APPLICATION NUMBER: WD/D/18/000047
APPLICATION SITE: LAND FROM WINTERBORNE ABBAS TO FRIAR WADDON INCLUDING BRADFORD PEVERELL, COMPTON VALLANCE, FRAMPTON, MARTINSTOWN, PORTESHAM, WINTERBOURNE ABBAS, AND WINTERBORNE STEEPLETON
PROPOSAL: The proposal comprises the following main elements: Installation of approximately 8.8km of 400kV underground cables; Construction of two cable sealing end compounds (SECs) including permanent access roads, required to connect the new underground cables to the existing overhead line; Dismantling and permanent removal of 8.25km of 400kV overhead line including 22 pylons Temporary works to facilitate road works and construction access. Replacement of one terminal pylon and approximately 0.6km of new 400kV overhead line (separate consent under s37 of the Electricity Act)
APPLICANT: National Grid
CASE OFFICER: Sophie Mawdsley
WARD MEMBER(S): Cllr T Bartlett, Cllr I Gardner, Cllr J Dunseith
RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY: Approve subject to S106 and conditions
1. DESCRIPTION OF SITE:
1.1 The vast majority of the application site lies within the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and covers four separate landscape character areas. The northern Sealing End Compound is located within the Upper Frome Valley and then the cabling will enter the South Dorset Downs for the majority of the application site. The southern section of the site lies within the South Dorset Escarpment and ends within the South Dorset Ridge and Vale with the Southern End Compound. Each of the character areas has different characteristics and the Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment identifies the impact of the proposal on the environment.
1.2 The Environmental Statement describes the location of the development; ‘The OHL to be undergrounded runs south from elevated ground, near Lankham Eweleaze, north-west of Winterbourne Abbas, across the A35, over undulating downland west of the B3159 road and the settlements of Winterbourne Abbas, Winterbourne Steepleton and Martinstown. The OHL continues in a south-easterly direction crossing over a minor road east of Ballarat Farm before turning south, across the upper slopes of Shorn Hill and Corton Down where it crosses the South Dorset Ridgeway, before abruptly stepping over the South Dorset Escarpment, east of Corton Farm (in an area known as Friar Waddon Hill) where it also crosses the Jubilee Trail before exiting the AONB’.
1.3 The site lies within a rich archaeological landscape and specifically the route of the cable would pass through the South Dorset Ridgeway which according to the Environmental Statement contains a high density of archaeological monuments and historic landscape features. Features and evidence includes prehistoric barrow monuments, lynchetts, a Roman settlement, a medieval and post-medieval settlement and WWII military remains. There are a number of listed buildings within the area including those at Friar Waddon and Corton including the Grade II* Chapel of St Bartholomew.
1.4 There are a number of Statutory ecological designated sites within 2km of the site boundary. Blackdown (Hardy Monument), a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) lies to the west and Pitcome Down SSSI 2km to the west. In terms of non-statutory designated sites, There are 20 Sites of Nature Conservation Interest (SNCI) including Winterbourne Steepleton and Waddon, Corton and Friar Waddon within the application site, Kit Hill Bottom 45m to the east and Compton Valence to the north.
2. DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT:
2.1 The full planning application seeks permission for the Installation of approximately 8.8km of 400kV underground cables; Construction of two cable sealing end compounds (SECs) including permanent access roads, required to connect the new underground cables to the existing overhead line; Dismantling and permanent removal of 8.25km of 400kV overhead line including 22 pylons Temporary works to facilitate road works and construction access.
2.2 This scheme, known as the Dorset Project forms part of the wider Visual Impact Provision (VIP) Project by the National Grid which has been allocated £500m by Ofgem to carry out work to reduce the impact of existing transmission lines in English and Welsh Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty and National Parks. The overhead line (OHL) within the Dorset AONB is one of four projects that have been chosen to take forward. The non-Technical Summary states;
‘The Dorset Project represents a major opportunity to mitigate the visual impact of existing electricity infrastructure within the Dorset AONB and to conserve and enhance the natural beauty, wildlife and environmental heritage of the area’.
2.3 The Introduction to the Environmental Statement outlines that under Section 38 of the Electricity Act 1989, National Grid is required to comply with Schedule 9 of the Act which requires licence holders to:
Schedule 9(1)(a) “have regard to the desirability of preserving natural beauty, of conserving flora, fauna and geological or physiographical features of special interest and of protecting sites, buildings and objects of architectural, historic or archaeological interest”; and Schedule 9(1) (b) “do what he reasonably can to mitigate any effect which the proposals would have on the natural beauty of the countryside or on any such flora, fauna, features, sites, building or objects”.
2.4 The proposal is to underground a 8.8km section of the existing 400kw OHL from north west of Winterbourne Abbas, southwards across the A35 and west of Winterbourne Abbas, Winterbourne Steepleton and Martinstown to a location east of Corton Farm, Friar Waddon Hill which lies just outside of the AONB boundary. 22 existing pylons would be removed and two Sealing End Compounds (SECs) are required in order to connect the new underground cables with the existing OHL. One is proposed to the north west of Winterbourne Abbas and the Southern Compound to the south of Corton Farm.
2.5 In terms of the construction phase, this is anticipated to take approximately 3 years and then the removal of the OHL and pylons will follow this installation. The construction involves 12 cables being installed within 4 parallel trenches with a construction working width area of 60m. This would include the temporary haul road which would be utilised by construction traffic. The Sealing End Compounds measuring 68m by 40m consist of gantries, switchgear, sealing ends and support structures bounded by a perimeter security fence.
2.6 During the construction phase there will be modifications to the highway network. However, there is a Construction Traffic Management Plan and Public Rights of Way will be manged to ensure minimal disruption and conflicts between the users. Access to the North Sealing End Compound and the route north of Winterbourne Abbas will be from the Roman road which runs parallel to the A35 and access to the south of the A35 will be accessed directly from the A35.
2.7 Specifically the Project includes the following construction works; Temporary widening of various sections along the Roman Road to facilitate HGV access Construction and presence of 3 temporary bellmouth access points for HGV’s via the Roman Road and the A35, with a further 6 smaller bellmouth access points on Coombe Road, Friar Waddon Road and an unnamed road. Construction of a temporary haul road, approximately 9km long and 4m wide with 7m wide passing places at regular intervals along route. This will cross the public highway at 4 locations – A35, Coombe Road, Unnamed road (National Cycle Route 2) and Friar Waddon Road. Upgrading of existing farm track to North Sealing End Compound from Roman Road. Upgrading sections of existing farm track to SSEC from Friar Waddon Road. Removal of approximately 21 hedgerows and field boundary trees, across the works area measuring approximately 4.9km of hedgerow. Installation of a Link Pillar Box at each cable joint location above ground (to enable monitoring of cables). Main works Construction Compound located south of the A35 measuring 100m x 100m with hardstanding, welfare facilities, parking, porta cabin offices, spoil storage, waste, security and laydown areas.
2.8 The Dorset Project also involves the replacement OHL via a replacement pylon at the Southern SEC which is exempt under The Overhead Lines (Exemption) (England & Wales) Regulations 2009 and notification has been given to the Council. The Planning Authority raised objections to this on archaeology grounds and further work is being done to overcome these concerns. Section 37 Consent is being obtained from the Secretary of State, Business, Energy, and Industrial Strategy for the replacement OHL near the northern SEC.
2.9 The development has been considered to be EIA development and as such an Environmental Statement has been submitted as part of the application. This deals with the following issues; landscape, ecology, historic environment, water resources, geology, soils and contamination, agriculture and land use, traffic and transport, socio- economics and tourism and noise and vibration. A Search Area for the purposes of baseline data collection has been established which is based on the likely maximum extent of permanent and temporary works that has been defined. Study area extents differ depending on the environmental aspect being considered. The proposal has been subject to comprehensive pre-application discussions and negotiations with a number of national bodies including Natural England, Historic England, Highways Agency and the Environment Agency.
3. RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: None relevant
4. RELEVANT PLANNING POLICIES:
National Planning Policy Framework
4.1 As far as this application is concerned the following sections of the NPPF are considered to be relevant;
Section 1 - Building a strong, competitive economy Section 3 - Supporting a prosperous rural economy Section 7 – Design Section 10 – Meeting the challenges of climate change Section 11 – Natural Environment Section 12 - Historic Environment
Para 186 - Local planning authorities should approach decision-taking in a positive way to foster the delivery of sustainable development. The relationship between decision-taking and plan-making should be seamless, translating plans into high quality development on the ground.
Para 187 - Local planning authorities should look for solutions rather than problems, and decision-takers at every level should seek to approve applications for sustainable development where possible. Local planning authorities should work proactively with applicants to secure developments that improve the economic, social and environmental conditions of the area.
Adopted West Dorset and Weymouth & Portland Local Plan (2015)
4.2 INT1 Sustainable development SUS2 Distribution of development ENV1 Landscape, seascape and sites of geological interest ENV2 Wildlife and habitats ENV4 Built heritage and archaeological remains ENV5 Flood risk ENV8 Agricultural and farming resilience ENV9 Pollution and contaminated land ENV10 Landscape and townscape setting ENV12 Design and positioning of buildings ENV15 Efficient Use of Land ENV16 Amenity COM7 Creating a safe and efficient transport network COM10 Community Needs and Infrastructure
5. OTHER MATERIAL PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS: 5.1 Design and Sustainable Development Planning Guidelines (adopted 2009). Policy (a) Work in harmony with the site and its surroundings Policy (b) Involve the right people at the design stage Policy (h) Maintain and enhance local character Policy (j) Achieve high standards of environmental performance
5.2 Dorset AONB Management Plan 2014 - 2019
5.3 West Dorset Landscape Character Assessment 2009
6. HUMAN RIGHTS: 6.1 Article 6 - Right to a fair trial. Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life and home. The first protocol of Article 1 Protection of property
This Recommendation is based on adopted Development Plan policies, the application of which does not prejudice the Human Rights of the applicant or any third party.
7. PUBLIC SECTOR EQUALITIES DUTY: 7.1 As set out in the Equalities Act 2010, all public bodies, in discharging their functions must have “due regard” to this duty. There are 3 main aims:- • Removing or minimising disadvantages suffered by people due to their protected characteristics • Taking steps to meet the needs of people with certain protected characteristics where these are different from the needs of other people • Encouraging people with certain protected characteristics to participate in public life or in other activities where participation is disproportionately low.
Whilst there is no absolute requirement to fully remove any disadvantage the Duty is to have “regard to” and remove OR minimise disadvantage and in considering the merits of this planning application the planning authority has taken into consideration the requirements of the PSED.
8. CONSULTATIONS:
Environment Agency 8.1 We have a holding objection / position in regards to the protection of groundwater, and require further clarification from the applicant on the points below prior to commenting in further detail.
8.2 Groundwater Protection Cable Design/ Structure The route of the proposed cable goes through Source Protection Zones, areas of protection for water supply, and therefore requires the appropriate consideration. There is potential for a significant risk to the groundwater if the cables are fluid filled, as identified in our groundwater position statements (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/groundwater-protection-position- statements). Therefore, please can the applicant confirm whether the 400kV cabling is to be fluid filled? We can will be provided additional comments on the risk once the confirmation of the cable design is received. South Winterbourne The crossing of this watercourse should be by directional drilling, unless there are technical reasons not to. This is because the channel at this point is a winterborne, which are protected habitats, and there is a risk that an open cut crossing could result in a preferential pathway through the stream bed at times of falling groundwater resulting in a loss of surface water flow. This is a known issue elsewhere on the South Winterborne. Therefore, the applicant should confirm that open cut crossing is the only option. If confirmed that this is the case then we would provide further comments on the method of reinstatement to be satisfied that this risk was appropriately mitigated for.
8.3 Following confirmation of the cable design we can withdraw our objection, however we wish to make the following comments and recommend the conditions and informatives below be attached to any permission granted. Groundwater and Surface Water Protection The Poole Harbour catchment and specifically the Friar Waddon Public Water Supply (within the Water Framework Directive Dorset Operational Catchment) are adversely impacted by nitrate and show rising trends in nitrate concentrations assumed to be largely from agricultural sources. There is also evidence to suggest that Poole Harbour catchment may also be increasingly impacted by sediment laden run-off from agricultural land and the associated phosphate. The proposal crosses mainly agricultural arable fields and the construction process will result in significant soil movement and compaction, potentially exacerbating soil loss via run-off.
