Bulphan Fen Solar Farm and Battery Storage Environmental Statement Technical Appendices on behalf of Warley Green Limited
Prepared by Aardvark EM Limited | December 2020 | Document Reference: R008
Bulphan Fen Solar Farm and Battery Storage – R008: Environmental Statement
Environmental Statement Technical Appendices Contents Page
Chapter 1 Introduction ...... 1
Appendix 1.1 EIA Screening Opinion Letter ...... 1 Appendix 1.2 EIA Scoping Opinion Report ...... 1 Appendix 1.3 EIA Project Team Qualifications and Experience ...... 1
Chapter 6 Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment ...... 1
Appendix 6.1 Glossary ...... 1 Appendix 6.2 Methodology ...... 1 Appendix 6.3 Visualisations and ZTV Studies ...... 1 Appendix 6.4 National Planning Policy ...... 1 Appendix 6.5 Extracts from Landscape Character Assessment ...... 1 Appendix 6.6 Consultation ...... 1 Appendix 6.7 Figures ...... 1
Aardvark EM Limited – December 2020
Development Management, Civic Offices, New Road, Grays Thurrock, Essex RM17 6SL
Applicant: Our Ref: 20/01178/SCR Rachel Ness Aardvark EM Limited E-Mail: [email protected] By email: [email protected]
Date: 29 September 2020
Dear Rachel
Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017 – Request for the Screening Opinion of the local planning authority
Proposal: Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) screening opinion on proposed solar farm and battery storage Location: Land at Bulphan Fen, Harrow Lane, Bulphan, Essex
I refer to your recent request, submitted under cover of an e-mail for a Screening Opinion pursuant to Part 2(6) of the above Regulations.
Having undertaken the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Screening Assessment Process (below) the local planning authority considers that the proposal is Schedule 2 development and would result in significant environment effects. Consequently the local planning authority has determined as follows:
That an Environmental Impact Assessment is required
I can confirm that in accordance with the Regulations a copy of this decision will be placed on Part 1 of the Planning Register. Should you have any further queries relating to this matter please do not hesitate to contact me via the email address above.
Yours sincerely
Lucy Mannion Senior Planning Officer
EIA SCREENING PROCESS
TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 (as amended) TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING (ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT) REGULATIONS 2017 Yes No 1) SCHEDULE 1 PROPOSAL? 2) SCHEDULE 2 PROPOSAL? 3) SENSITIVE AREA LOCATION? Land in a Site of Special Scientific Interest National Park The Broads UNESCO World Heritage Site Schedule Ancient Monument (SAM) Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (ANOB) Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) Ramsar wetlands of international importance. Although not formal sensitive area the following may be considered sensitive locations Severely contaminated land Sites of major archaeological importance Local Nature Reserves SINCS or County Wildlife Sites Registered Parks and Gardens Coastal Protection belts Ancient Landscapes Country Parks Regionally Important Geological Sites Areas close to water boreholes Within river corridors Sea defences National trust sites Air Quality Management Area 4) DOES THE PROPOSAL MEET SCHEDULE 2 THRESHOLDS AND CRITERIA? 1. AGRICULTURE AND AQUACULTURE Projects for the use of uncultivated land or semi natural areas for intensive agricultural purposes (> 0.5 hectares) Water management projects for agriculture including irrigation and land drainage projects (> 1 hectare) Intensive livestock management (> 500 m²) Fish farming (> 10 tonnes per year) Reclamation of land from the sea 2. EXTRACTIVE INDUSTRY Quarries and mining all development Extract by fluvial or marine dredging Deep drillings for geothermal, water, nuclear waste (>1 ha, or within 100m of controlled water for nuclear) Surface installations for extracting coal, petrol, gas and ores (> 0.5 ha)
3. ENERGY INDUSTRY Installation for production of electricity, steam and hot water (> 0.5 ha) Installation for carrying gas, steam and hot water (> 1 ha) Storage of gas and storage of fossil fuel (> 500m2 or within 100m of controlled water) Industrial briquetting of coal and lignite (> 1,000 m²) Installation for processing & storage of radioactive waste (> 1,000 m²) Installations for hydroelectric energy projection (> 0.5 megawatts) Installations for the harnessing of wind power for energy production (> 2 turbine or hub height of any turbine >15 metres in height) Installations to capture carbon dioxide 4. PRODUCTION & PROCESSING OF METALS (> 1000 m²) 5. MINERAL INDUSTRY (> 1000 m²) 6. CHEMICAL INDUSTRIES Production of pesticides, chemicals pharmaceutical products, paint, varnishes etc (floor area > 1,000 m²) Storage facilities for petroleum or petroleum products (any building/structure > 0.05 ha or > 200 tonnes stored at a time) 7. FOOD INDUSTRY Manufacture of vegetable/animal oils/fats (> 1000 m²) Packing and canning of animal/vegetable goods (> 1000 m²) Manufacture of dairy products (> 1000 m²) Brewing and malting (> 1000 m²) Confectionary and syrup making (> 1000 m²) Animal slaughter (> 1000 m²) Starch manufacturing (> 1000 m²) Fish meal/oil factory (> 1000 m²) Sugar factory (> 1000 m²) 8. TEXTLE LEATHER WOOD AND PAPER Industrial production of paper/board (> 1000 m²) Washing, bleaching and dying of fibres/textiles (> 1000 m²) Tanning plants (> 1000 m²) 9. RUBBER INDUSTRY Manufacture & treatment of elastomer based products (> 1000 m²) 10. INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS Industrial estate developments (where area of development > 0.5 ha) Urban development projects (> 1 ha which is not dwelling house development, or, > 150 dwellings, or > 5ha for overall development) Transhipment facilities and intermodal terminals (> 0.5 ha) Railways (> 1 ha) Airfields (> 1 ha, or includes extension to a runway) Roads (> 1 ha) Ports and Harbours (> I ha) Canals and flood relief works (> I ha) Oil and gas pipelines/installations (> I ha, or pressure to 7 bar) Coastal work to combat erosion and associated works Groundwater abstraction (> I ha) Works to transfer of water resources between river basins (> I ha) Motorway service areas (> 0.5 ha) 11. OTHER PROJECTS Permanent racing and test tracks for motorised vehicles (> 1 ha)
Installations for disposal of waste (incineration or >0.5 ha or within 100m of controlled waters) Waste water treatment plans (> 1,000 m²) Sludge deposition sites, storage of scrap/vehicles (area > 0.5 ha or within 100m of controlled waters) Testing engines, turbines and reactors (> 1,000 m²) Installation of artificial fibres (> 1,000 m²) Installation for recovery of destruction of explosives (> 1,000 m²) Knackers Yard (> 1,000 m²) 12. TOURISM AND LIESURE Ski runs, ski lifts and cable cars (> 1 ha or height > 15m) Marina’s (> 1,000 m²) Holiday villages/theme parks (> 0.5 ha) Permanent camp sites and caravan sites (> I ha) Golf courses and associated developments (> I ha) 13. Changes to developments within Schedule 1 (check)
Determination of whether Schedule 1 or Schedule 2 Development
The description of the proposed development does not fall within any of the categories of Schedule 1 development, where Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is always required.
