is suggested that a condition is attached to any planning permission.

Landscape Appraisal

25. A Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment has been produced in support of the application. This states that

• the proposal would have a medium scale non–permanent change to the

landscape.

• The proposals would introduce considerable peripheral areas, protected by security fencing and set away from the boundaries which will create a greater opportunity for enhanced biodiversity and habitat links. Existing

hedges will be managed and there will be an overall enhancement of the existing landscape features.

• The ancillary plant and fencing will be screened by landscaping and the effects are considered to be small scale, short–medium duration.

• The scale of direct effects during the operational phase is considered to be medium scale, with the significance of adverse direct landscape effects being moderate- i.e. some medium scale changes to medium sensitivity landscape. However it is considered that the maturing of the mitigation planting will gradually have a beneficial effect on the landscape. It is therefore concluded that in the medium to very long term the significance of adverse direct landscape effects will reduce to minor.

26. A 5 year Landscape Management Plan has also been submitted with the application. This gives details of planting and maintenance for the site. This

generally involves new planting to reinforce weak hedge lines, and manage existing hedges.

Flood Risk

27. The site lies entirely within Flood Zone 1, which has the lowest probability of flooding. A SuDS scheme has been submitted as part of the proposal with a system of swales, scrapes and bunds to manage surface water runoff.

2.6 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 15 January 2014 ______

Agricultural Appraisal

28. An agricultural assessment has been produced as part of the application. The site is subgrade 3b of moderate agricultural quality capable of growing moderate yields.

Planning History

29. Earlier this year under 13/00009/EIA/AS a request for a screening opinion was received. It was determined that an EIA was not required for this

development.

Consultations

Ward Member: Cllr Burgess, the Ward Member, is a Member of the Planning

Committee.

Kenardington Parish Council: A village consultation has been carried out and the

votes were 21 votes in favour and 48 against. The Councillors voted unanimously to object to the application.

Brenzett Parish Council: Object - this is another attempt to industrialise this beautiful part of our country.

KCC Highways & Transportation: Raise no objection subject to conditions.

Natural : Has no objection to the proposal, but state that the proposal has opportunities to provide for biodiversity enhancements.

Kent Wildlife Trust: Part of Hunt’s Wood Local Wildlife site falls within the application site and part abuts the western section of the northern boundary. Almost

all of the northern boundary abuts ancient woodland. No objection is raised though there is concern that the proposed 2m margins to hedgerows, woodland and the pond is inadequate. A minimum 8m margin has been agreed for other solar farms in the County and Natural England’s standing advice advocates the provision of a buffer to ancient woodland of at least 15m. These broader corridors will enable the site to continue to provide effective wildlife corridors across the site.

Project Office: No objection subject to conditions on SuDS

Southern Water: No objection, the applicant will need to ensure that arrangements exist for the long term maintenance of the SuDS facility.

2.7 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 15 January 2014 ______

Environment Agency: No objection subject to condition relating to sustainable drainage

Project Office: Support EA’s comments. Whilst having no objection to the proposal requires clarification to a few points.

Environmental Services: The predicted noise levels at the nearest dwelling are very low so no objection.

Neighbours:

10 Objections

• Any more building will ensure that the area loses its character and will encourage more housing.

• Precedent

• The land is elevated and would be very visible to every vehicle that drove along the road

• The site will also be visible from Appledore Road which is used extensively by cyclists, walkers and horse riders

• The site is within the curtilage of the village and is too close to existing dwellings

• Kenardington as a village is too small to be able to absorb such a large development without it despoiling and blighting the whole area

• The proposed hedging to screen the development would almost take the lifetime of the solar farm before it becomes effective and then only in the summer

months.

• It will not be possible to establish a wildflower meadow unless the top soil is stripped and sterilised

• Where is the local benefit?

• The solar panels maybe a problem, for owls swooping over the fields

• Concern over the proposed drainage systems

• Agricultural land should not be considered as suitable,

2.8 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 15 January 2014 ______

• Concern over the increase in HGV traffic during construction

• Concern about flood lighting (DC Manager – this is not part of the proposal)

• Concern about pollution from the panels should they break

• Concern over noise from the site

• The site will devalue properties (DC Manager - Not a planning matter)

• The renewable target can be achieved by focusing on small roof mounted installations

• The area is being targeted for solar farms

• It will affect the listed building status of the neighbouring property (DC Manager – The nearest listed building is approximately 130m away from the site and is separated from the application site by 2 roads.)