Historic England
8.4 The route of the proposed development runs through an area of Dorset which has an especially high density of archaeological sites, many of them from the prehistoric period. Preliminary archaeological assessment of the development site indicates that the groundworks for the cable scheme will have a significant impact on numerous archaeological sites, including those potentially of national importance.
8.5 The scheme will bring significant improvements to the setting of designated heritage assets in the area, and to the overall historic landscape character of this part of the Dorset AONB and Historic England is strongly supportive of the scheme, on the understanding that the archaeological impacts will be properly dealt with. Historic England, together with the Dorset County Senior Archaeologist, Steve Wallis, has been involved since 2015 in extensive pre-application consultations and discussions with the National Grid and their archaeological consultants. Specifically, we have advised on the programme for pre-determination heritage assessment and archaeological investigation, and the archaeological programme for the post-determination period which includes a major scheme of site evaluation and mitigation through archaeological excavation and recording prior to and during the construction phase.
Additional comments
8.6 Further to our initial letter of 29 March 2018 in response to your consultation of 15 February 2018 regarding the above application, and following further liaison with yourself and the applicants, we are writing with final advice to assist your authority in determining the application.
8.7 As mentioned in our previous letter, in order to maintain the overall project timetable, the planning application was submitted prior to the finalising of certain key archaeological items and revision of application documents. These shortfalls were accepted on the understanding that the remaining investigation and evaluation would be undertaken, and that key documents would be revised during the application process and form part of the application. Since then we have been engaged in intensive pre- application discussions with the National Grid and their archaeological 2 consultants. The outstanding issues identified in our previous letter have now been addressed and further information has been provided to supplement and update the previous documentation. These items include data on Geophysics, Lidar Survey and Fieldwalking (Surface Artefact Collection Survey), and updated WSIs (Outline WSI; Updated WSI for Phase 2 Archaeological Evaluation Trial Trenching).
8.8 The provision of the additional information at both pre-determination and post- determination stages effectively supplements and updates the archaeological database, and there will therefore be no need to revisit the ES. In the case of certain items, strategies have been agreed between ourselves, the applicant, the council planning officer and the Dorset Senior Archaeologist, for the work to be undertaken and reports provided after determination and prior to commencement of development. In these cases is accepted that it would be appropriate to secure the submission and approval of these items through planning conditions attached to any grant of consent. For this, the following planning condition has been agreed:
No ground works shall take place on the site until the following documents, other than Item 8, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority: 1. Completed updated geophysical survey report 2. Completed Surface Artefact Collection Survey (SACS) report 3. Updated WSI for Phase 2/3 Trial Trench Archaeological Evaluation 4. Updated Phase 2/3 trial trench location plan 5. Phase 2 Trial Trench Archaeological Evaluation report 6. Updated Archaeological WSI for construction phase mitigation 7. Any construction-phase Site-Specific WSIs which are considered necessary by the planning authority (as advised by its archaeological advisors), for archaeological mitigation work in the construction phase of the development. 8. Phase 3 trial trenching report (if such trenching is undertaken). The WSIs shall include on-site work, and off-site work such as the analysis, publication, and archiving of the results, together with a timetable for completion of each element. All works shall be carried out and completed in accordance with the approved scheme, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Historic England is happy to support the application, on the understanding that this planning condition is attached to any grant of permission. If there are any proposed changes to the above condition please let us know immediately.
Natural England
8.9 Has undertaken detailed pre-application discussions with the applicant and the AONB team over the design of the current scheme. We consider the proposals will provide a substantive and important long term environmental benefit and we therefore fully support the current application.
8.10 The scheme will inevitably have adverse landscape impacts during the construction and restoration phases. However, Natural England is satisfied that the temporary impacts are far outweighed by the long term benefits of the scheme. Natural England therefore fully supports the proposals as a means of providing a long term significant enhancement of the protected landscape of the Dorset AONB and as a significant contribution to the delivery of the Dorset AONB Management Plan objectives, most notably Objective and supporting policy L2:Conserve and enhance the AONB by removing, avoiding and reducing intrusive and degrading features.
8.11 Natural England welcomes the completion of the Outline Landscape and Ecology Management Plan (LEMP). Any permission should be subject to a condition for the final LEMP to be agreed and fully implemented as part of the scheme. We also note the LEMP includes provision for a biodiversity compensation payment. I can confirm that NE has previously agreed the level of funding with the applicant. I understand it is proposed that the funding will be secured as a unilateral undertaking and I can confirm we would in this case have no objection to this approach.
Highways England
8.12 The proposed development has the potential to impact on the safe and efficient operation of the SRN, namely the A35. We have previously commented that the number of vehicles generated by the project in both the AM and PM peak hours is not considered to have a material impact on the operation of the A35. We recommend planning conditions be attached to any planning permission that may be granted to ensure the safe and efficient operation of the Strategic Road Network.
Dorset AONB team
8.13 We have been engaged in ongoing discussion with the National Grid and their consultants regarding both the plans and landscape and visual impact assessment (LVIA). Overall, we are strongly supportive of the application and consider it to conform with both the purpose of the AONB designation and with numerous policies and objectives within our Management Plan.
8.14 The Countryside and Rights of Way Act (2000) confirmed the significance of AONBs and created improved arrangements for their management, including: Section 85 places a statutory duty on all ‘relevant authorities’ to have regard to the purpose of conserving and enhancing natural beauty when discharging any function affecting land in AONBs. Section 89 places a statutory duty on local planning authorities to act jointly to produce a Management Plan for each AONB in their administrative area. National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) makes the following reference to AONBs: Section 115 states that “Great weight should be given to conserving landscape and scenic beauty in National Parks, the Broads and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, which have the highest status of protection in relation to landscape and scenic beauty. The conservation of wildlife and cultural heritage are important considerations in all these areas, and should be given great weight in National Parks and the Broads.” Section 116 states that “Planning permission should be refused for major developments in these designated areas except in exceptional circumstances and where it can be demonstrated they are in the public interest. Consideration of such applications should include an assessment of: the need for the development, including in terms of any national considerations, and the impact of permitting it, or refusing it, upon the local economy; the cost of, and scope for, developing elsewhere outside the designated area, or meeting the need for it in some other way; and any detrimental effect on the environment, the landscape and recreational opportunities, and the extent to which that could be moderated.”
8.15 I consider that the planning authority should regard this proposal as a form of major development within the AONB and undertake an exceptional circumstances test. Regarding the first two points, it should be noted that the funding for this project is overseen by the national industry regulator OFGEM and can only be directed toward projects benefitting AONBs and National Parks. In considering the third part of the test, the authority can draw upon the submitted LVIA, which provides a comprehensive and accurate prediction of the effects of the proposal.
8.16 This is a major project, containing numerous activities across a wide area. The most significant aspects of the application are: Removal of approximately 8.25km of existing overhead line including 22 pylons Installation of approximately 8.8km of 400kV underground cable Construction of two new Sealing End Compounds
In considering the project’s landscape and visual effects, I would highlight the following key points: The most significant adverse effects of this proposal arise from construction. The project cannot be accomplished without some significant landscape and visual effects on the landscape in the short-medium term, primarily linked to construction. Construction will be phased over a three-year period. Most of the construction effects are reversible and there are no significant concerns regarding the prospect of returning the physical features of the landscape to their pre- construction condition. Measures have been adopted to limit the construction effects, including primary mitigation measures (i.e. avoidance of sensitive areas when selecting the cable route). The permanent effect of the project would be of major benefit to the character and appearance of this part of the AONB. Although the benefits are not universal, as the level of enhancement is notably lower in those areas where the required Sealing End Compounds (SECs)are located, the overall benefits of the project are nonetheless considerable. Furthermore, the applicant has incorporated mitigation measures to minimise the adverse effects of the required new permanent infrastructure such as the SECs. 8.17 Concerning the construction effects, the most significant elements are the large scale of the project and the requirement for the enclosure of the site area with temporary fencing, the presence of a haul road that is approximately 9km long and 4m wide, the construction of cable trenches, the presence of construction compounds and the activity of construction traffic and people across the area for the duration of works. These features of the project will significantly adversely affect visual amenity and the tranquil and undeveloped character of the AONB during the construction phase. However, it is considered that the duration of these activities, lasting up to three years, and the phased nature of works, will be tolerable, considering the long term significant benefits of the project. 8.18 Concerning effects on landscape features, the project will require the removal of trees and hedgerows. The applicant has committed to replacing trees at a minimum ratio of 4:1 and overall there is projected to be a net increase of 1.25ha of woodland within the site boundary following project completion. Hedgerow loss will total approximately 4.9 linear kilometres, with the majority of this to be reinstated, with the exception of 353m which will be permanently lost. As to the significance of the effect on biodiversity, the AONB Team would refer the authority to other advisors for an opinion as to the acceptability of the proposals. 8.19 The most notable permanent visible infrastructure that will be introduced are the two SECs. There has been considerable pre-application discussion between the National Grid, the AONB Team and other stakeholders regarding the location and design of these. Much of this discussion has focussed on the southern SEC. The northern SEC, although located in a relatively elevated position that is visible from a nearby bridleway (S54/1), is comparatively straightforward to mitigate in the longer term and the applicant intends to implement extensive woodland planting on three sides of the SEC, using appropriate native species. The likely benefit of the proposed mitigation in screening the northern SEC is illustrated in figures 6.13.1 & 6.13.2 and I am entirely satisfied that the proposed design is suitable in achieving the required level of mitigation. 8.20 The southern SEC has been more difficult to resolve, due to a number of technical and practical issues. However, I am satisfied that the proposed location and design, as detailed within figure 6.11.b, is sufficient to moderate the effect of the southern SEC on the AONB and would therefore satisfy the requirements of a major development test. The location of the southern SEC is within the AONB (although close to its boundary), in the middle of a vale. To the north there is a notable limestone ridge running east-west, along which the Jubilee Trail is routed. To the south there is a further east-west ridge that is outside of the AONB. However, there are a number of rights of way crossing the area to the south, providing views into the AONB across the SEC site area. The visual impact of the southern SEC, following the maturation of the proposed planting, is shown on the following images: 6.23.1, Corton Farm 6.22.2, Jubilee Trail 6.24.1, footpath S37/21 (view into AONB from south) 8.21 The SEC will be positioned in an open location that is clearly overlooked from the north and south. Technical constraints have limited the ability of the applicant to locate the SEC closer to the corner of the field (i.e. to the south of the selected location), or in an alternative position such as close to the existing copes that are found to the west. All of these options have been discussed with the applicant and explored fully, as has an alternative location approx. 850m to the northwest, at the foot of Friar Waddon Hill. It has not been possible to achieve a solution that sits more comfortably within the landscape that the submitted proposal and, as such, it is considered that the design of the southern SEC is the best that can be achieved in this location. As with the northern SEC, the applicant will include suitable native tree planting around three sides of the SEC, with the aim of filtering views into the area and providing a textured backcloth to site, which will make features such as the gantry towers more visually recessive. It should be recognised that the affected viewpoints will all experience benefits from the wider project, which will remove large scale pylons from views. It should also be recognised that the view from the Jubilee trail to the north is not solely focussed on the vale within which the SEC is located. As shown within figure 6.22.4, the route also provides views to the South Dorset Escarpment, which will be significantly enhanced due to the wider project. 8.22 I have reviewed the submitted LVIA and can recommend this as a suitable basis for establishing the landscape and visual effects of the project. The LVIA has been produced in consultation with the AONB Team and focusses on an agreed study area, which is set at 5km, with a focus on receptors within 3km, and utilises agreed viewpoints for the purposes of assessment and visualisations. The LVIA conforms to the Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment and the visualisations are of high quality and appear to meet relevant technical requirements.