Within the Table referred to by Schedule 2 of the Regulations, reference is made at Part 3 to Energy industry. Paragraph (a) of Part 3 refers to ‘Industrial installations for the production of electricity, steam and hot water (unless included in Schedule 1)’. The applicable threshold and criteria set by Column 2 of the Table for Part 3(a) is:
The area of the development exceeds 0.5 hectare.
The submitted information confirms that the site extends to 132 hectares. The proposals therefore exceed the relevant thresholds set out at Part 3(a). I therefore conclude that the proposals are Schedule 2 development. When screening Schedule 2 projects, the local planning authority must take account of the selection criteria at Schedule 3 of the Regulations. PPG includes an annex titled “Indicative screening thresholds” (reference ID: 4-057-2070720) which provides thresholds and criteria for the identification of Schedule 2 development requiring EIA and indicative values for determining significant effects.
The existing site comprises 18 arable or improved grassland fields and there is limited built form on the site with some adjoining individual residential properties and farmsteads. Consequently it is considered that the proposed development is on a significantly greater scale than the previous use. Furthermore the potential types of environmental impact associated with the development are considered to be of a markedly different nature compared to the existing uses.
In accordance with the Regulations it is necessary to consider whether the development would lie within a “sensitive area” as defined at Part 1(2) of the Regulations. The proposal
is not within a “sensitive area”. However, the site is within the ‘Impact Risk Zones’ drawn around SSSI designations located to the north, east and south of the site.
Screening Opinion
Schedule 3 of the 2017 Regulations sets out the selection criteria for screening developments that may require an EIA. The key criteria are:
1. characteristics of development; 2. location of the development; and 3. characteristics of the potential impact.
On the basis of the submitted information, the local planning authority considers that the proposed development would have the potential to generate significant environmental effects in the location proposed so as to require the submission of an EIA. The conclusion is that the proposal is Schedule 2 development, and REQUIRES EIA.
The reasons for this conclusion are set out below:
Characteristics of development
1. The characteristics of development must be considered having regard, in particular, to
(a) the size and design of the whole development; (b) accumulation with other existing development and/or approved development; (c) the use of natural resources, in particular land, soil, water and biodiversity; (d) the production of waste; (e) pollution and nuisances; (f) the risk of major accidents and/or disasters relevant to the development concerned, including those caused by climate change, in accordance with scientific knowledge; (g) the risks to human health (for example, due to water contamination or air pollution).
It is considered that size of the development site (132 hectares) and therefore the quantum of proposed solar panels and ancillary / associated development is likely to be significant compared to the existing site. Therefore the size and design of the proposal could give rise to significant environmental impacts. In particular it is considered that the proposals could give rise to significant landscape and visual impacts.
Location of development
2. The environmental sensitivity of geographical areas likely to be affected by development must be considered, having regard, in particular, to –
(a) the existing and approved land use;
(b) the relative abundance, availability, quality and regenerative capacity of natural resources (including soil, land, water and biodiversity) in the area and its underground; (c) the absorption capacity of the natural environment, paying particular attention to the following areas— (i) wetlands, riparian areas, river mouths; (ii) coastal zones and the marine environment; (iii) mountain and forest areas; (iv) nature reserves and parks; (v) European sites and other areas classified or protected under national legislation; (vi) areas in which there has already been a failure to meet the environmental quality standards, laid down in Union legislation and relevant to the project, or in which it is considered that there is such a failure; (vii) densely populated areas; (viii) landscapes and sites of historical, cultural or archaeological significance.
As noted above the site is close to sensitive areas and is within the impact risk zones drawn around nearby SSSIs. It is considered that EIA is the proper process for assessing potential significant impacts on these receptors.
CBA on behalf of Thurrock Council produced the ‘Thurrock Landscape Capacity Study’ in 2005. This was produced to assess the ability of the landscape to accommodate potential development scenarios produced to inform the Local Development Framework. The site falls within the ‘Bulphan Fenland Landscape Character Area’. The area is recognised as an area that is largely unspoiled by development. One of the key landscape options is ‘introduction of substantial-scale or very large-scale development into the area would diminish the sense of tranquillity experienced within the area. The essentially open, large- scale rural character of the landscape would be lost’. The report considers it to be of ‘high’ sensitivity to very large scale urban development and of ‘high’ sensitivity to substantial scale urban developments. In judging whether the effects of a development are likely to be significant it will be necessary to have regard in particular to the visual impact of the development on landscape character and how this will be affected by the proposal.
Whilst it is acknowledged that the Thurrock Landscape Capacity Study was produced for a particular purpose, it does highlight the key characteristics of certain areas and their relative sensitivity to development. The proposed development would be within a Landscape Character Area sensitive to change and both short range and more distant views may be afforded of the development. The impact of the development on landscape and visual receptors is considered to be significant. It is notable that there are a number of public rights of way within and close to the site.