• It will adversely affect the local businesses that rely on tourism

2 letters of Support

• There is a need to embrace new technology.

• The proposal will have no effect on property values.

• The scheme will not be visible from the roads or footpaths after a few years growth of the newly planted hedges and trees.

• The solar park will produce clean renewable low carbon energy.

• There will be significant benefits to the local community (DC Manager- this is not part of the planning proposal).

• There will be no significant runoff and no contamination.

• The land will still be used for farming, and the cessation of arable farming will improve the flora and fauna.

• The environment will benefit from an increased diversity in wildlife.

• Should embrace new technologies.

2.9 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 15 January 2014 ______

• Renewables are clean, and low carbon. This will help in reducing the UK’s greenhouse gas emissions.

Planning Policy

30. The Development Plan comprises the saved policies in the adopted Ashford Borough Local Plan 2000, the adopted LDF Core Strategy 2008, the adopted Ashford Town Centre Action Area Plan 2010, the & Rural Sites DPD 2010 and the Urban Sites and Infrastructure DPD 2012.

31. The relevant policies from the Development Plan relating to this application are as follows:-

Ashford Borough Local Plan 2000

GP12 - Protecting the countryside and managing change

CF8 - Renewable Energy

Local Development Framework Core Strategy 2008

CS1 - Guiding Principles

CS9 - Design quality

CS11 - Biodiversity and geological conservation

CS15 - Transport

CS20 - Sustainable drainage

Tenterden & Rural Sites DPD 2010

TRS14 - Diversifying existing agricultural businesses

TRS17 - Landscape Character and Design

TRS18 - Important rural features

32. The following are also material to the determination of this application:-

Supplementary Planning Documents

2.10 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 15 January 2014 ______

Sustainable Drainage SPD 2010

Landscape Character Area DPD 2011

Informal practice guidance for solar farm developments

Government Advice

National Planning Policy Framework 2012

Planning practise guidance for renewable and low carbon energy July 2013

BRE Planning Guidance for the development of large scale ground solar mounted solar pv systems

33. Members should note that the determination must be made in accordance

with the Development Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. A significant material consideration is the National Planning Policy Framework

(NPPF). The NPPF says that less weight should be given to the policies above if they are in conflict with the NPPF.

Assessment

34. The main issues for consideration are:

• Principle and Government Policy • Access to the site and highway implications • Impact on residential amenity • Historic Environment • Landscape and Visual Impact • Glint and Glare • Ecology • Drainage, Surface Water Run-off and Flooding • Impact upon Agricultural land • Decommissioning

Principle and Government Policy

35. Policy CF8 of the Local Plan deals with renewable energy in general, however this policy would now have little weight due to the age of the policy and the

2.11 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 15 January 2014 ______

references to government guidance in the supporting text which is out of date. However the relevant criteria referred to in the policy relate to landscape and visual impact and traffic generation which are consistent with Government guidance documents and the practise guide on solar farms.

36. The NPPF, whilst not specific on solar farms, advises in para 97 that to help increase the use and supply of renewable and low carbon energy, local planning authorities should recognise the responsibility on all communities to contribute to energy generation from renewable or low carbon sources. They should

• have a positive strategy to promote energy from renewable and low carbon sources

• design their policies to maximise renewable and low carbon energy

development while ensuring that adverse impacts are addressed satisfactorily, including cumulative landscape and visual impacts.

37. It goes on to state that when determining planning applications local planning authorities should

• Not require applicants to demonstrate the overall need for renewable or low carbon energy and also recognise that even small-scale projects provide a valuable contribution to cutting greenhouse gases and

• Approve the application if its impacts are (or can be made) acceptable.

38. In July the Government published ‘Planning Practise Guidance for Renewable and Low Carbon Energy’(PPG).This states that the factors to bear in mind include:-

• Encouraging the effective use of previously developed land, and if it does involve greenfield land, that it allows for continued agricultural use and or encourages biodiversity improvements.