8.23 Overall, the LVIA is considered to provide a fair and well-reasoned assessment of the foreseeable landscape and visual effects, noting that there will be some significant short-term effects arising from the construction, but that the long-term effect on the character and appearance of the AONB would be significantly beneficial, despite the introduction of new features such as the SECs and smaller scale pillar boxes. The LVIA recognises that despite the temporary nature of the works, a significant adverse impact would affect the South Dorset Downs and South Dorset Escarpment character areas, due to the large scale of the project and the high sensitivity of these areas. However, in the opinion of the AONB Team, these effects are unavoidable in the pursuance of the greater aim of the project and the applicant has incorporated sufficient mitigation measures to minimise those adverse effects that can be foreseen. The significant, but largely temporary and reversible construction effects will serve to achieve an overwhelmingly positive landscape and visual effects in the longer term. In the opinion of the AONB Team, these long terms benefits outweigh the predicted adverse effects in the short to medium term.
8.24 Dorset AONB’s Management Plan 2014-19 is a material consideration in the planning process and provides a framework to help guide authorities in fulfilling their statutory duty, informing the development of local planning policy and influencing development decisions. Overall, the long-term benefits of application are considered to conform with the following objectives and policies of the Management Plan:
Objective Policy Objective L1: Conserve and enhance L1a: Conserve and enhance the AONB and the character and landscape character and quality quality of its distinctive landscapes and promote the use of landscape and associated features and seascape character assessment to shape decisions affecting the AONB L1c: Conserve and enhance the Special Qualities of the AONB such as tranquility and remoteness, wildness and dark skies Objective L2: Conserve and enhance L2c: Remove, avoid and reduce the AONB by removing, avoiding and intrusive and degrading features to reducing intrusive and degrading restore and enhance landscape features character and quality Objective PH1: Support sustainable PH1a: Ensure that any necessary development that conserves and development affecting the AONB enhances the Special Qualities of the is sensitively sited and designed AONB and conserves and enhances local character PH1b: Ensure that proposals affecting the AONB are assessed to a high standard PH1g: Conserve and enhance the AONB’s undeveloped rural character, panoramic views, tranquility, remoteness and wildness
Objective PH2: Impacts of PH2b: Protect the quality of development and land use damaging uninterrupted panoramic views to the AONB’s Special Qualities are into, within and out of the AONB avoided and reduced
DCC Lead Local Flood Authority 8.25 The FRA, due to the nature of the proposed works, covers a large area, therefore the differing forms of flood risk and their significance, change depending on the section of the scheme being considered. The FRA, referenced above, is sufficiently detailed in respect of all forms of flooding and has correctly highlighted the fluvial, Ground Water (GW) and SW flood risks present and any necessary mitigation measures, both during and after construction. With respect to the drainage mitigation measures for new, impermeable areas, we are also satisfied that MWH have adequately demonstrated how increased runoff will be managed through storage and infiltration, such that drainage mimics pre-development rates and discharge routes. We also accept National Grid’s commitment to maintain any infrastructure in perpetuity. We therefore have no objection to the application, subject to the conditions and informatives at the end of this letter, being included on any permission granted.
8.26 As well as the usual detailed design, the following will need to be considered in more depth at Discharge of Condition (DoC) stage: Whilst the applicant has confirmed indicative storage volumes, and claimed that the area will support some infiltration to ground, no Ground Investigation appears to have been undertaken to quantify rates etc. We have progressed to conditions on the basis that the area is known to support infiltration and British Geological mapping confirms the presences of chalk, which typically allows drainage to ground. However, at detailed design we will expect storage volumes supported by BRE 365 tests. An indicative layout should be provided which shows where infiltration features will be situated.
DCC Natural Environment Team 8.27 We believe the LEMP, which includes further consultation with Natural England, adequately addresses required mitigation, compensation and enhancements for this development and have no further comments to make.
Dorset Wildlife Trust
8.28 We welcome the production of a Outline Landscape and Ecology Management Plan for this proposed development and support the majority of the details within it. However, with regards to the proposed mitigation management during the first five years following reinstatement on the Waddon, Corton and Friar Waddon Hill Site of Nature Conservation Interest, we disagree with the suggestion that “some of this material to be retained for at least three small piles of cuttings to provide habitat for reptiles including slow worm and grass snake.” Piles of fresh grass cuttings alone do not create good ‘habitat piles’ for reptiles. They will rot down on the grassland are on which they stand killing off the sward below and adding further nutrients which may run-off over time to a wider area reducing the species-richness. We believe that all cuttings from the restoration area on the SNCI following development should be removed. If there is a desire to create ‘habitat piles’ for reptiles, then these should definitely be off the SNCI.
8.29 The plans show that as well as the Waddon, Corton and Friar Waddon Hill SNCI, a second SNCI (SY 68/030 Winterborne Steepleton) lies within the development area. Although it appears from the plan that the cable will not go across the SNCI, there will nevertheless be need to remove the existing pylon on the edge of the SNCI, and the overhead lines which run across it, which could result in some temporary damage. This is recognised in the “Assessment of impacts during construction” section of the Environmental Statement (7.7.10), but there does not appear to be any mention of it in the LEMP. Provided that any necessary measures to avoid adverse impacts of these activities during construction are detailed in a CEMP then this should be acceptable. With these minor amendments, provided that the full details included within the LEMP are secured by a condition of planning permission, then DWT will have no further concerns regarding this planning application.
WPA Consultants
8.30 Chapter 10 does indeed provide a summary and extracts from reporting that provides much of the information I am looking for in my review. At the very least this provides for the initial assessment of contamination we see as CLR11 compliant Phase One studies on other developments. I make the following additional comments: • It would be helpful to be able to review the factual reporting quoted in Chapter 10 relating to borehole and trial pit investigation, visits and investigations to farms etc. • The matter of groundwater assessment can be deemed satisfactory from the Authority’s perspective if the EA response is noted and any of their recommendations can be seen to be implemented or integrated with the Authority’s likely requirement for CL planning conditions (or by other means). • I note the WW2 UXB and military activities assessment. I note the discovery of asbestos, the locations of made ground and reported pollution events in the vicinity. The topography, geology, hydrogeology and hydrology reporting appear straightforward and from reputable sources. The conceptual site modelling, however, suggests that there are no plausible contaminant linkages. The likelihood of encountering contamination during the proposed works cannot be discounted/easily dismissed and the proposed CEMP should be reinforced by a condition covering a ‘discovery of currently unknown contamination strategy’. • Unless the factual reporting that relates to the Chapter 10 summary can be reviewed it is also advisable to have additional contaminated land planning conditions covering invasive site investigation in place that can be shown to be complied with by the later submission of the factual reporting and the processing and validation of the CEMP and actions concerning contamination that may arise that will have to be reported due to the conditions. A finalising report t verifying actions of discovery and remediation should also be required within the conditions.
8.31 In summary WPA recommends that WDDC contaminated land planning conditions are put in place. The initial Phase One DTS and site recon component could be deemed at this stage to be satisfactorily completed. If EA response is integrated with the conditions placed and/or their consultation can be signed off, and factual reporting can be reviewed at this time these recommendations could be amended.
Further comments received;
8.32 I have now considered the desktop study and site investigation information, (from Geotechnical Engineering Ltd) conducted in 2016 and relating to this National Grid project, that has been supplied. In so far as the development occurs over an extended area with sporadic potential issues with land contamination the submissions serve to provide an overall characterisation confirming that there may be some localised areas where contamination may be encountered. The invasive investigation and associated methodology have been largely driven by geotechnical requirements. The targeting of potentially contaminative land use is not, therefore apparent. The limited soils testing for potential contaminants does not really provide meaningful information other than to characterise natural soils and to inform designers concerning construction criteria. The reporting should highlight and provide targeted information concerning made ground and contaminative land uses within the curtilage of the development or adjacent to the development where contaminants may be mobile. If there are none of concern then the reporting should justify such a case. As things stand I recommend the standard set of CL conditions to ensure further assessment and reporting are provided. If the consultants can provide a rationale for a do nothing approach then we need to see the justification. If such an approach can be justified then at the very least the consultant would need to maintain a watching brief and ensure currently unknown contamination issues are dealt with appropriately when encountered.
County Highway Authority 8.33 No objection subject to condition
Winterbourne St Martin Parish Council 8.34 No objection to the proposal but trust that every effort will be made to minimise interruption to local residents and businesses during the course of the work.
DCP Technical Services 8.35 I have no objection. Given that the site qualifies as major development I would direct to the comments already provided by the FRM team at DCC and the Environment Agency.
DCP Senior Landscape Architect 8.36 Prior to making these observations I have been involved in a number of National Grid Stakeholder Advisory Group meetings regarding the evolution of associated landscape proposals and the potential impacts of the Development.
8.37 The majority of the Site comprises arable land and improved grassland, with numerous hedgerows of varying quality and condition, areas of poor semi-improved grassland, hard standing, semi-natural broadleaved woodland, amenity grassland, scrub, semi-improved calcareous grassland, semi-natural mixed woodland, broadleaved plantation woodland, semi-improved neutral grassland, grassland with scattered trees, unimproved calcareous grassland, introduced scrub, rows of trees etc.
LVIA: 8.38 The Applicants have carried out a thorough LVIA. Having read Appendix 6A – Landscape Character Assessment (ES Volume 3) which assesses the likely effects of construction within the various landscape character areas I am happy with the predicted level of ‘effects’. The LVIA has been produced in consultation with the Dorset AONB Team where the ‘study area’ and ‘Viewpoints’ were discussed and agreed prior to the production of the Assessment.
The following effects of construction on landscape character are predicted: South Dorset Downs LCA: Moderate-major. South Dorset Escarpment: Moderate negative. South Dorset Ridge and Vale: Minor-moderate negative. Upper Frome Valley: Minor negative.
With regards the potential effects – the Dorset AONB Team have drawn attention to the following-
The most significant adverse effects of this proposal arise from construction. The project cannot be accomplished without some significant landscape and visual effects on the landscape in the short-medium term, primarily linked to construction.
Construction will be phased over a three-year period. Most of the construction effects are reversible and there are no significant concerns regarding the prospect of returning the physical features of the landscape to their pre- construction condition.
Measures have been adopted to limit the construction effects, including primary mitigation measures (i.e. avoidance of sensitive areas when selecting the cable route).
The permanent effect of the project would be of major benefit to the character and appearance of this part of the AONB. Although the benefits are not universal, as the level of enhancement is notably lower in those areas where the required Sealing End Compounds (SECs) are located, the overall benefits of the project are nonetheless considerable. Furthermore, the applicant has incorporated mitigation measures to minimise the adverse effects of the required new permanent infrastructure such as the SECs. I would agree with the above and am of the opinion that the conclusions drawn from the LVIA are reasonable and fair.
8.39 Mitigation: Details of landscape mitigation proposals are illustrated within the Outline Landscape and Ecological Management Plan (LEMP). The scope and content of the LEMP appears to be thorough and comprehensive with all planted areas being subject to a 5 year management programme (1.3.2 of the Outline LEMP). The objectives of the LEMP are in accordance with the AONB Management Plan policies L1a, L1b, L1c, L2a, L2b, and L2c. Landscape mitigation proposals for the SEC’s have been submitted (Fig’s 6.11A and 6.11B).
8.40 Local Plan Policy: ENV1i) Whilst this Development will generate significant adverse effects during the construction period (3 years) the majority of the construction effects are reversible with the aim being to reinstate the physical features of the land to their pre-construction condition. So – whilst there is likely to be temporary ‘harm’ to the character, special qualities or natural beauty of the AONB – the proposed ‘permanent’ effects of the Scheme would result in major benefits to the character and appearance of this area.
ENV ii) I am happy that the Scheme has considered measures in order to limit the effects of the construction effects (i.e. avoidance of sensitive areas when selecting the cable route). It is acknowledged that the two SEC’s will result in notable new visible elements within the landscape – the scale of which is a challenge to fully mitigate. I am, however, satisfied that the locations of these, and the level of mitigation proposed, would be acceptable.
Significant visual enhancements will be gained through the removal of 22 existing pylons and the long term visual benefits of this would be considered to outweigh the predicted adverse effects in the short to medium term.