Characteristics of the potential impact
3. The potential significant effects of development must be considered in relation to criteria set out under paragraphs 1 and 2 above, and having regard in particular to –
(a) the magnitude and spatial extent of the impact (for example geographical area and size of the population likely to be affected); (b) the nature of the impact; (c) the transboundary nature of the impact; (d) the intensity and complexity of the impact; (e) the probability of the impact; (f) the expected onset, duration, frequency and reversibility of the impact; (g) the cumulation of the impact with the impact of other existing and/or approved development; (h) the possibility of effectively reducing the impact.
The site area extends to 132 hectares and therefore the potential environmental impacts of the development could affect a significant geographical area. The development could have a significant visual impacts on a largely open site with the potential to result in significant ecological, heritage, landscape and visual impacts.
Conclusion
Overall, based upon the above assessment, it is considered that the proposal would result in significant environment effects as a result of its scale and location and therefore an EIA is required for this proposed development. As requested, the local planning authority will now commence the scoping opinion (pursuant to 15(5) of the Regulations. Nonetheless, and without prejudice to the scoping opinion to be issued by the local planning authority, at this stage I would expect an EIA to assess at least the topic areas of landscape and visual impacts.
Please note that part of the site is within the London Borough of Havering, this screening opinion therefore only relates to the site which is within the Thurrock Borough boundary.
Development Management, Civic Offices, New Road, Grays Thurrock, Essex RM17 6SL
Applicant: Our Ref: 20/01296/SCO Rachel Ness Aardvark EM Ltd E-Mail: [email protected] By email: [email protected]
Date: 3 November 2020
Dear Rachel
Re: Request for Scoping Opinion pursuant to Part 4(15) of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017
Location: Land at Bulphan Fen, Harrow Lane, Bulphan, Essex.
Proposal: Request for an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Scoping Opinion: Proposed solar farm and battery storage.
I refer to your email dated 4 September 2020 submitting a request for an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Screening Opinion for the proposed development described above. In anticipation of an EIA being required, your screening request contained the adequate information for the Scoping Opinion in accordance with Regulation 15(2).
Scope of the Environmental Statement
The purpose of the Scoping Request is to determine, from all the project’s likely effects, those that are predominantly significant with respect to impacts on the environment. The contents of the information received are generally endorsed, subject to the comments contained in this letter and of those comments made by the various consultees.
Schedule 4 to the EIA Regulations specifies the information that an Environmental Statement (ES) must provide. The ES must include the information referred to in Schedule 4 and should include such of the information as is reasonably required to assess the environmental effects of the development and to which the applicant can, having regard in particular to current knowledge and methods of assessment, reasonably be required to compile. Paraphrasing the contents of Schedule 4 together in the context of the proposed development, the ES for the proposed development should contain;
1. a description of the development including in particular – (a) a description of the location, (b) the physical characteristics of the whole development and land use requirements, (c) a description of the main characteristics of the operations; (d) an estimate, by type and quantity, of expected residues and emissions; 2. a description of the reasonable alternatives studied by the applicant and an indication of the main reasons for the choice, taking into account environmental effects; 3. a description of the aspects of the current state of the environment and its likely evolution without implementation of the development; 4. a description of the factors specified in regulation 4 (2) likely to be significant affected by the development; 5. a description of the likely significant effects on the environment resulting from – (a) construction and existence of the development, (b) the use of natural resources, (c) emission of pollutants, the creation of nuisances and the disposal of waste, (d) risks to human health, heritage or the environment; (e) the cumulation of effects with other existing / approved projects, (f) the impact on climate and (g) the technologies and substances used; 6. a description of forecasting methods used to identify and assess the significant effects; 7. a description of the measures to avoid, prevent, reduce or offset any identified significant effects; 8. a description of the expected significant adverse effects deriving from the vulnerability of the development to risks of major accidents; 9. a non-technical summary of the above; and 10. a reference list of sources.
Section 4 of the submitted EIA Report, confirms that the characteristics of the proposed development together with its location and potential effects have been assessed against the following considerations. The confirmation as to whether the Council considers these should be scoped in or out of the EIA is added:
- Landscape and visual impacts - (scoped-in) - Heritage impacts - (scoped-out) - Impacts of biodiversity - (scoped-out) - Impacts on amenity (glint and glare and noise) – (scoped-out) - The use of agricultural land - (scoped-out) - Flood risk impacts - (scoped-out) - Traffic impacts and access - (scoped-out) - Cumulative impacts - (scoped-out) Consultation
As required by Part 4 (15) (4) of the EIA Regulations the local planning authority has consulted with the following bodies:
• Cadent Gas • Essex County Council (Archaeology) • Environment Agency • Highways England • London Borough of Havering • Natural England • Thurrock Council – Emergency Planning • Thurrock Council - Environmental Health • Thurrock Council – Flood Risk • Thurrock Council – Highways • Thurrock Council – Listed Buildings • Thurrock Council – Landscape & Ecology • Thurrock Council – Public Rights of Way
In relation to the environmental topics which are proposed to be scoped-in or scoped-out of the EIA, the relevant comments from the consultation responses are summarised and considered below:
Landscape and visual impacts - (scoped-in)
THURROCK COUNCIL – LANDSCAPE & ECOLOGY
The site is within the Mardyke Valley, an area which has few settlements and is mainly used for agriculture. The former fenland character means there are long, expansive views with relatively few trees or hedges present. It is an area of locally high landscape character.
It is proposed to provide a standalone Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment undertaken in accordance with the best practice guidance.
Section 4.1 of the Request for Screening Opinion refers to the Thurrock Landscape Capacity Study, which was prepared in 2005 principally to inform large-scale residential development. It is recommended that the landscape architects review the Land of the Fanns Landscape Character Assessment prepared in 2016 which will be more appropriate.
The zone of visual influence has been prepared and submitted (appendix 2). It is necessary for the consultants to agree viewpoints and photomontages/visualisations.
The broad principles to minimise landscape and visual effects are considered appropriate. The LPA would welcome opportunities to comment on emerging designs to ensure that they complement and enhance green infrastructure objectives within this area.