• Conditions used to ensure the installations are removed when no longer in use and the land restored to its previous use.

• The effect on the landscape of glint or glare and on neighbouring uses.

• The need for, and impact of, security measures such as lights and fencing.

2.12 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 15 January 2014 ______

• Great care to ensure heritage assets are conserved in a manner appropriate to their significance.

• The potential to mitigate landscape and visual impacts through for example screening.

39. The guidance also makes it clear that large scale solar farms can have a negative impact on the rural area, particularly in very undulating landscapes. However the visual impact of a well-planned and well-screened solar farm can be properly addressed within the landscape if planned sensitively.

40. In November the Department of Energy and Climate Change sent a letter to all authorities relating to solar energy. The Rt. Hon Gregory Barker stated that he was aware of concerns raised by the public about the potential growth of large scale solar farms. The new solar PV Roadmap makes it very clear

that new solar installations need to be sensitively placed and sets out four guiding principles which form the basis of the Governments strategy for solar PV. This includes the principle that:

“Support for solar PV should ensure proposals are appropriately sited, give proper weight to environmental considerations such as landscape and visual impact, heritage and local amenity, and provide opportunities for local communities to influence decisions that affect them”

41. The Solar Roadmap reflects the planning practise guidance published in July 2013, detailed above.

42. Ground based solar PV can make a contribution to meeting national targets for renewable energy generation and can be brought on stream quickly unlike nuclear and fossil fuels. A site needs to have good solar irradiation levels consequently solar farms were initially focused in the south west of the

country however the infrastructure there is currently almost up to capacity. Consequently the rest of the country is now being searched for suitable sites for solar farms.

43. This is a countryside location and Government Policies are aimed at protecting the environment whilst promoting sustainable development and ensuring efficient uses of resources.

44. The PPG for renewables states that increasing the amount of energy from renewable and low carbon technologies will help to make sure the UK has a secure energy supply, reduce greenhouse gas emissions to slow down climate change and stimulate investment in new jobs and businesses.

2.13 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 15 January 2014 ______

Planning has an important role in the delivery of new renewable and low carbon energy infrastructure in locations where the local environment impact is acceptable.

45. The Government is clear that the need for renewable or low carbon energy does not automatically override environmental protections and the cumulative impacts require particular attention especially the impact of large scale solar farms in the landscape and local amenity. Great care should be taken to ensure that heritage assets are conserved in a manner appropriate to their significance including the impact of proposals on views important to their

setting.

46. The principle of solar farms in the rural area is therefore acceptable subject to the issues listed above.

Access to the site and highway implications

47. Construction of the site is expected to take 16 weeks. HGV’s will arrive on

site bringing the modules, steel substructure, inverters, transformers, cabling and fencing. The access is from A2070 through Hamstreet along the B2067.

48. The size of the vehicle being 40 T is well within the maximum size of HGV that are allowed within the UK.

49. Suitable temporary signage will be required along the construction traffic route and a conditions survey of the B2067 will be carried out before and after construction, with the subsequent agreed repairs being carried out by the applicant if necessary.

50. The construction of the solar park will result in approximately 300 HGV deliveries to the site spread over 3 months. Even at the most intense period

construction, when the solar panels and frames are delivered, it is unlikely that there would be more than 8 HGV deliveries (16 HGV movements) per day.

51. Kent Highways raise no objections to the amended details subject to a number of conditions, which could be placed on any planning permission. I agree that with suitable controls this level of traffic is unlikely to be detrimental to highway safety or the convenience of road users even within Hamstreet village where the road width is regularly restricted by parked vehicles.

52. Given the current level of traffic on this road and the duration of the construction period the movement of additional HGVs is unlikely to result in

2.14 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 15 January 2014 ______

any significant increase in noise and disturbance to people who live on this road.

Impact on residential amenity

53. The nearest residential properties lie on the west side of the site over 100m away from the panels, there is screening from these properties to the western most field and due to the height of the panels in my view views of the farm will be limited.

54. The visual impact on the residential properties to the east will also be limited due to the existence of the greenhouses. There will be more longer distance views of the farm from the properties lying in Appledore Road at the heart of the village.