ENViii) With regard the moderation of adverse effects on the landscape – I am satisfied that the Applicant has fully considered the likely effects of the Development within the LVIA and that the Scheme has evolved through thorough consultations and consideration of design options.
With regards ENV10 which seeks to contribute positively to the maintenance and enhancement of local identity and distinctiveness – I am satisfied that the proposals and outline LEMP acknowledge the exceptional landscape and visual qualities of the area and that the level and nature of the mitigation proposed would be appropriate.
8.41 To conclude – I am happy to support this Application within the Dorset AONB as the significant ‘effects’ arising from the 2-3 year construction period will be outweighed by the longer term positive landscape and visual benefits. The success of the landscape restoration will be dependant on the adherence to the LEMP, 5 years maintenance and Soil Management Plan.
DCP Conservation Officer 8.42 The application site and buffer zones are very large and with initial assessment offer a visual impact over a large area. However as Historic England note the works during the construction phase is likely to be visually prominent but that by the subsequent operational phase the cables will be buried. However, for the Sealing End Compounds, with their surface structures and pylons, there may be significant long term visual impacts on heritage assets, the main pylons being over 14m high and the equipment serving it is over 91 meters high and I agree with HE in that these will need to be fully assessed. For this, Zone of Theoretical Vision maps, section drawings and photomontages may be useful for demonstrating and assessing impacts. I share HE concerns about the classifications in Tables 7.1-7.3 of the Scoping Report, which are used for the assessment of asset sensitivity and significance. The classification tables need to be used with caution and at best can only be an approximate guide, with individual cases dealt with on their own merits. Conclusions about the impacts of a development are only as reliable as the judgements and assumptions on which they are based, and rely on the classification levels that categorise the Heritage Assets.
8.43 In terms of the categorisation of assets according their heritage significance, Table 7.1: Criteria for determining heritage significance categorises the assets as High, Medium , Low and Very Low significance, with reference also to international, national, regional and local importance or value. There is justification in categorising separately the highest national grade of assets Grade I and II* buildings as a starting point for assessment however Grade II buildings and Conservation Areas are classed in the table as Medium, at the same level as non-designated assets of regional Importance. I support HE’s view that the grading of the significance of designated assets in Table 7.1 does not properly reflect the level of heritage importance or value indicated for heritage assets in legislation and national planning policy, and brings the risk of under-estimation of potential impact and effect on setting and significance of some of the heritage assets affected by the proposed development. HE has offered a remedy for this and suggest that the national significance of Grade II assets needs to be reflected in the Tables and scoring system. This and the photo montages should give a better understanding of potential impacts on the built environment.
DCP Environmental Health 8.44 Under Chapter 14 Construction Noise and Vibration it states: 14.8.2 Mitigating measures associated with BPM would include (but would not be limited to) the following: Working hours restricted to core hours so far as appropriate. Core hours are between 0700 and 1900 Mondays to Fridays and between 0800 and 1700 on Saturdays and Sundays; Selection of quieter plant and less intrusive methods (such as hydraulic plant rather than percussive) where appropriate and practicable; Locating plant and equipment as far as practicably possible from receptor locations; Site hoarding with acoustic properties to be provided at compounds; Proper maintenance of all plant and equipment; and Noise and/or vibration monitoring where required.
8.45 Further mitigation is also supplied for residential properties in the close vicinity to works – listed in the following part of the chapter. I would like to raise concerns for noisy works carried out on Sundays and bank holidays close to those properties and would advise the planning case officer to consider the necessity of undertaking noisy works at those times, close to those locations. I would also request that the acoustic barriers proposed to give 5 dB - 10 dB protection aim to provide as higher level of protection as possible by increasing the acoustic insulation. Where there is isolated/concentrated noisy works, barriers should be supplied at source as well as at sensitive locations, if this is physically possible.
DCP Environmental Assessment Officer 8.46 Firstly, since the applicant requested an EIA Scoping Opinion on 5th May 2016 (under WD/D/16/001128) before the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations (2017) came into force in May 2017, the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations (2011) continue to apply for this application. It’s important therefore that you consider the applications under the 2011 regs rather than the 2017 regs, and reference the correct regulations (2011 regs) in your reports. For further information on the revocation of the 2011 regs and transition into the 2017 regs, please see regulation 76 of the 2017 regulations.
8.47 In terms of the EIA process, the regulations prevent us from determining the application within 14 days from receiving the Environmental Statement - doesn’t sound like this is a problem here, but nevertheless something to be aware of. I’ve reviewed the Environmental Statement and it meets the requirements of Schedule 4 of the EIA regs 2011 which sets out the regulatory requirements for an Environmental Statement. The submitted Environmental Statement therefore the requirements of the 2011 regs and is therefore legally compliant.
8.48 The 2011 EIA regs require the LPA to show that the ‘environmental information’ (which includes the environmental statement, consultation responses and any other relevant information) has been taken into account when determining the planning application. I note that you mention the outstanding Heritage Issues in particular. I would recommend including the findings of the environmental statement and the comments of Historic England and the Conservation Team in your report, to show that we’ve considered all of the relevant information in addressing this environmental issue.
9. REPRESENTATIONS:
9.1 13 representations have been received. 11 in favour of the proposal for the following reasons and including the responses from the 3 organisations as detailed below;
- removal of pylons reduces the visual impact and clutter - Jurassic Coast seeing major investment in the environment - the outlook for Winterbourne Abbas residents will be improved and the area around them - long term benefit of enhanced scenery and views worth the short term disruption - once in a generation opportunity - project will restore the natural beauty of the area - it will improve access to crops - provide benefits to the local economy - there will be less susceptibility to the impact of severe weather - well worth the investment and an excellent use for funding
National Trust 9.2 One of the founding beliefs of the National Trust is that places matter to people. Our statutory core purpose is to promote and protect places of historic interest and natural beauty – forever and for everyone. Over the last 120 years we have continually sought to ensure that the nation’s countryside, heritage and natural environment are protected for the enjoyment of all and for inheritance by future generations. As a result, the Trust has supported National Grid’s Visual Impact Provision (VIP) project (the scheme under which this proposal will be delivered) since its inception. We strongly commend the VIP’s ambition to enhance the natural beauty of the nation’s special places, our Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONBs) and National Parks.
9.3 The landscape of the Dorset AONB is of national and global significance, from the unspoilt Jurassic Coast, England’s only natural UNESCO world heritage site, to the many Iron Age hill forts that punctuate its heathland and rolling hills. Delivered well, we do believe that National Grid’s proposal to remove pylons near Martinstown and Winterbourne Abbas and replace them with underground cables would have a transformative effect on this setting. In particular, it would greatly improve views from the Hardy Monument, a local landmark and a popular heritage attraction visited by tourists from across the country, as well as from the well-used South Dorset Ridgeway trail.
9.4 The Trust recognises the tangible landscape benefits this scheme would provide, and by extension, the benefit to people who live in and visit the area. We also recognise that it is an innovative proposal. The successful completion of the project will represent the first time that existing high-voltage electricity transmission line has been removed purely to enhance the surrounding landscape. Successful delivery of this proposal will not be without its challenges however, and we therefore trust National Grid and WDDC will work together to ensure that the issues raised during the planning application consultation process are addressed with appropriate design, mitigation and environmental enhancement where possible.
CPRE 9.5 CPRE are very much in favour of this having campaigned for it for some time. We give complete support
National Association of AONBs 9.6 We have engaged with National Grid's Visual Impact Provision project through our representation on its national Stakeholder Advisory Group and helped shape some of the decisions that led to this application to remove 22 pylons in the Dorset AONB. We are confident that removing these pylons will greatly enhance the local setting and benefit the many visitors who seek to enjoy this striking setting. Among the National Association of AONB's aims are the commitment to make things happen, translating vision and national policy into local action and to work with local communities and value their skills, knowledge and energy. We believe that the VIP project in Dorset meets and exceeds these aims and are therefore pleased to support it.
9.7 2 comments from a local resident and landowner on the scheme on the following grounds;
- impact on local businesses in Martinstown in particular the pub and bed and breakfast. - impact on local bus services and appears no consultation with bus service providers - long term impact on farming due to position of link pillar boxes - restricted access to farmland which brings in question of viability of business - disruption to movement of animals, equipment, vehicles and staff - shared use of access track and impact during harvest
10. PLANNING ISSUES:
Landscape impact - landscape character and visual amenities Ecology Historic Environment Highways and Traffic Amenity Water resources Soils and contaminated land Economy and tourism Agriculture and Land Use
11. PLANNING ASSESSMENT:
Landscape and Visual amenities 11.1 Central to the VIP is the resulting enhancement to the AONB from the removal of the overhead lines and pylons which is line with the NPPF paragraph 115 which states; ‘Great weight should be given to conserving landscape and scenic beauty in National Parks, the Broads and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, which have the highest status of protection in relation to landscape and scenic beauty’. Whilst the overarching aim is to mitigate the visual impact of existing electricity infrastructure within the Dorset AONB and to conserve and enhance the natural beauty, wildlife and environmental heritage of the area there will considerable disruption in the short term during the construction phase and the addition of two Sealing End Compounds which will have a landscape impact. Therefore this needs to be carefully considered and as part of the ES, a Visual Impact Assessment was undertaken. This considered the potential effects of the Project on the landscape as a resource in its own right and views and visual amenity as experienced by people.
11.2 The NPPF in paragraph 116 states that major development in these designated areas should be refused except in exceptional circumstances and where it can be demonstrated they are in the public interest. An assessment should be done on the need for the development; the cost of and scope for developing elsewhere; and any detrimental effect on the environment.
11.3 Need for Development – As noted by the Dorset AONB Team, the funding for this project is organised by the national industry regulator OFGEM and it can only be directed towards projects benefitting the designated areas. As outlined in the Section 2 of this report, the Dorset VIP is one of 4 chosen projects and offers an incredible opportunity to enhance the Dorset landscape.
11.4 Cost of, and scope for developing elsewhere – The driving force for this application is to specifically improve the landscape quality of the Dorset AONB. Different locations have been carefully considered with regards to the two Sealing End Compounds to minimise harm; however it is not appropriate in this case to seek alternative locations outside the AONB for the entire project.
11.5 Detrimental effect on the environment – this will be discussed in detail below. However, the Dorset AONB team are clear that the permanent effect of the project would be of major benefit to the character and appearance of this part of the AONB and mitigation measures have been put forward to minimise adverse effects, in particular where the Sealing End Compounds are proposed to be located.
11.6 During the construction phase, which will take place over a 3 year period there will be disruption to the landscape and the visual amenities of the locality. However, as the LVIA describes in para 6.5.4 ‘Landscape Character Area’s key characteristic and important features that will be affected by the Proposed Project have been considered throughout the design process and have formed the underlying basis for the projects design, such as location and orientation of SEC’s, underground cabling route alignment, mitigation planting, materials and finishes’.
11.7 The LVIA recognises that there will be a temporary significant adverse effect from the construction phase on the South Dorset Downs and South Dorset Escarpment due to the large scale of change over a large geographical area and in the short term the works are likely to harm the tranquillity and rural character of the landscape. However, during the operation of the project, the majority of the landscape enhancement would occur in the South Dorset Downs landscape due to the removal of 16 pylons which as the ES states; 'removal of this substantial number of large-scale pylons and associated OHLs from the broad rolling chalk upland landscape, enhancing the sense of large open skies and views of distant horizons, which are among its key characteristics'. It is identified that there would be a localised adverse impact from the positioning of the pillar boxes at the cable junctions; however the removal of the OHLs outweighs this local harm. With regards to the South Dorset Escarpment, the ES states the following; 'Removal of 1.1km OHLs and 4 pylons from the visually prominent, dramatic and exposed steep slopes of the landscape with the areas of rough unimproved calceareous downland and historic landscape features will result in a large improvement to the skyline of the scarp and the panoramic views along and out from the escarpment, to the coast'. Again, whilst the siting of the link pillar boxes and the cable corridor will result in some scarring of the landscape, overall there will be a positive effect on the character of this part of the landscape.