Heritage impacts - (scoped-out)
ESSEX COUNTY COUNCIL (ARCHAEOLOGY)
The present scoping opinion contains an assessment of the historic environment which would provide a basic understanding of the known potential impact of the development of the site. There is a limited amount of known archaeological deposits in the Bulphan area largely as a result of little research or modern development The Historic Environment Record does show that the area around Bulphan contains a number of medieval moated sites, of 15th-18th century date, indicative of a dispersed settlement pattern.
The present proposal will need to be supported by field work, potentially in the form of a geophysical survey to assess for previously unknown archaeological deposits.
LISTED BUILDINGS
The proposed development of this site has the potential to impact upon a number of designated heritage assets and their settings, as identified within the submitted screening opinion request report. Therefore with regard to the proposals, the principal considerations are the indirect effects to heritage assets due to change within their settings. It is acknowledged that the proposed development would be temporary in nature and would be located within the wider setting of the identified designated heritage assets, however based on the information submitted with the application, it is not possible to make a fully informed assessment of potential impact. Furthermore, the screening opinion request report does not consider or identify any non- designated heritage assets which may potentially be impacted by the proposed development. It is noted that there are a number of farmsteads located within close proximity to the application site boundary, also present on historic ordnance survey maps, which could potentially be considered as non-designated heritage assets. As such, there is the potential for the proposed development to have an impact upon these buildings from a heritage perspective.
Impacts of biodiversity - (scoped-out)
THURROCK COUNCIL – LANDSCAPE & ECOLOGY
Section 4.3 summarises the surveys that have been undertaken to date. Most of the site is still in arable production and I would agree that ecologically important habitats will be confined to the field edges and watercourses. I agree with the list of species to be scoped out given the lack of suitable habitat for them on site.
The overall approach including the proposal for a Landscape and Ecology Management Pan are supported. Consideration should be given to how mitigation on this site could complement being proposed for the adjacent Lower Thames Crossing.
The scheme will seek to deliver Biodiversity Net Gain. At present Thurrock Council does not have an official policy for BNG. The Defra metric is being used for other schemes; however this is something that is being reviewed by the Council.
Impacts on amenity (glint and glare and noise) – (scoped-out)
The use of agricultural land - (scoped-out)
NATURAL ENGLAND
Soil is a finite resource that fulfils many important functions and services (ecosystem services) for society, for example as a growing medium for food, timber and other crops, as a store for carbon and water, as a reservoir of biodiversity and as a buffer against pollution. It is therefore important that the soil resources are protected and used sustainably.
The applicant should consider the following issues as part of the Environmental Statement:
1. The degree to which soils are going to be disturbed/harmed as part of this development and whether ‘best and most versatile’ agricultural land is involved.
This may require a detailed survey if one is not already available. For further information on the availability of existing agricultural land classification (ALC) information see www.magic.gov.uk. Natural England Technical Information Note 049 - Agricultural Land Classification: protecting the best and most versatile agricultural land also contains useful background information.
2. If required, an agricultural land classification and soil survey of the land should be undertaken. This should normally be at a detailed level, e.g. one auger boring per hectare, (or more detailed for a small site) supported by pits dug in each main soil type to confirm the physical characteristics of the full depth of the soil resource, i.e. 1.2 metres.
3. The Environmental Statement should provide details of how any adverse impacts on soils can be minimised. Further guidance is contained in the Defra Construction Code of Practice for the Sustainable Use of Soil on Development Sites.
Flood risk impacts - (scoped-out)
ENVIRONMENT AGENCY
No comments received.
THURROCK COUNCIL – EMERGENCY PLANNING
No comments at this time.
THURROCK COUNCIL – FLOOD RISK
No comments received.
Traffic impacts and access - (scoped-out)
THURROCK COUNCIL – HIGHWAYS
Detailed comments made in relation to a future planning application.
HIGHWAYS ENGLAND
Impacts would need to be fully reviewed within a Transport Assessment.
THURROCK COUNCIL – PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY.
Public Rights of Way strongly oppose any changes to the Definitive Routes of the following Public Rights of Ways located within the boundary of the above application unless a much improved network can be introduced:- Bridleway 219 (in part)
Footpaths 89, 90, 135 - (travelling along the western boundary of the proposed development) 136, 159 and 160 (in part). With this amount of rights of ways needing to be either stopped up or diverted all will require legal procedures under the Highways Act 1980. Objections will no doubt be received and unless resolved would ultimately reach the Secretary of State for determination.
Cumulative impacts - (scoped-out)
THURROCK COUNCIL – LANDSCAPE & ECOLOGY
It is noted that the site is close to the proposed Lower Thames Crossing. More details of proposed landscape mitigation for that scheme are available now and the landscape architects should consider any opportunities to ensure these two schemes complement each other.
Copies of the full responses can be viewed using the application reference number through the planning pages of the council’s website via the following link http://regs.thurrock.gov.uk/online-applications.
Please note that I have not yet received replies from some consultees. I recommend that you check the website over the next month to see if further comments are provided to assist you in preparing your Environmental Statement.
Assessment
Whilst the information provided within the EIA report is adequate, I draw your attention to the consultation responses with regard to the preparation of the Environmental Statement. It is considered the only environmental topic which needs to be scoped into the ES is landscape and visual impact. However, Schedule 4 (5) (e) of the Regulations refers to the cumulation of effects with other existing and/or approved projects and it should be noted that the application for a DCO for the Lower Thames Crossing has now been submitted and the Order Limits of the proposed DCO includes land within the site. The ES therefore needs to consider cumulative impacts. It is agreed that the soil and agricultural land quality impacts has already been addressed in the Screening Report and that they do not give rise to likely significant effects. Additionally, as there are no designated heritage assets within the red line area this has also been scoped out.
Decision
This response comprises the authority’s formal adoption of the Scoping Opinion under paragraph 15 of the above Regulations.
This decision is based upon consideration of the information provided within the initial screening opinion request.
Please note that once the Authority has received any future planning application, Environmental Statement and consultation responses, it reserves the right to request further information should the need arise.
I hope this information is of assistance and should you wish to discuss any aspect of this letter please contact me via the email address stated in this letter.