Historic Environment

55. An Archaeological assessment has been provided by the applicant. KCC

Heritage, Planning and Environment state the site lies within an area of low archaeological potential. They agree with the assessment and suggest a condition to be attached to any planning permission in order that some limited archaeological monitoring is carried out.

Landscape and Visual Impact

56. The site lies to the north of the B2067 in in the Old Romney Shoreline Settlements landscape character area.

57. The site comprises of two arable fields which are separated by a significant north -south hedge ditch and planting. This will remain together with the existing field boundary hedges which will strengthened as part of the

proposal.

58. The site will be most visible from the main road and views from the south including the village of Kenardington. There are a number of public footpaths on the opposite side of B2067. The site is well enclosed to the north and the surrounding hedgerows and trees within them provide a level of enclosure principally to the east and west. The central wooded track/ditch also provides screening from the east field and the west. The agent considers that the value and sensitivity of the site is medium. The scale of direct landscape effects on the site during the construction and operational phase would also be medium.

2.15 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 15 January 2014 ______

59. I have employed a Landscape Consultant to assess the Landscape and Visual impact of the scheme as clearly this is one of the most critical aspects of the proposal. The Consultant has stated that the submitted Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment report has been produced generally following the relevant guidance and methodology and is to a high standard. They feel that the assessment has slightly underestimated the baseline sensitivity and underestimated the scale of change to the landscape character that would occur at the site level and as a result they disagree to a degree with the assessment of effect upon the landscape character.

60. They consider that the development would have a major adverse impact upon the landscape character and this would extend to the site/local scale only- approx. 500m south and south- west. There will be a small number of minor adverse impacts from a few highly localised positions in the short term but these can be fully mitigated by the proposals before the end of the operational

phase.

61. They strongly disagree that the operational impact upon landscape character

would be of ‘Moderate’ adverse significance, and that this would be reduced to ‘Minor’ in the long term by the proposed mitigation planting, for the following reasons:

• They disagree that the scale of effect would be ‘Medium,’ and conclude that the scale of effect would be ‘Large’. The construction phase will rapidly introduce a large number of uncharacteristic elements across the entire site, which is currently of a well-defined agricultural character. This would significantly alter its physical appearance and land use.

• They disagree with the baseline assessment that Sensitivity would be ‘Medium,’ as set out above, and conclude that the sensitivity rating should be ‘High’

• Although mitigation planting has been proposed, taken into account reasonable timescales for establishment of new planting when compared to the overall life span of the development, it is likely to be between 5 to 10 years before new mitigation planting would be fully effective, thereby limiting its effectiveness over this period

• In their opinion, whilst mitigation proposals may assist in mitigating visual impacts, and arguably could improve the condition and quality of valued components within the landscape, the scale of these improvements within the wider context might be assessed as being no more than minor at best, and more realistically negligible in effect. They also do not, reverse or

2.16 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 15 January 2014 ______

alter the significant adverse impact upon existing landscape character of the site, as a result of introducing a prominent and uncharacteristic development into a rural agricultural landscape.

62. They conclude that the operational effect upon the landscape should be assessed to be major adverse and long term and this would remain the situation until the completion of the decommissioning process. However these effects are temporary and fully reversible and limited to a highly localised scale typically within 1km of the application site.

63. Overall they agree with the conclusions of the report. However in their view there would be ‘Major Adverse’ landscape and visual impacts which would result from this development, these however are considered not to be disproportionate or unexpected for a development of this kind, in this location and in their opinion do not result purely from the detailed nature of the

development proposal itself but rather from the introduction of ‘development’ generally onto the site.

64. Most of the inverter buildings are situated within the solar farm where the buildings will be less visible. The centre station however is close to the southern boundary and maybe more visible due to its pitched roof from longer distances.

65. I am particularly concerned over the visual impact of the solar farm with its associated fencing from the south and south west, so there would be views from the properties in Kenardington, from the footpaths on the southern side of the B2067 and also from the road itself. It would appear as an alien feature in the rolling countryside.