11.8 During the construction phase, there will be temporary significant adverse effects on the visual receptors with the clearest views such as the Hardy Monument, users of the Roman Road, users of the National Cycle Route 2, walkers on the Jubilee Trail and South Dorset Ridgeway and the local communities of Winterbourne Abbas, Winterbourne Steepleton and Corton farm. However, this is on a temporary basis and the overall long term impact will be significant and result in visual enhancements to the Dorset AONB. Visitors to Hardy Monument, an elevated hill top vantage point which provides visitors with panoramic views across the AONB will see a moderate positive effect at year 15 once the landscape has recovered form the construction phase. Users of the National Cycle Network Route 2 and the South Dorset Ridgeway will see a major improvement at year 15. At Corton Farm, a small community the overall benefit will be moderated by the presence of the SEC and permanent access track; however by year 15 it is anticipated the impact will be moderate-major.
11.9 The location of the two Sealing End Compounds has been carefully considered during the evolution of the project. The locations were chosen in order to minimise the need for cut and fill and where they were in relatively visually discrete positions, within field corners next to existing hedgerows to minimise disruption to field patterns and boundaries. The Landscape and Ecology Management Plan outlines a variety of mitigation measures to reduce the impact of the development both during the construction phase and operational phase. There is a significant amount of planting at the Sealing End Compounds where the biggest disruption and impact will occur. Figure 6.11a Landscape Mitigation shows new woodland planting consisting of native species including blackthorn, wild cherry, hawthorn, oak, maple and beech around the North SEC predominantly to the north and south of the site. New hedgerows will be introduced around the western edge of the woodland and a new species rich grassland is shown adjoining the SEC on the western side. The existing hedgerow to the south east which will be partially removed to facilitate the laying of the cable will be reinstated post construction and additional trees within the existing hedgerow will be added for enhanced mitigation. Whilst mitigation measures will be put in place to reduce the impact of the NSEC, this part of the project would introduce built form into a rural landscape within the Upper Frome Valley and therefore the ES has concluded there would be a moderate adverse effect in the early years; however after 15 years the planting will have matured and it will appear more integrated into the landscape and its effect would then be a minor-moderate negative effect.
11.10 At the South SEC, which lies within the South Dorset Ridge and Vale landscape, native woodland planting is proposed directly to the north of the facility and to the western edge. Native shrub planting will be located to the south and grassland is proposed for the edge of the access track. The existing hedge row to the east and along the permanent access track to the south will be strengthened and enhanced with additional native trees. Like the NSEC, this installation would cause some adverse harm to the landscape character in the early years with a moderate effect. However, as the planting matures this decreases to a minor positive effect at year 15. All the new planting is subject to a 5 year management plan as outlined in the LEMP and the document states that the planting has been proposed and will be undertaken in accordance with the landscape character management guidelines for the affected individual Landscape Character Areas. There is a mixture of large standard trees and smaller whips to ensure coverage and screening from the start of the project to year 15 of the project.
11.11 During decommissioning of the project, there will no doubt be some adverse impact on the landscape character and visual receptors with the removal of the infrastructure and movements associated with this. However, the ES did not deem any of the effects to be significant and once the elements have been removed and once further planting has established itself there will not be a harmful impact on the AONB.
11.12 The proposal is considered to adhere to the objectives of the AONB Management Plan, specifically policy L2c: Remove, avoid and reduce intrusive and degrading features to restore and enhance landscape character and quality and policy PH1a: Ensure that any necessary development affecting the AONB is sensitively sited and designed and conserves and enhances local character. Given the overriding benefit to the landscape qualities of the AONB it is considered that this major development is definitely in the public interest, adhering to paragraph 16 of the NPPF.
Ecology and Biodiversity
11.13 Chapter 7 of the ES covers Ecology and outlines the Desk Top study and Field Surveys that have been undertaken and the Assessment looks at the potential impacts on species, habitats and features of the different phases of the development. Within the application site boundary the predominant land type is arable land and pasture with habitats including woodland, standing water, running water, calcareous grassland and scrub. However, it was determined that as most of land was treated with herbicides, it was not suitable for notable flora. One pond within the site boundary supported great crested newts; 33 bird species were recorded including the red kite, hobby, quail and the skylark. Considerable bat activity was recorded, predominantly along the hedgerows although only one roost was identified within the site boundary.
11.14 The ecological surveys covered a wider area than the application site in order to allow flexibility for the exact position of the cable corridor. It is stated in the ES that; 'the Proposed Project has sought to minimise habitat and ecological disruption by taking into consideration ecological constraints and using techniques tailored to this specific project'. The project would result in a degree of permanent habitat loss, for example 0.9ha of arable land is permanently affected along with the loss of 229m of hedgerow (identified as species poor). Species identified to be directly affected by the proposal include breeding birds, dormice, bats and the brown hare.
11.15 However, it is concluded that there is a very minor permanent loss of habitats within the site boundary and these habitats have a low value and the residual effect is not considered to be significant. A wide range of mitigation and enhancement measures have been put forward alongside the Landscape, Ecology Management Plan (LEMP) and a financial contribution inline with the Dorset Biodiversity Compensation Framework. This one off payment of £34,500 will be secured through a Unilateral Undertaking and will be used for projects identified by the Local Authority, Dorset AONB team and the Natural Environment Team at Dorset County Council. Direct mitigation measures include reinstatement of native hedgerow, managed for a minimum period of 5 years; tree planting at the SEC's with new trees within the boundaries and new areas of woodland, grassland and shrub planting; restrictions and specific methodology for works at ponds; and storage of topsoil from the Waddon, Corton and Friar Waddon SNCI to be re-used once works completed. This Legal Agreement is currently with the Council's Legal Team being verified.
11.16 Further enhancement Measures outlined in the LEMP include; Hedgerow enhancement planting and newly created hedgerows Landscape planting at both SEC locations Improve quality of pond within application site boundary by dredging and vegetation thinning to open up the pond area Improve management of SNCI grassland to encourage species diversity Working with landowners to set aside areas of land and alter management timings to improve habitats
11.17 Dorset Wildlife Trust have made comments regarding the inappropriateness of the proposed mitigation management during the first five years following reinstatement on the Waddon, Corton and Friar Waddon Hill SNCI as can be seen in paragraph 8.25 of this report. This has been brought to the attention of the applicant and they have agreed to remove the following wording; some of this material to be retained for at least three small piles of cuttings to provide habitat for reptiles including slow worm and grass snake' from the LEMP. Furthermore, regarding the removal of the pylon at the Winterborne Steepleton SNCI, they have suggested the addition of a paragraph to the LEMP to state that any disturbance will be restored in this area but that impacts are not expected to be severe and very short term. The LEMP submitted with the application is in Outline form and therefore it is considered necessary to condition the final version of the document so the above changes can be included.
11.18 Overall, the consultees are satisfied with the ecological impacts of the development and with the LEMP secured by condition, it is considered that the project complies with policy ENV2 of the Local Plan.
Historic Environment
11.19 Chapter 8 of the ES deals with the Historic Environment and a number of documents including an outline Written Scheme of Investigation have also been submitted to support the application. Negotiations have taken place with Historic England and the County Archaeologist during the course of the application regarding the surveys and trial trenching to be undertaken prior to the determination of the proposal. Additional documentation has been submitted to allow a thorough assessment of the implications of the proposal on the heritage assets within the site and wider environment.
11.20 The objectives of the programme of archaeological works as outlined in the WSI are; Define the extent of the known, and identify any previously unknown archaeological remains that could be impacted during the course of the construction works; Ensure appropriate mitigation measures are implemented to consist of either 'preservation in situ' or 'preservation by record' Contribute to the body of knowledge on archaeological remains in the area
5 Stages of the approach have been identified;
Stage 1 - Project Planning - The WSI outlines the strategy and programme Stage 2 - Pre-construction/Construction-phase fieldwork - geophysical survey or fieldwalking Surface Artefact Collection (SACS) undertaken before determination of the application and after any permission granted in preparation of phase 2 trial trenching and final mitigation. This surveys, reports and mitigation at this stage also include;
Archaeological trial trenching - a number of trenches have been excavated and the remaining trial trenches will be excavated and this will be secured by condition. These have been agreed by Historic England and Dorset County Council. Surface Artefact Collection - systematic collection of artefacts exposed on the surface of recently ploughed fields Preparation of the updated Archaeological WSI - on completion of the above assessments, an updated WSI to deal with the construction phase assessment Archaeological 'Strip, Map and Sample'- removal of overburden and archaeological excavation of pre-designated areas of proven archaeological significance during construction Archaeological watching brief - implemented over groundworks where no archaeological potential recorded Preservation 'in situ' - significant features may be preserved by means of a local engineering variation to the proposed infrastructure Preservation 'by record' - where the loss of whole or part of asset is justified, the recording and understanding of the significance of the heritage asset is required. Reinstatement - temporary working areas will be reinstated and no intrusive activities will take place in areas of known buried archaeology
Stage 3 - 5 - Post-excavation Assessment and Reporting - all archaeological work will be subject to an appropriate staged programme of post excavation assessment, analysis, review and publication.
11.21 The geophysical survey that has already taken place has identified anomalies of potential archaeological interest. 88 known heritage assets have been identified within the site boundary and 5 of these are Scheduled Monuments. 51 of the 88 are located within the construction impact area (cable corridor, access tracks, SEC's, temporary work areas). The following works during construction could have an impact on them; top soil and subsoil stripping of the working width; cable trench excavation; open cutting through ditches and watercourses; benching works (grading of slopes); and pre- construction drainage. There are 12 'significant' field boundaries that are being crossed by the cable corridor and a record of each boundary will be maintained. A number of lynchets (terracing) have been identified within the cable corridor and it is proposed that the cable trenching will be undertaken under the supervision of a geoarchaeologist. The Outline WSI states that the option of reinstatement and replication of historic undulations of heritage assets as a mitigation measure is possible in order to reduce the effect on the significance and maintaining the legibility and integrity of historic landscape character.
11.22 With regards to the visual effects on heritage assets, the ES has concluded that the removal of the OHL along with the two SEC's would result in a net benefit to the significance and setting of the surrounding heritage assets including Hardys Monument and a number of listed buildings. There is no heritage specific visual mitigation proposed; however the proposed landscape and ecological mitigation measures will no doubt reduce the overall impact of the infrastructure on the historic environment and wider landscape.
11.23 With a revised WSI and a number updated surveys and documents secured by condition to enable further trial trenching in consultation with Historic England and the County Archaeologist, it is considered that with preservation in situ of assets and preservation by 'record' of assets', there will be no direct substantial or less than substantial harmful effects on the historic environment. The proposal is considered to be compliant with Section 12 of the NPPF and policy ENV4 of the Local Plan.
Highways, Traffic and Public Rights of Way
11.24 Chapter 12 of the ES covers Traffic and Transport. Highways England and DCC Highways have provided advice on the preparation of the ES. The roads that will be impacted upon will be considered in more detail.
A35 - This is the strategic road managed by the Highways England and provides access between Dorchester and Bridport and further onto Honiton. It is generally a two way single carriage way and has a 30mph limit through the village of Winterbourne Abbas but then opens up to 60mph. Approximately 200m west of the village, a bellmouth is proposed to allow access to all southern work areas. This will also include widening of the carriageway as shown on plan PDD-33495-LAY-027. The haul road will leave the A35 and go northwards towards the Sealing End Compound and also south eastwards on elevated land. There will be a managed haul road crossing where it crosses the public right of way to the south of the village. Roman Road - This is the single track highway that runs to the north and parallel to the A35 and will provide permanent access to the Northern Sealing Compound with the introduction of a new bellmouth on an existing farm access. Coombe Road - The highway links Winterbourne Abbas to Portesham and the haul road will cross this road as outlined above. Bellmouths are proposed on both side of the road to facilitate the haul road crossing as it continues south eastwards across arable land. Unnamed road (National Cycle Route) - This road runs westwards from the road between Winterbourne Steepleton and Martinstown and the haul road will cross this so bellmouths are proposed on either side of the carriageway. The existing pylons runs directly overhead this road as they continue southwards. Friar Waddon Road - The permanent access road to the Southern Sealing End Compound is located off this highway at Corton. A bellmouth is proposed to the north east of this access for the temporary haul road. An unnamed private road off Friar Waddon Road opposite Friar Waddon Farm provides access to the haul road over Friar Wadden Hill. 2 managed crossings are located along the public right of way within this area.