Yours sincerely
Lucy Mannion Senior Planning Officer
Client: Warley Green Solar Limited Title: R008: Technical Appendix - EIA Project Team Qualifications & Experience Project: Bulphan Fen Solar Farm and Battery Storage
Technical Appendix - EIA Project Team Qualifications & Experience
This Appendix provides information necessary to demonstrate compliance with Regulation 18 of the EIA Regulations 2017 which requires: Developers to “ensure that the environmental statement is prepared by competent experts”; and The Environmental Statement (ES) to be accompanied by a statement from the developer “outlining the relevant expertise or qualifications of such experts”.
Table 1 Individual Profiles Company Individual Profile Role Aardvark EM Nick Leaney Qualifications: EIA Co-ordinator BSc Hons Real Estate Management MRICS (from 1996 to date)
Relevant Experience and Expertise: 26 years commercial planning and development experience of which the last 16 years has been in project managing and advising on large scale energy and waste management planning applications, appeals and environmental impact assessment.
Aardvark EM Rachel Ness Qualifications: EIA Technical BSc Hons Town and Regional Planning Reviewer MRTPI from 1995 - 2003
Relevant Experience and Expertise: 27 years experience advising on major infrastructure planning applications and EIA development including for large scale energy projects and project managing multi- disciplinary teams in the preparation of the necessary planning and environmental assessment reports. Experience includes DCO NSIPs including preliminary environmental impact reporting and EIA and Welsh DNS applications and EIAs.
LDA Design Ruth Knight Qualifications: Landscape and BA (Hons), PG Dip, MA, CMLI Visual Impact
Relevant Experience and Expertise: Chartered Landscape Architect with over 19 years’ experience specialising in landscape and environmental planning and advising on EIA development including large scale energy projects.
Bulphan Fen Solar Farm
Appendices to Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment January 2021
A 17 Minster Precincts
Peterborough
PE1 1XX United Kingdom T 01733 310 471
W www.lda-design.co.uk
LDA Design Consulting Ltd Registered No. 09312403 17 Minster Precincts, Peterborough, PE1 1XX
7530
7530
Contents
Appendix 6.1 Glossary ...... 1 Appendix 6.2 Methodology ...... 3 Appendix 6.3 Visualisations and ZTV Studies ...... 12 Appendix 6.4 National Planning Policy ...... 14 Appendix 6.5 Extracts from Landscape Character Assessment ...... 17 Appendix 6.6 Consultation ...... 18 Appendix 6.7 Figures ...... 19
Version: 1.1
Version date: 11 January 2021
Comment Final
This document has been prepared and checked in accordance with ISO 9001:2015.
7530
January 2021 Bulphan Fen Solar Farm
Appendix 6.1 Glossary Cumulative effects. The additional changes caused by a proposed development in conjunction with other similar developments or as the combined effect of a set of developments, taken together. 1 Green Infrastructure (GI). The network of natural and semi-natural features within and between our villages, towns and cities. These features range in scale, from street trees, green roofs and private gardens through to parks, rivers and woodlands Landscape Character Areas These are single unique areas which are the discrete geographical areas of a particular landscape type. Each has its own individual character and identity, even though it shares the same generic characteristics with other types. 2 Landscape character type. These are distinct types of landscape that are relatively homogeneous in character. They are generic in nature in that they may occur in different areas in different parts of the country, but wherever they occur they share broadly similar combinations of geology, topography, drainage patterns, vegetation, historical land use, and settlement pattern. 2
Landscape effects. Effects on the landscape as a resource in its own right. 1 Landscape character. A distinct and recognisable pattern of elements in the landscape that makes one landscape different from another, rather than better or worse.2 Landscape quality (or condition). A measure of the physical state of the landscape. It may include the extent to which typical character is represented in individual areas, the intactness of the landscape and the condition of individual elements. 1 Landscape receptor. Defined aspects of the landscape resource that have the potential to be affected by a proposal. 1 Landscape value. The relative value that is attached to different landscapes by society. A landscape may be valued by different stakeholders for a whole variety of reasons. 1 Magnitude (of effect). A term that combines judgements about the size and scale of the effect, the extent of the area over which it occurs, whether it is reversible or irreversible and whether it is short or long term, in duration. 1 Mitigation. Measures which are proposed to prevent, reduce and where possible offset any significant adverse effects (or to avoid, reduce and if possible remedy identified effects).1 Sensitivity. A term applied to specific receptors, combining judgements of the susceptibility of the receptor to the specific type of change or development proposed and the value related to that receptor. 1 Susceptibility. The ability of a defined landscape or visual receptor to accommodate the specific proposed development without undue negative consequences. 1 Visual amenity. The overall pleasantness of the views people enjoy of their surroundings, which provides an attractive visual setting or backdrop for the enjoyment of activities of people living, working, recreating, visiting or travelling through an area. 1 Visual effect. Effects on specific views and on the general visual amenity experienced by people. 1
January 2021 Bulphan Fen Solar Farm
Visual receptor. Individuals and/or defined groups of people who have the potential to be affected by a proposal. 1 Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV). A map, usually digitally produced, showing areas of land within which a development is theoretically visible.1
1The Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment, 3rd Edition, Landscape Institute with the Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment, 2013
2 An Approach to Landscape Character Assessment Guidance for England and Scotland, Natural England, 2014.
January 2021 Bulphan Fen Solar Farm
Appendix 6.2 Methodology Introduction This appendix contains additional detail regarding the assessment methodology, supplementing the information provided within the LVIA text. This appendix sets out a standard approach – specific matters in terms of the scope of assessment, study area and modifications to the standard approach for this assessment are set out within the LVIA. The methodology has the following key stages, which are described in more detail in subsequent sections, as follows: Baseline – includes the gathering of documented information; agreement of the scope of the assessment with the EIA co-ordinator and local planning authority; site visits and initial reports to the EIAA co-ordinator of issues that may need to be addressed within the design. Design – input into the design / review of initial design / layout / options and mitigation options. Assessment – includes an assessment of the landscape and visual effects of the scheme, requiring site based work and the completion of a full report and supporting graphics. Cumulative Assessment – assesses the effects of the proposal in combination with other developments, where required.