66. Whilst landscaping can help to soften the views, the advice received is that the landscaping will take some considerable time to help screen the site and

this is due to the rolling nature of the site and the fact that the land to the south generally has expansive views of the application site due to levels. It will therefore be difficult to successfully hide the structures.

Glint and Glare

67. Glint may be produced as a direct reflection of the sun in the surface of the PV solar panel. It may be the source of the visual issues regarding viewer distraction. Glare is a continuous source of brightness, relative to diffused lighting. This is not a direct reflection of the sun, but rather a reflection of the bright sky around the sun. Glare is significantly less intense than glint. Panels are designed to absorb, not reflect, irradiation.

2.17 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 15 January 2014 ______

68. The panels face south principally towards open fields and woodland. In my view glint and glare will not be an issue with the panels on existing residents or road users.

Ecology

69. A Phase 1 Habitat survey was submitted with the application. The conclusions of the report were that the site is overall of low nature conservation importance, is species poor and lacks biodiversity. Detailed enhancement proposals are suggested for the wildlife species. If permission

is granted conditions would be required in order to provide these features.

70. I note Kent Wildlife’s comments regarding the need to provide much larger buffers around the farm up to 15m particularly on the northern edge. The plans submitted show wide strips of land between the external fence and the

site boundary. This does scale at 15m on the northern boundary and there are large margins on the other boundaries especially along the wildlife area through the site.

Drainage, Surface Water Run-off and Flooding

71. Due to the size of solar PV parks, planning applications are accompanied by a Flood Risk Assessment. This needs to consider the impact of drainage. The Flood risk assessment with the application stated that the site is located entirely within Flood Zone 1; the site has no history of flooding. The SuDS scheme will effectively reduce the runoff rate to less than the current runoff rates as storage and infiltration on site will be improved. I see no reason to disagree with this assessment. If permission is granted a condition would be required for a sustainable drainage system.

Impact upon Agricultural land

72. The DCLG guidance states that where Greenfield land is used then continued agricultural use is a factor that needs to be taken into consideration. This is grade 3b agricultural land.

73. The applicant has stated that sheep grazing will take place under the panels; sheep grazing is certainly a possibility under the panels and is good practise. They do go onto state that should the fields be put to grass they would not be grazed all year round- particularly winter grazing, due to climatic conditions, there would not be enough quality grass produced.

2.18 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 15 January 2014 ______

74. Ashford’s guidance note on large solar farms states that the presence of the best and most versatile agricultural land will be a significant issue in the determination of applications, however in this case as the land is of moderate quality only, this is not an issue and the land does not make any special contribution to the environment or the economy.

75. I therefore agree with the conclusions of the submitted report that this is not the best and most versatile land and therefore the erection of the solar farm should not be precluded by this issue.

Decommissioning

76. The application states that at the end of the 25 year life all plant will be decommissioned and the site returned to its former condition. The plant contains recyclable materials including glass approximately 80% of the

module is glass, copper, aluminium steel and silicon. On decommissioning these components are dismantled and recycled. This could be required by a condition should planning permission be granted.

Human Rights Issues

77. I have also taken into account the human rights issues relevant to this application. In my view the “Assessment” section above and the Recommendation below represent an appropriate balance between the interests and rights of the applicant (to enjoy his land subject only to reasonable and proportionate controls by a public authority) and the interests and rights of those potentially affected by the proposal (to respect for private life and the home and peaceful enjoyment of their properties).

Working with the applicant

78. In accordance with paragraphs 186 and 187 of the NPPF Ashford Borough Council (ABC) takes a positive and proactive approach to development proposals focused on solutions. ABC works with applicants/agents in a positive and proactive manner as explained in the note to the applicant included in the recommendation below.

Conclusion

79. Having reviewed the case and the issues raised by the applicant, interested bodies and local people I am of the opinion that there are 2 key determining issues. These are:-

2.19 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 15 January 2014 ______

• Traffic movements during construction

• Landscape and visual impact

80. Kent Highways are satisfied that the amount of traffic using the designated route in the manner outlined in the application will not cause issues of highway safety and they have raised no objection subject to conditions.