11.25 The proposed cable route and haul road will also impact upon Public Rights of Way.
Bridleway S54/1- the haul road will cross this route to the south of the Roman road. Footpaths S54 and S59/9 - the haul road will cross these two paths although the ES Statement states that they both did not appear to be heavily used with the broken stile and overgrown vegetation. Bridleway S59/3 - the haul road will cross this path to the south of Winterbourne Steepleton. It appeared well used although not specifically for equestrian purposes. Bridleway 58/13 - This well used route connects with the unnamed road, the Cycle Route at East Rew Farm and the haul road will cross it to the North East of Ballarat Farm. Bridleway S58/12 - This was identified to be well used by agricultural vehicles and non-motorised users and the haul road again will cross this path, southwest of Pen Barn Farm. South Dorset Ridgeway (part of the South West Coast Path National Trail) - this is a well used path by both pedestrians and equestrians and the haul road will cross it; however a managed crossing would be provided. Bridleway S37/14 - South from the South Dorset Ridgeway is this path and given the location of the haul road it will be temporary closed and a temporary diversion put in place. Footpath S37/16 - This tarmaced agricultural access is to be used for the construction access route to the SEC. Footpath S37/17 - forms part of the long distance Jubilee Trail and crosses this access route to the SEC. Footpath S37/18 - This will form the permanent access by Corton Farm to the SEC. Footpaths S37/20 and S37/21 - These footpaths will also be used for the permanent access to the SEC.
11.26 There will no doubt be some temporary disruption to the highway network during the construction, operation and decommissioning of the development. Impacts identified included the effect of development traffic on severance, driver delay, pedestrian and cycle delay and amenity, fear and intimidation and hazardous loads. The ES has concluded following; 'the greatest severance will be on the Roman Road and Friar Waddon Road; however given that these roads operate within their capacities it is not considered the disruption would be significant'. Local access will be maintained and diversionary routes put in place. However, in terms of rights of way without any mitigation measures in place, there could be significant disruption and increase in travel times. In order to allow the construction of the badmouths on the unnamed road, National Cycle Network 2 will be temporarily closed (2 weeks) and a diversion put in place. The predicted increase in HGV movement though Winterbourne Abbas during the peak construction traffic month is 11%, but movements on the local roads will be higher. Given the above therefore, mitigation measures are being put in place to ensure the increase in traffic movements does not significantly disrupt traffic movements and amenity of the locality. These include; Roman Road access improvement; a Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP); and a Public Right of Way Management Plan.
11.27 Roman Road Access Improvements - These are likely to include adding and improving passing places and will be finalised with Dorset County Council.
11.28 CTMP - This will include specifying routes for HGV's to follow; a signage strategy; specification of core working hours; temporary traffic management procedures for example widening of the A35 to allow Belmouth construction and continue flow of traffic; management of haul crossings with a security hut; management of abnormal loads; delivery management plan to ensure deliveries are spread across the day and minimise disruption during peak hours; provision of information packs to all contractors; and wheel cleaning facilities.
11.29 Public Right of Way Management - This will include managed crossing of haul roads with gates and signs to warn users; short term PRoW closures at strategic crossings; segregation of pedestrian and vehicle routes along access routes (i.e. footpath S37/160; and temporary diversions. The applicant will need to apply to the Countryside Access team at Dorset County Council prior to any closure or diversion of the right of ways.
11.30 Following the mitigation measures the ES Statement concludes that the effects during the construction phases will be minor adverse and on a temporary basis. During the operational phase the transport impacts are considered to be neglible and during decommissioning, the effects are no greater than during the construction phase. Highways England and Dorset County Council Highways have raised no objections to the scheme and have just suggested a number of conditions.
Economy and Tourism
11.31 Chapter 13 of the ES covers the Socio-economics and tourism impact of the Project. It was determined that the effects are the potential effects on tourist attractions, activities and accommodation; potential traffic effects on access to residential properties and recreation associated with access to the PRoWs; potential effects on communities, residents and tourists; employment; and the supply chain. The ES identifies tourism sites or attractions, community facilities and Figure 13.3 Rev 8 specifically identifies commercial receptors which includes bed and breakfast businesses, caravan sites and farm businesses.
11.32 The Assessment concluded that the Proposed Project would have no significant local or regional effects on the tourism sector. It is recognised that there will be some temporary disruption and delays to the traffic flow in the locality and this could deter visitors; however, the tourist attractions which include those of cultural heritage, natural heritage and archaeological/historic interest alongside the paid attractions such as The Swannery at Abbotsbury are not considered to be significantly harmed by the construction phase of the development. Tourist accommodation may be subject to a minor impact, in particular those very close to the Proposed Project. However, as the ES states; there are many options for tourist accommodation in the area, especially camping sites and this alongside with the potential requirement for worker accommodation it is considered there would not be a significant effect on accommodation.
11.33 The cable route and haul road will impact on access to Public Rights of Way, the National Cycle Route 2 and the Jubilee Trail. However, PRoW access will be carefully managed during the construction phase as outlined above in the Highways Section above. In terms of recreational impact, the ES concludes that whilst there may be temporary disruption, the magnitude of the impact is expected to be very low on the majority of the paths. However, with regards to S58/8 which forms part of the South West Coast Path, the effect is assessed to be moderate adverse and as such significant.
11.34 During the construction phase of the Project, employment opportunities will be generated. Although the posts would require trained specialists who are qualified to work on National Grid sites, there would be also opportunities in other sectors such as site security, plant hire, haulage, fencing and drainage which could utilise local businesses. The ES has calculated that 85 jobs would be created nationally, 11 of which would be created in the local economy. A representation has referred to the disruption to local businesses from the works, in particular little mention has been made of the village pub or main B & B in Martinstown. There is also comment on the impact on the local bus service between Dorchester and Bridport which stops at Winterbourne Steepleton and Martinstown. Figure 13.3 Commercial Receptors identifies a number of businesses (including bed and breakfasts) within the 500m Zone of influence. Martinstown lies outside of this zone and although it is appreciated that businesses outside of this Zone could be affected; it is considered appropriate and reasonable for the ES to focus on this 500m zone of influence. With regards to the buses, the Traffic Chapter adequately deals with the impact on the strategic highway (A35) and the local network which the local buses would use. Whilst there be some delay, there is not considered to be a significant permanent disruption or impact.
11.35 With regards to amenity effects, Winterbourne Abbas is considered to be subject to significant visual effects during construction due to the proximity to the haul road and Northern Sealing End Compound and Corton is expected to have a moderate-major adverse effect due to clear views of the South Sealing End Compound and laying the cable underground. However, during the operation, these 2 communities will experience significant positive landscape and visual effects alongside Winterbourne Steepleton.
Agriculture and Land Use
11.36 The majority of the agricultural land within the study area (Baseline blue line) has been classed as Grade 3 and land use is a mix of arable and pasture land. Figure 13.3 has identified the farms within the study area. There will undoubtedly be some temporary impact on agricultural land and the farming enterprises during the construction phase by removing it from production and disturbing soils. The movement of livestock, drinking water supplies for livestock and farm traffic movements are likely to be affected; however the following mitigation measures are proposed to minimise disruption; The SECs are located as close to the existing OHL as possible to minimise land disturbance; Construction swathe width will be minimised; A Construction Management Plan will be prepared; Permanent surface water/agricultural drains re-installed All soils will be stored a minimum of 5m from watercourses Construction activities will not take place during extreme wet weather Minimum depth to the top of the protective covers cover the cable will 900mm in agricultural land; Following construction agricultural land will be fully reinstated to or as near as practically possible to its former condition; Industry standard measures put in place to control pollution; Liaison with landowners to agree commercial terms with affected parties in relation to associated losses Vertical barriers within trench excavations to prevent creation of preferential drainage pathways to minimise risk of erosion.
11.37 There would be a permanent loss of agricultural land with the siting of the 2 Sealing End Compounds and their access tracks. A representation has been received from a landowner who raises issues regarding the positioning of the pillar link boxes at the cable joint locations and their impact on the ability to farm the land. The applicant has confirmed that the precise location of these link boxes cannot be determined until the detailed cable design has been undertaken; although every effort will be made to site them as close to field boundaries as possible. It is understood discussions with landowners are continuing and a condition has been proposed to ensure the Local Planning Authority is party to the final position of the cable and the link pillar boxes. Further to this, during the operational phase pollution prevention measures will be in place and where there is permanent restriction to farmland these will be discussed with affected landowners.
Amenity
11.38 Chapter 14 of the ES focuses on noise and vibration during the construction phase of the project. The survey results from the monitoring locations and the report has identified that bellmouth construction and construction of some access roads, in particular at weekends is likely to cause some disturbance to occupiers of neighbouring sites and therefore, mitigation is required for these locations. Further to this, undergrounding the cable in certain areas will also exceed weekend daytime noise limits. The dismantling of some of the existing pylons will exceed weekend daytime noise limits for neighbouring residential properties. Mitigation measures will be put in place to reduce the noise levels highlighted above. These include; working hours restricted to core hours so far as appropriate (between 0700 and 1900 Monday to Fridays and between 0800 and 1700 on Saturdays and Sundays); a selection of quieter plant and less intrusive methods; locating plant and equipment as far as possible from receptor locations; site hoarding with acoustic properties at compounds; noise or vibration monitoring where required. Acoustic screening is proposed around Bellmouth 3 and 4 to protect the amenities of the occupiers at Scotts Corner Camp Site and Boxenhedge Farm. It is also proposed at Bellmouth 2, and between 6 and 7 to protect the amenities at Little Glebe Farm, Ballarat Farm and Barley Mow Cottage. Further acoustic screening is required between Bellmouth 4 and 5 to protect a number of residential properties.
11.39 The ES concludes that the highest impact will be at the Camp site at Scotts Corner when works take place at the site boundary. However, the works are transient and short lived in nature and with mitigation measures in place, the impact will not be significant for all of the construction works. The Council's Environmental Health department have not objected to the scheme, although they have made comments on the possibility of restricting noisy works on Sundays. The applicant has responded to this; 'The standard approach to delivering the construction activities will be to minimise weekend working. It is however a requirement that some weekend working for safety and operational reasons will be required. These specific tasks include cable jointing, Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD) activities, abnormal deliveries and outage periods (when the National Grid system is switched off to enable safe working). These specific activities will be communicated with Stakeholders well in advance via our Community Relation commitments (which will include a telephone helpline and an up-to-date website). All construction activities in general and, in particular those close to residential areas, will be carefully planned to minimise any noise with appropriate mitigation implemented to ensure noise limits are met.
11.40 The Construction Environmental Management Plan in table 3.1 outlines the proposed mitigation measures and this document will be secured by condition. The amenity of visitors and tourists to this part of the AONB has been discussed in the Economy and Tourism section.
Water resources
11.41 The ES states that; 'reducing the potential for environmental impacts on water resources receptors has been at the heart of the project design from its early inception'. The project has been designed to; avoid the parallel running of temporary and permanent linear elements of the project adjacent to watercourses over significant distances reduce the requirement for new bridges and above-ground crossings maximise the thermal insulation of the new cable sections local collaboration
11.42 The ES includes a Flood Risk Assessment and Drainage Strategy which have been assessed by the Environment Agency and the LLFA. However, despite the above and the embedded mitigation which includes the minimising the construction swathe where practicable; a CEMP being in place; de-watering of deep excavations, clay bungs within trench excavations; permanent surface water/agricultural drains will be re- installed and the cable will be buried at a sufficient depth below the watercourses there will still be some impacts of moderate or higher significance and further mitigation measures will be required to overcome the adverse impact.
11.43 The study area for water resources mainly lies within the South Winterbourne catchment and there a number of perennial rivers and streams of a notable size alongside a number of potential surface water flow paths associated with the dry chalk valleys. The area has been subject to flooding due to high groundwater tables and surface runoff. The majority of the search area is within Flood Zone 1 (low probability) with the exception of the land alongside the South Winterbourne which runs through the village of Winterbourne Abbas which is Zone 2.