Baseline The baseline study establishes the planning policy context, the scope of the assessment and the key receptors. It typically includes the following key activities: A desk study of relevant current national and local planning policy, in respect of landscape and visual matters, for the site and surrounding areas. Agreement of the main study area radius with the local planning authority. A desk study of nationally and locally designated landscapes for the site and surrounding areas. A desk study of existing landscape character assessments and capacity and sensitivity studies for the site and surrounding areas. A desk study of historic landscape character assessments (where available) and other information sources required to gain an understanding of the contribution of heritage assets to the present day landscape. Collation and evaluation of other indicators of local landscape value such as references in landscape character studies or parish plans, tourist information, local walking & cycling guides, references in art and literature. The identification of valued character types, landscape elements and features which may be affected by the proposal, including rare landscape types. Exchanging information with other consultants working on other assessment topics for the development as required to inform the assessment.
January 2021 Bulphan Fen Solar Farm
Draft Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) studies to assist in identifying potential viewpoints and indicate the potential visibility of the proposed development, and therefore scope of receptors likely to be affected. The methodology used in the preparation of ZTV studies is described within Appendix 6.3. The identification of and agreement upon, through consultation, the scope of assessment for cumulative effects. The identification of and agreement upon, through consultation, the number and location of representative and specific viewpoints within the study area. The identification of the range of other visual receptors (e.g. people travelling along routes, or within open access land, settlements and residential properties) within the study area. Site visits to become familiar with the site and surrounding landscape; verify documented baseline; and to identify viewpoints and receptors. Input to the design process. The information gathered during the baseline assessment is drawn together and summarised in the baseline section of the report and reasoned judgements are made as to which receptors are likely to be significantly affected. Only these receptors are then taken forward for the detailed assessment of effects (ref. GLVIA 3rd edition, 2013, para 3.19).
Design The design and assessment stages are necessarily iterative, with stages overlapping in parts. Details of any mitigation measures incorporated within the proposals to help reduce identified potential landscape and visual effects are set out within the LVIA.
Assessment The assessment of effects includes further desk and site based work, covering the following key activities: The preparation of a ZTV based on the finalised design for the development. An assessment, based on both desk study and site visits, of the sensitivity of receptors to the proposed development. An assessment, based on both desk study and site visits, of the magnitude and significance of effects upon the landscape character, designated and recreational landscape and the existing visual environment arising from the proposed development. An informed professional judgements as to whether each identified effect is positive, neutral or adverse. A clear description of the effects identified, with supporting information setting out the rationale for judgements. Identification of which effects are judged to be significant based on the significance thresholds set out within the LVIA The production of photomontages from a selection of the agreed viewpoints showing the anticipated view following construction of the proposed development.
January 2021 Bulphan Fen Solar Farm
Site The effect of physical changes to the site are assessed in terms of the effects on the landscape fabric. Landscape and Townscape Character Considerations The European Landscape Convention (2000) provides the following definition: “Landscape means an area, as perceived by people, whose character is the result of the action and interaction of natural and/or human factors.” And notes also in Article 2 that landscape includes “natural, rural, urban and peri-urban areas. It includes land, inland water and marine areas”. An Approach to Landscape Character Assessment (Natural England, 2014) defines landscape character as: “a distinct and recognisable pattern of elements, or characteristics, in the landscape that make one landscape different from another, rather than better or worse.” The susceptibility of landscape character areas is judged based on both the attributes of the receiving environment and the characteristics of the proposed development as discussed under ‘susceptibility’ within the methodology section of the LVIA. Thus, the key characteristics of the landscape character types/areas are considered, along with scale, openness, topography; the absence of, or presence, nature and patterns of development, settlement, landcover, the contribution of heritage assets and historic landscape elements and patterns, and land uses in forming the character. The condition of the receiving landscape, i.e. the intactness of the existing character will also be relevant in determining susceptibility. The likelihood of material effects on the landscape character areas can be judged based on the scale and layout of the proposal and how this relates to the characteristics of the receiving landscape. The introduction of any development into a landscape adds a new feature which can affect the ‘sense of place’ in its near vicinity, but with distance, the existing characteristics reassert themselves. The baseline is informed by desk study of published landscape character assessments and field survey. It is specifically noted within An Approach to Landscape Character Assessment (Natural England, 2014) that: “Our landscapes have evolved over time and they will continue to evolve – change is a constant but outcomes vary. The management of change is essential to ensure that we achieve sustainable outcomes – social, environmental and economic. Decision makers need to understand the baseline and the implications of their decisions for that baseline.” At page 51 it describes the function of Key Characteristics in landscape assessment, as follows: “Key characteristics are those combinations of elements which help to give an area its distinctive sense of place. If these characteristics change, or are lost, there would be significant consequences for the current character of the landscape. Key characteristics are particularly important in the development of planning and management policies. They are important for monitoring change and can provide a useful reference point against which landscape change can be assessed. They can be used as indicators to inform thinking about whether and how the landscape is changing and whether, or not, particular policies – for example – are effective and having the desired effect on landscape character.”