81. The site will be particularly visible from the south and south-west. Landscaping could help to mitigate the impact of the panels, buildings and

fencing although this should be of an adequate size and spacing to assist in the fast assimilation of it into the setting. However it will never be possible to completely block the views of the structures due to the rise in land levels and loss of leaves during the winter. In addition our landscape consultants have stated that the landscaping could take a significant time to mature, leaving the

site visible for a significant length of time.

82. Although the visual impacts on the landscape would be contained to a

relatively small area of influence typically between 500m south and south west these would be Major Adverse impacts in the view of our Landscape Consultants. The operational effect upon the landscape characteristic would remain until after the decommissioning process i.e. at least 25 years. I conclude that the visual and amenity harm in this case is significant and merits a refusal of the application.

83. In my view there is insufficient justification for constructing the solar farm on this particular site that outweighs the harm identified to landscape character.

Recommendation

Refuse

1. The proposal is contrary to

a. Policies GP12 and CF8 of the Ashford Borough Local Plan 2000,

b. Policy CS1 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy 2008,

c. Policies TRS14, TRS17 and TRS18 of the Tenterden & Rural Sites DPD 2010

d. the Landscape Character Area DPD 2011

2.20 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 15 January 2014 ______

e. the Informal Practice Guidance for Solar Farm Developments approved by the council in 2013

f. the National Planning Policy Framework 2012,

g. Planning Practise Guidance for Renewable and Low Carbon Energy July 2013 and

h. BRE Planning Guidance for the Development of Large Scale Ground Solar Mounted Solar PV Systems

and is therefore harmful to matters of acknowledged planning importance for the following reasons:

1) The proposed development, the solar panels, buildings and fence by

virtue of their siting and being clearly visible from footpaths, the B2067 and nearby residential properties would represent an unsympathetic and incongruous form of development within the open rolling

countryside which would detract significantly from the visual amenity of the area, and this development cannot be assimilated into the countryside with sufficient native landscaping or in a timescale which would overcome this harm.

Note to Applicant

1. Working with the Applicant

In accordance with paragraphs 186 and 187 of the NPPF Ashford Borough Council (ABC) takes a positive and proactive approach to development proposals focused on solutions. ABC works with applicants/agents in a positive and proactive manner by;

• offering a pre-application advice service,

• as appropriate updating applicants/agents of any issues that may arise in the processing of their application,

• where possible suggesting solutions to secure a successful outcome,

• informing applicants/agents of any likely recommendation of refusal prior to a decision and

2.21 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 15 January 2014 ______

• by adhering to the requirements of the Development Management Customer Charter.

In this instance

• the applicant/agent was updated of any issues after the initial site visit,

• The applicant was provided the opportunity to submit amendments and/or additional information to the scheme/ address issues.

The application was considered by the Planning Committee where the applicant/agent had the opportunity to speak to the Committee and promote the application.

Background Papers

Letter from C Field 17/10/2013 Comments from R Sinden 18/10/2013

Comments from Kent Highways 11/10/2013 Comments from Kenardington Parish Council 5/11/2013

Letter from Southern Water 28/10/13 Letter from Brenzett PC 7/11/13 Letter from Natural England 21/10/2013 Letter from Kent Wildlife Trust 6/11/13 Letter from KCC Archaeology 5/12/13 Comments from Environmental Health Officer 15/10/13 Comments from Mr & Mrs Hedley 24/10/13

Comments from Mr & Mrs Cooke 28/10/13 Comments from E Freemont 29/10/13 Comments from B Keogh 29/10/13 Letter from Environment Agency 30/10/13 Comments from Mr & Mrs Dalton 31/10/13 Comments from Project Office 1/11/13 Comments from B Vidal 4/11/13 Comments from C Hayselden-Ashby 4/11/13 Comments from A Beeching 4/11/13

2.22 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 15 January 2014 ______

Comments from S Mcintyre 5/11/13 Comments from J Weeks 5/11/13

Contact Officer: Carol Ridings – Telephone: (01233) 330247

2.23 ______AnnexPage1 of 1 to Report 1 of Annex 2 to Report 13/00789/AS Planning Committee 2015 NovemberJanuary 2013 2013 Ashford Borough Council ______

13/01074

/AS

2 . 24

______