11.44 During the construction phase the installation of the underground cables has the potential to increase groundwater floodrisk, change the baseflow discharges to surface water, change water levels in abstraction wells and result in the mobilisation of contaminated groundwater. During the operation phase there is a risk of increased volume and rate of surface water runoff which in turn leads to increased sediment local transportation. The permanent siting of the SECs with their access roads and hard surfacing could have a moderate significant impact so additional mitigation is required. The mitigation measures set out in the ES include; monitoring of groundwater levels prior to construction, during construction and post-construction avoidance of construction during periods of high groundwater levels areas at risk would be delineated within the CEMP and works can be phased backfill material in cable trench is sourced locally to ensure continual flow of water in the trench Site Drainage Plan - attenuation storage, infiltration drainage and sediment trapping techniques Avoid stockpiling soil use of geotextile temporary spoil storage further than 10m from watercourse reinstated surfaces have same run-off properties as existing avoid temporary above ground elements within areas of floodplain and overland flow pathways Operational Phase SuDS Maintenance and Management Plan for SECs
11.45 It is considered that the applicant has sufficiently assessed the water resource implications of the project and adequate mitigation measures will be put in place. However, further detailed design of surface water management is required by the consultees to minimise floodrisk and prevent contamination of the water resources. This will be secured by condition.
Soils and contamination
11.46 During the construction phase there is the potential for spillages to occur into the ground from fuels, oils, chemicals and other pollutants and result in the contamination of soils and controlled waters. Chapter 10 of the ES states that the site is generally defined by agricultural fields which has a medium sensitivity; however the groundwater beneath the route of the cable is defined as a principal aquifer along with groundwater protection zones (GPZs). Both of these are considered to have a Very High sensitivity. The excavation/stockpiling/backfilling could also impact on the soils. No significant source of land contamination has been identified although WPA Consultants in their consultation response have stated; 'The conceptual site modelling, however, suggests that there are no plausible contaminant linkages. The likelihood of encountering contamination during the proposed works cannot be discounted/easily dismissed and the proposed CEMP should be reinforced by a condition covering a ‘discovery of currently unknown contamination strategy’.
11.47 Proposed embedded mitigation measures are similar to those listed above in paragraph 11.41 along with the following; Fuel and chemical storage will comply with regulations Measures for controlling dust and general pollution will be outlined in the CEMP Deep excavations may require de-watering (water treated to avoid movement of silt into local watercourses) Fules, lubricants will be stored in bunded areas
11.48 With these in place, the ES has concluded that; 'there would be a Neglible impact on a receptor of a Very High sensitivity (aquifer and GPZs), resulting in a Minor effect which is Not Significant and a Neglibile impact on a receptor of Medium sensitivity (agricultural land), resulting in a Negligible effect which is Not Significant. It is recognised that sterilisation of local mineral resources will occur within the cable corridor. However, according to the ES, the minerals are already partially sterilised by the presence of the existing overhead lines. Ensuring minimal land take for the project will mean there is a Low impact on this receptor of High Sensitivity. Within the site boundary, lies the Corton Cutting Site of Special Scientific Interest, designated for its geological exposures (provides a clear exposure of the geological features of Portland Sand Formation) and is considered to have a very high sensitivity. The existing access road from Friar Waddon Lane to Corton Farm is within the SSSI and it is proposed to be used as an access route for light operation traffic; however no further works are proposed so the SSSI is not considered to be affected by the proposal.
11.49 WPA have concluded that the investigations and reports that have been undertaken so far are acceptable. However, there does not appear to be one collated response to the assessment and possible remediation of contaminated land during construction and operation of the Project. Therefore, it is considered appropriate to include a standard contaminated land condition on any approval. Given that the development will not result in an unacceptable risk of pollution to the ground water and surface water bodies, the proposal is compliant with policy ENV9 of the Local Plan
Other Matters
11.50 The National Grid has submitted a report which covers the likely significant health and environmental effects of electric and magnetic fields (EMFs) associated with the phases of the Project. The UK Government has set out policies on the control of EMF (National Policy Statement EN-5) for application for nationally significant infrastructure projects. The EMF report concludes; 'the assets associated with the Project would be fully compliant with the Government Policy. Specifically, all the EMFs produced would be below the relevant exposure limits and therefore, there would be no significant EMF effects resulting from the Project'. A Certificate has been supplied from an appointed company by the SoS for Trade and Industry which confirms the above.
CONCLUSION:
11.51 It is concluded, that this proposed development will result in an overall substantial positive impact on the landscape character and visual amenities of the Dorset AONB. As stated above in the consultation section, the 2011 EIA regs require the Local Planning Authority to show that the ‘environmental information’ (which includes the environmental statement, consultation responses and any other relevant information) has been taken into account when determining the planning application. The ES has been carefully assessed by all the consultees and the Local Planning Authority is satisfied that whilst there will be some temporary significant effects on the receiving environment during the construction phase, a range of mitigation measures will be put in place to reduce this significance and during the operation stage of the Project, there will be an overwhelming long term benefit to the visual amenities of the Dorset AONB.
11.52 In particular, the South Dorset Downs landscape will be much improved with the removal of the OHL, along with other receptors including users of the public rights of way (Jubilee Trail and South Dorset Ridgeway), visitors to tourist attractions and landscape landmarks and local communities. The public rights of way and use of the strategic and local highway network will be carefully managed during the construction phase to minimise disruption to the enjoyment of the area and movement of people and vehicles around the Project area.
12. RECOMMENDATION: Approve subject to conditions and to delegate Authority to Head of Planning to conclude the Unilateral Undertaking to secure the financial contribution for ecological and landscape enhancements.
1. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:
Typical Bellmouth Arrangement- Drawing Number MMD-362981-C-DR-DO-LAY-0024 Rev 00 received on 10/01/2018 Typical Standard Direct Buried Cable Trench Cross Section - Drawing Number MMD- 362981-E-DR-DO-HVC-0001 Rev 03 received on 10/01/2018 Typical Joint Bay Arrangement- Drawing Number MMD-362981-C-DR-DO-HVC-0014 Rev 01 received on 10/01/2018 Typical Controlled Access Road/Private Track Crossing - Drawing Number MMD- 362981-C-DR-DO-LAY-0026 Rev 3 received on 10/01/2018 Proposed Traffic Management Arrangement A35- Drawing Number MMD-362981-C-DR- DO-LAY-0027 Rev 04 (1 of 2) received on 10/01/2018 Proposed Traffic Management Arrangement A35- Drawing Number MMD-362981-C-DR- DO-LAY-0027 Rev 04 (2 of 2) received on 12/01/2018 Winterbourne Abbas North - Cable Sealing End Compound Layout on OS Map - Drawing Number MMD-362981-C-DR-DO-LAY-0036 Rev 4 received on 10/01/2018 Cable Sealing End Compound Winterborne Abbas North - Drawing Number MMD- 362981-E-DR-DO-HVC-0008 Rev 03 received on 10/01/2018 Cable Sealing End Compound Winderborne Abbas South - Drawing Number MMD- 362981-C-DR-DO-HVC-0018 Rev 02 received on 10/01/2018 Bellmouth Location, Access and Public Rights of Way Plan - Drawing Number MMD- 362981-C-DR-DO-LAY-0054 Rev 06 received on 04/04/2018 Bellmouth Locations, Road Closures and Diversions - Drawing Number MMd-362981-C- DR-DO-LAY-0034 Rev 03 received on 10/01/2018 Indicative Cable Route 1 of 10 - Drawing Number MMD-362981-C-DR-DO-LAY-0048 Rev 08 received on 04/04/2018 Indicative Cable Route 2 of 10 - Drawing Number MMD-362981-C-DR-DO-LAY-0048 Rev 08 received on 04/04/2018 Indicative Cable Route 3 of 10 - Drawing Number MMD-362981-C-DR-DO-LAY-0048 Rev 08 received on 04/04/2018 Indicative Cable Route 4 of 10 - Drawing Number MMD-362981-C-DR-DO-LAY-0048 Rev 08 received on 04/04/2018 Indicative Cable Route 5 of 10 - Drawing Number MMD-362981-C-DR-DO-LAY-0048 Rev 08 received on 04/04/2018 Indicative Cable Route 6 of 10 - Drawing Number MMD-362981-C-DR-DO-LAY-0048 Rev 08 received on 04/04/2018 Indicative Cable Route 7 of 10 - Drawing Number MMD-362981-C-DR-DO-LAY-0048 Rev 08 received on 04/04/2018 Indicative Cable Route 8 of 10 - Drawing Number MMD-362981-C-DR-DO-LAY-0048 Rev 08 received on 04/04/2018 Indicative Cable Route 9 of 10 - Drawing Number MMD-362981-C-DR-DO-LAY-0048 Rev 08 received on 04/04/2018 Indicative Cable Route 10 of 10 - Drawing Number MMD-362981-C-DR-DO-LAY-0048 Rev 08 received on 04/04/2018 Indicative Overhead Line Working Areas 4YA Route. Tower 4YA195 and 4YA196 04/04/2018 Indicative Overhead Line Towers 4YA197 and 4YA198 - Drawing Number MMD- 362981-C-DR-DO-OHL-0003 Rev 07 (4 of 17) received on 04/04/2018 Indicative Overhead Line Working Areas 4YA Route. Tower 4YA199 - Drawing Number MMD-362981-C-DR-DO-OHL-0003 Rev 07 (5 of 17) received on 04/04/2018 Indicative Overhead Line Working Areas 4YA Route. Towers 4YA202 and 4YA203 - Drawing Number MMD-362981-C-DR-DO-OHL-0003 Rev 07 (7 of 17) received on 04/04/2018 Indicative Overhead Line Working Areas 4YA Route. Towers 4YA200 and 4YA201 - Drawing Number MMD-362981-C-DR-DO-OHL-0003 Rev 07 (6 of 17) received on 04/04/2018 Indicative Overhead Line Working Areas 4YA Route. Towers 4YA204 and 4YA205 - Drawing Number MMD-362981-C-DR-DO-OHL-0003 Rev 07 (8 of 17) received on 04/04/2018 Indicative Overhead Line Working Areas 4YA Route Tower 4YA206 - Drawing Number MMD-362981-C-DR-DO-OHL-0003 Rev 07 (9 of 17) received on 04/04/2018 Indicative Overhead Line Working Areas 4YA Route. Towers 4YA207 and 4YA208 Overview- Drawing Number MMD-362981-C-DR-DO-OHL-0003 Rev 07 (10 of 17) received on 04/04/2018 Indicative Overhead Line Working Areas 4YA Route Tower 4YA209 - Drawing Number MMD-362981-C-DR-DO-OHL-0003 Rev 07 (11 of 17) received on 04/04/2018 Indicative Overhead Line Working Areas 4YA Route Towers 4YA210 and 4YA211 - Drawing Number MMD-362981-C-DR-DO-OHL-0003 Rev 07 (12 of 17) received on 04/04/2018 Indicative Overhead Line Working Areas 4YA Route Towers 4YA212 - Drawing Number MMD-362981-C-DR-DO-OHL-0003 Rev 07 (13 of 17) received on 04/04/2018 Indicative Overhead Line Working Areas 4YA Route Towers 4YA213 and 4YA214 - Drawing Number MMD-362981-C-DR-DO-OHL-0003 Rev 07 (14 of 17) received on 04/04/2018 Indicative Overhead Line Working Areas 4YA Route. Tower 4YA215 - Drawing Number MMD-362981-C-DR-DO-OHL-0003 Rev 07 (15 of 17) received on 04/04/2018 Indicative Overhead Line Working Areas 4YA Route. Towers 4YA216T, 4YA216A and South CSE - Drawing Number MMD-362981-C-DR-DO-OHL-0003 Rev 07 (16 of 17) received on 04/04/2018 Indicative Overhead Line Working Areas 4YA Route Towers 4YA217 and 4YA218 - Drawing Number MMD-362981-C-DR-DO-OHL-0003 Rev 07 (17 of 17) received on 04/04/2018 Winterbourne Abbas South Sealing End Compound Layout on OS Map - Drawing Number MMD-362981-C-DR-DO-LAY-0046 Rev 06 received on 01/05/2018 Site Plan - Drawing Number MMD-362981-C-DR-DO-LAY-0052 Rev 05 (1 of 10) received on 04/04/2018 Site Plan - Drawing Number MMD-362981-C-DR-DO-LAY-0052 Rev 05 (2 of 10) received on 04/04/2018 Site Plan - Drawing Number MMD-362981-C-DR-DO-LAY-0052 Rev 05 (3 of 10) received on 04/04/2018 Site Plan - Drawing Number MMD-362981-C-DR-DO-LAY-0052 Rev 05 (4 of 10) received on 04/04/2018 Site Plan - Drawing Number MMD-362981-C-DR-DO-LAY-0052 Rev 05 (5 of 10) received on 04/04/2018 Site Plan - Drawing Number MMD-362981-C-DR-DO-LAY-0052 Rev 05 (6 of 10) received on 04/04/2018 Site Plan - Drawing Number MMD-362981-C-DR-DO-LAY-0052 Rev 05 (7 of 10) received on 04/04/2018 Site Plan - Drawing Number MMD-362981-C-DR-DO-LAY-0052 Rev 05 (8 of 10) received on 04/04/2018 Site Plan - Drawing Number MMD-362981-C-DR-DO-LAY-0052 Rev 05 (9 of 10) received on 04/04/2018 Site Plan - Drawing Number MMD-362981-C-DR-DO-LAY-0052 Rev 05 (10 of 10) received on 04/04/2018 Location Plan - Drawing Number MMD-362981-C-DR-DO-LAY-0051Rev 05 (amended) received on 04/04/2018 Indicative Overhead Line Towers 4YA197 and 4YA198 - Drawing Number MMD- 362981-C-DR-DO-OHL-0003 Rev 08 (1 of 17) received on 04/04/2018
REASON: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.