January 2021 Bulphan Fen Solar Farm
It follows from the above that in order to assess whether landscape character is significantly affected by a development, it should be determined how each of the key characteristics would be affected. The judgement of magnitude therefore reflects the degree to which the key characteristics and elements which form those characteristics will be altered by the proposals. Landscape value – considerations Paragraph 5.19 of GLVIA states that “A review of existing landscape designations is usually the starting point in understanding landscape value, but the value attached to undesignated landscapes also needs to be carefully considered and individual elements of the landscape- such as trees, buildings or hedgerows -may also have value. All need to be considered where relevant.” Paragraph 5.20 of GLVIA indicates information which might indicate landscape value, including: Information about areas recognised by statute such as National Parks, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty; Information about Heritage Coasts, where relevant; Local planning documents for local landscape designations; Information on features such as Conservation Areas, listed buildings, historic or cultural sites; Art and literature, identifying value attached to particular areas or views; and Material on landscapes of local or community interest, such as local green spaces, village greens or allotments. An assessment of landscape value is made based on the following factors outlined in Box 5.1 of GLVIA3: Landscape quality (condition); scenic quality; rarity; representativeness; conservation interest; recreational value; perceptual aspects; and associations. In addition to the above list, consideration is given to any evidence that indicates whether the landscape has particular value to people that would suggest that it is of greater than Community value. Viewpoints and Visual Receptors – considerations A wide variety of visual receptors can reasonably be anticipated to be affected by the proposed development. Within the baseline assessment, the ZTV study and site visits are used to determine which visual receptors are likely to be significantly affected and therefore merit detailed assessment. In line with guidance (GLVIA, 3rd Edition, 2013); both representative and specific viewpoints may be identified to inform the assessment. In general, the majority of viewpoints will be representative – representing the visual receptors at the distance and direction in which they are located and of the type(s) that would be present at that location. The representative viewpoints have generally been selected in locations where significant effects would be anticipated; though some may be selected outside of that zone – either to demonstrate the reduction of effects with distance; or to specifically ensure the representation of a particularly sensitive receptor. The types of visual receptors likely to be included with the assessment are: Users of walking routes or accessible landscapes including Public Rights of Way, National and Regional Trails and other long distance routes, Common Land, Open
January 2021 Bulphan Fen Solar Farm
Access Land, permissive paths, land held in trust (e.g. Woodland Trust, National Trust) offering free public access, and other regularly used, permitted walking routes; Visitors to and residents of settlements; Visitors to specific valued viewpoints; Visitors to attractions or heritage assets for which landscape and views contribute to the experience; and Users of roads or identified scenic routes. Visual receptors are grouped for assessment into areas which include all of the routes, public spaces and homes within that area. Groups are selected as follows: • Based around settlements in order to describe effects on that that community – e.g. a settlement and routes radiating from that settlement; or • An area of open countryside encompassing a number of routes, accessible spaces and individual dwellings; or • An area of accessible landscape and the routes within and around it e.g. a country park; and • such that effects within a single visual receptor group are similar enough to be readily described and assessed.
With the exception of specific viewpoints, each route, settlement or location will encompass a range of possible views, which might vary from no view of the development to very clear, close views. Therefore effects are described in such a way as to identify where views towards the development are likely to arise and what the scale, duration and extent of those views are likely to be. In some cases this will be further informed by a nearby viewpoint and in others it will be informed with reference to the ZTV, aerial photography and site visits. Each of these individual effects are then considered together in order to reach a judgement of the effects on the visual receptors along that route, or in that place. The representative viewpoints are used as ‘samples’ on which to base judgements of the scale of effects on visual receptors. The viewpoints represent multiple visual receptors, and duration and extent are judged when assessing impacts on the visual receptors. For specific viewpoints (key and sometimes promoted viewpoints within the landscape), duration and extent are assessed, with extent reflecting the extent to which the development affects the valued qualities of the view from the specific viewpoint.
January 2021 Bulphan Fen Solar Farm
Visual Receptor Sensitivity – typical examples
High Medium Low 1 4 8 National/International 2 5 8 Local/District 3 6 9 Community 7 10 Limited
1) Visitors to valued viewpoints or routes which people might visit purely to experience the view, e.g. promoted or well-known viewpoints, routes from which views that form part of the special qualities of a designated landscape can be well appreciated; key designed views; panoramic viewpoints marked on maps. 2) People in locations where they are likely to pause to appreciate the view, such as from local waypoints such as benches; or at key views to/from local landmarks. Visitors to local attractions, heritage assets or public parks where views are an important contributor to the experience, or key views into/out of Conservation Areas. 3) People in the streets around their home, or using public rights of way, navigable waterways or accessible open space (public parks, open access land). 4) Users of promoted scenic rail routes. 5) Users of promoted scenic local road routes. 6) Users of cycle routes, local roads and railways. 7) Outdoor workers. 8) Users of A-roads which are nationally or locally promoted scenic routes. 9) Users of sports facilities such as cricket grounds and golf courses. 10) Users of Motorways and A-roads; shoppers at retail parks, people at their (indoor) places of work.
January 2021 Bulphan Fen Solar Farm
Preparation and use of Visuals The ZTVs are used to inform the field study assessment work, providing additional detail and accuracy to observations made on site. Photomontages may also be produced in order to assist readers of the assessment in visualising the proposals but are not used in reaching judgements of effect. The preparation of the ZTVs (and photomontages where applicable) is informed by the Landscape Institute’s Advice Note 01/11 – ‘Photography and photomontage in landscape and visual impact assessment’ and SNH ‘Visual Representation of Wind Farms Best Practice Guidance’ (both the 2007 and 2017 editions). The following points should be borne in mind in respect of the ZTV study: Areas shown as having potential visibility may have visibility of the development obscured by local features such as trees, hedgerows, embankments or buildings. A detailed description of the methods by which ZTVs and visualisations are prepared is included in Appendix 6.4. In addition to the main visualisations, illustrative views are used as appropriate to illustrate particular points made within the assessment. These are not prepared to the same standard as they simply depict existing views, character or features rather than forming the basis for visualisations. Cumulative Assessment Cumulative assessment relates to the assessment of the effects of more than one development. A search area from the proposal site (typically of a similar scale to the study area) is agreed with the planning authority. For each of the identified cumulative schemes agreement is reached with the Planning Authority as to whether and how they should be included in the assessment. Only operational and consented developments are considered, unless specific circumstances indicate that a development in planning should be included, with progressively decreasing emphasis placed on those which are less certain to proceed. Typically, operational and consented developments are treated as being part of the landscape and visual baseline. i.e. it is assumed that consented schemes will be built except for occasional exceptions where there is good reason to assume that they will not be constructed. The cumulative assessment examines the same groups of landscape and visual receptors as the assessment for the main scheme, though different viewpoints may be used in order to better represent the likely range of effects arising from the combination of schemes. The assessment is informed by cumulative ZTVs as necessary, showing the extent of visual effects of the schemes in different colours to illustrate where visibility of more than one development is likely to arise. Cumulative wirelines or photomontages may also be prepared. In addition, the effects on users of routes through the area, from which developments may be sequentially visible as one passes through the landscape are also considered, if appropriate. This assessment is based on the desk study of ZTVs and aerial photography, and site visits to travel along the routes being assessed. In relation to landscape and visual cumulative assessment, it is important to note the following:
January 2021 Bulphan Fen Solar Farm
For each assessed receptor, combined cumulative effects may be the same as for the application scheme, or greater (where the influence of multiple schemes would increase effects, or where schemes in planning other than the application scheme would have the predominant effects). For each assessed receptor, incremental cumulative effects may be the same as for the application scheme, or reduced (where the influence of other schemes in planning would be such that were they consented and considered to be part of the baseline, the incremental change arising from the addition of the application scheme would be less). Subject to the distance and degree of intervening landform, vegetation and structures there may be no cumulative effects. The way in which the assessment is described and presented is varied depending on the number and nature of scenarios which may arise. This variation is needed in order to convey to the reader the key points of each assessment. For example, the three different cumulative combinations that may arise for an assessment in which there are two existing undetermined applications each can be assessed individually. A situation in which there are 10 applications cannot reasonably be assessed in this way and the developments may need to be grouped for analysis.