2. The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission. Reason: This condition is required to be imposed by Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).
3. Prior to any works commencing on the construction cable swathe or Sealing End Compounds a plan outlining the final timescale and phasing of the development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In order to understand the timing of the development given the scale of the project and its different phases of construction, operation and decommissioning.
4. Prior to any works being carried out on the cable swathe final details of the exact position and route within the cable corridor of the underground cabling and the link pillar boxes shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In order to minimise disruption to agricultural activities and protect the landscape qualities of the AONB.
5. Prior to the commencement of development an updated Construction and Environmental Management Plan (including the Construction Traffic Management Plan CTMP) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved Plan unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure appropriate management of the environmental impacts during the construction phase of the development and protect amenity
6. Prior to any works commencing on the construction cable swathe or Sealing End Compounds an updated Landscape and Ecology Management Plan and updated Figure 6.11a Landscape Mitigation plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved Plan, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure species and habitats are protected during the construction, operation and decommissioning phases and to ensure the mitigation measures are put in place.
7. No ground works shall take place on the site until the following documents, other than Item 8, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority: 1. Completed updated geophysical survey report 2. Completed Surface Artefact Collection Survey (SACS) report 3. Updated WSI for Phase 2/3 Trial Trench Archaeological Evaluation 4. Updated Phase 2/3 trial trench location plan 5. Phase 2 Trial Trench Archaeological Evaluation report 6. Updated Archaeological WSI for construction phase mitigation 7. Any construction-phase Site-Specific WSIs which are considered necessary by the planning authority (as advised by its archaeological advisors), for archaeological mitigation work in the construction phase of the development. 8. Phase 3 trial trenching report (if such trenching is undertaken). The WSIs shall include on-site work, and off-site work such as the analysis, publication, and archiving of the results, together with a timetable for completion of each element. All works shall be carried out and completed in accordance with the approved scheme, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure the appropriate identification, recording and publication of archaeological and historic remains affected by the development. 8. Prior to any works commencing on the construction cable swathe or Sealing End Compounds a detailed and finalised surface water management scheme for the site, based upon the hydrological and hydrogeological context of the development, with due consideration of the construction phase and any temporary works has been submitted to, and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The surface water scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the submitted details before the development is completed. Reason: To prevent increased risk of flooding and to improve and protect water quality.
9. Prior to any works commencing on the construction cable swathe or Sealing End Compounds details of maintenance and management of the surface water sustainable drainage scheme have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The scheme shall be implemented and thereafter managed and maintained in accordance with the approved details. These should include a plan for the lifetime of the development, the arrangements for adoption by any public body or statutory undertaker, or any other arrangements to secure the operation of the surface water drainage scheme throughout its lifetime. Reason: To ensure future maintenance of the surface water drainage system and to prevent increased risk of flooding.
10. Prior to any works commencing on the construction cable swathe or Sealing End Compounds a scheme to treat and remove suspended solids from surface water run-off during construction works has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The scheme shall be implemented as approved. Reason: To protect the local groundwater and surface water environment in accordance with National Planning Policy.
11. The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until such time as a scheme to: 1. secure de-watering of works areas where necessary 2. secure the protection of licensed and un-licensed sources 3. secure the maintenance of spring-fed flows 4. secure the protection of groundwater dependent terrestrial ecosystems has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. Any such scheme shall be supported by detailed information. The scheme shall be fully implemented in accordance with the scheme, or any changes as may subsequently be agreed, in writing, by the local planning authority. Reason: To protect the local groundwater and surface water environment in accordance with National Planning Policy
12. Any facilities for the storage of oils, fuels or chemicals shall be provided with secondary containment that is impermeable to both the oil, fuel or chemical and water, for example a bund, details of which shall be submitted to the local planning authority for approval. The minimum volume of the secondary containment should be at least equivalent to the capacity of the tank plus 10%. If there is more than one tank in the secondary containment the capacity of the containment should be at least the capacity of the largest tank plus 10% or 25% of the total tank capacity, whichever is greatest. All fill points, vents, gauges and sight gauge must be located within the secondary containment. The secondary containment shall have no opening used to drain the system. Associated above ground pipework should be protected from accidental damage. Below ground pipework should have no mechanical joints, except at inspection hatches and either leak detection equipment installed or regular leak checks. All fill points and tank vent pipe outlets should be detailed to discharge downwards into the bund. Reason: To prevent pollution of surface watercourses and groundwater in the Principal Aquifer and Source Protection Zones.
13. Prior to any works commencing on the construction cable swathe or Sealing End Compounds a scheme has been submitted to and approved by the local planning authority which demonstrates there will be no resultant unacceptable risk of obstruction to groundwater flow or unwanted impact on groundwater dependent features or abstractors from this development. The scheme shall be implemented as approved. Reason: To protect the local groundwater and surface water environment in accordance with National Planning Policy.
14. There shall be no storage (permanent or temporary) of any spoil arising from the proposed scheme, and no raising of ground levels, within Flood Zones 3 and 2 (as shown on the drawing in Appendix F of the Flood Risk Assessment, dated November 2017). Reason: To ensure that there will be no increased risk of flooding to other land
15. No crossing shall take place until detailed design regarding the watercourse crossing has been submitted to and approved by the local planning authority which demonstrates there will be no resultant unacceptable risk to the local environment. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To prevent unacceptable impact on the protected chalk river South Winterbourne
16. All works, including new and modified vehicle accesses shall be in accordance with the approved plans and details contained in the Application Submissions under Chapter 12 Traffic & Transport and must be implemented and adhered to for the full length of the construction and restoration periods. Reason: To minimise the likely impact of construction traffic on the surrounding highway network and prevent the possible deposit of loose material on, or damage to, the adjoining highway.
17. The implementation of Bellmouth 02 (BM02) shall generally be in accordance with the general arrangement (subject to detailed design and safety audit) as shown on drawing MMD-362981-C-DR-DO-LAY-0029 Rev 03. Reason: To ensure the safe and efficient operation of the strategic road network (A35)
18. The construction of BM 02 shall not commence until the provision of Traffic Management measures which include the measures to be implemented on the A35 have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of highway safety
19. No abnormal load deliveries will take place until an Abnormal Loads Movements and Notification form has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of highway safety
20. Prior to any works commencing on the construction cable swathe or Sealing End Compounds a Soil Management Plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure protection, conservation and reinstatement of soil material, its physical and chemical properties and functional capacity for agricultural use.
21. Prior to any ground works pursuant to this permission the developer shall submit for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority:
1. a 'desk study' report documenting component site histories 2. a site investigation report detailing ground conditions, a 'conceptual model' of all potential pollutant linkages, and incorporating risk assessment. 3. where necessary detailed schemes for remedial works and measures to be taken to avoid risk from contaminants/or gases when component sites are developed. 4. a detailed phasing scheme for the development and agreed remedial works.
The detailed phasing scheme incorporating remedial works, as agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, shall be fully implemented before the development hereby permitted is commissioned. Any variation to the scheme shall be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority in advance of works being undertaken. On completion of the works the developer shall provide written confirmation that all works were completed in accordance with the agreed details. Reason: To ensure potential land contamination is satisfactorily addressed.
22. Prior to any ground works hereby permitted, the approved remedial works (remediation schemes) shall be carried out unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Local Planning Authority must be given two weeks written notification of commencement of remediation scheme works. Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation schemes, a validation report that demonstrates the effectiveness of the remediation carried out shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors
23. In the event that contamination is found at any time when carrying out the approved development that was not previously identified it must be reported in writing immediately to the Local Planning Authority. An investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken and where remediation is necessary a remediation scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme a validation report shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors
Informatives
All works within the highway must be undertaken / constructed to the specification of the County Highway Authority in order to comply with Section 184 of the Highways Act 1980. The applicant should contact Dorset Highways by telephone at Dorset Direct (01305 221000), by email at [email protected], or in writing at Dorset Highways, Dorset County Council, County Hall, Dorchester, DT1 1XJ, before the commencement of any works on or adjacent to the public highway.
Ordinary watercourses cross the site. If it is intended to obstruct the flow in the watercourse (permanently or temporarily, including culverting) prior Land Drainage Consent from Dorset County Council as the Lead Local Flood Authority will be required. Please contact the Flood Risk Management team to discuss their requirements: [email protected]
Prior Land Drainage Consent (LDC) may be required from DCC’s FRM team, as relevant LLFA, for all works that offer an obstruction to flow to a channel or stream with the status of Ordinary Watercourse (OWC) – in accordance with s23 of the Land Drainage Act 1991. The modification, amendment or realignment of any OWC associated with the proposal under consideration, is likely to require such permission. We would encourage the applicant to submit, at an early stage, preliminary details concerning in-channel works to the FRM team. LDC enquires can be sent to [email protected].
Safeguards should be implemented during the construction phase to minimise the risks of pollution from the development. Such safeguards should cover: - the use of plant and machinery - wheel washing and vehicle wash-down - oils/chemicals and materials - the use and routing of heavy plant and vehicles - the location and form of work and storage areas and compounds - the control and removal of spoil and wastes. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/pollution-prevention-for-businesses
Should this proposal be granted planning permission, then in accordance with the waste hierarchy, we wish the applicant to consider reduction, reuse and recovery of waste in preference to offsite incineration and disposal to landfill during site construction. If any controlled waste is to be removed off site, then site operator must ensure a registered waste carrier is used to convey the waste material off site to a suitably authorised facility. If the applicant requires more specific guidance it is available on our website https://www.gov.uk/how-to-classify-different-types-of-waste
It should be noted that the use of these footpaths bridleways by vehicular traffic without lawful authority is an offence contrary to the Road Traffic Act 1988. Any damage to the surface of the path attributable to the development must be repaired to Dorset County Council’s specification, in accordance with Section 59 of the Highways Act 1980. The free passage of the public on all rights of way must not be obstructed at any time. If the public are unlikely to be able to exercise their public rights on the above path then a Temporary Path Closure Order must be obtained. This can be applied for through this office but the application must be completed and returned at least thirteen weeks before the intended closure date. It should be noted that there is a fee applicable to this application.