Residential Amenity
Paragraph 6.17 of GLVIA, 3rd edition notes that: “In some instances it may also be appropriate to consider private viewpoints, mainly from residential properties…. Effects of development in private property are frequently dealt with mainly through ‘residential amenity assessments’. These are separate from LVIA although visual effects assessment may sometimes be carried out as part of a residential amenity assessment, in which case this will supplement and form part of the LVIA for a project. Some of the principles set out here for dealing with visual effects may help in such assessments but there are specific requirements in residential amenity assessment”
When dealing with effects on residential properties, the outlook from a private property is essentially a private matter. The difference between that private interest and what should be protected in the public interest has been the subject of particular focus at Public Inquiries in relation to wind farm cases and the lessons learnt from Inspector’s decisions have informed how effects on views from residential properties influence a planning decision. This is fully described and set out in paragraphs 209-211 of the decision regarding Spring Farm Ridge wind farm (APP/Z2830/A/11/2165035 – December 2014), which sets out the approach that in considering effects on private residential amenity – whether effects are visually significant is not relevant – effects which fall below the threshold of being “so unpleasant, overwhelming and oppressive that this would become an unattractive place to live” (known as the Lavender Test) “would not feature in the planning balance, irrespective of how many dwellings were so affected”. The Inspector’s report also makes clear that this is a separate exercise to “weighing in the balance, as a component of the character and appearance issue, the effects on the locality generally that would derive from visual effects on resident receptors”, which is covered within the assessment of effects on visual receptors. The Spring Farm Ridge Inspector’s decision is for a wind farm but makes it clear that “the level of impact or threshold at which the public interest would be so engaged should be no different for wind turbines than would be the threshold applicable to other types of development.” Wind farms are unusually tall developments with a greater chance that they could have such an effect.
January 2021 Bulphan Fen Solar Farm
Most forms of development are unlikely to cause effects of such a high magnitude to render a property an unattractive place in which to live unless in very close to the property and occupying a large proportion of views. Residential properties closest to the site are viewed on site and from aerial photography to consider whether a residential amenity assessment is required. Where such an assessment is required, it is provided as an appendix to the LVIA.
January 2021 Bulphan Fen Solar Farm
Appendix 6.3 Visualisations and ZTV Studies ZTV Studies ZTV studies are prepared using the ESRI ArcGIS Viewshed routine. This creates a raster image that indicates the visibility (or not) of the points modelled. LDA Design undertake a ZTV study that is designed to include visual barriers from settlements and woodlands (with heights derived from NEXTMAP 25 surface mapping data). If significant deviations from these assumed heights are noted during site visits, for example young or felled areas of woodland, or recent changes to built form, the features concerned will be adjusted within the model or the adoption of a digital surface model will be used to obtain actual heights for these barriers. In this instance NextMap25 data has been used to include buildings and vegetation in the ZTV model. The model is also designed to take into account both the curvature of the earth and light refraction, informed by the SNH guidance. LDA Design undertake all ZTV studies with observer heights of 2m. The ZTV analysis begins at 1m from the observation feature and will work outwards in a grid of the set resolution until it reaches the end of the terrain map for the project. For all plan production LDA Design will produce a ZTV that has a base and overlay of the 1:50,000 Ordnance Survey Raster mapping or better. The ZTV will be reproduced at a suitable scale on an A3 template to encompass the study area. Ground model accuracy Depending on the project and level of detail required, different height datasets may be used. Below is listed the different data products and their specifications:
Product Distance Between Points Vertical RMSE Error LiDAR 50cm – 2m up to +/- 5cm
Photogrammetrically Derived 2m – 5m up to +/- 1.5m Heights Ordnance Survey OS terrain 5 5 m up to +/- 2.5m NextMap25 DTM 25 m +/- 2.06m
Ordnance Survey OS terrain 50 50 m +/- 4m
Site-specific topographical survey data may also be used where available. Photomontages and Photowires Verified / verifiable photomontages are produced in seven stages. Photowires are produced using the same overall approach, but only require some of the steps outlined below. 1) Photography is undertaken using a digital SLR camera and 50mm equivalent lens. A tripod is used to take overlapping photographs which are joined together using an industry standard application to create a single panoramic image for each viewpoint. These are then saved at a fixed height and resolution to enable correct sizing when reproduced in the final images. The photographer also notes the GPS location of the viewpoint and takes bearings to visible landmarks whilst at the viewpoint.
January 2021 Bulphan Fen Solar Farm
2) Creation of a ground model and 3D mesh to illustrate that model. This is created using NextMap25 DTM point data (or occasionally other terrain datasets where required, such as site-specific topographical data or Photogrammetrically Derived Heights) and ground modelling software. 3) The addition of the proposed development to the 3D model. The main components of the proposed development are accurately modelled in CAD and are then inserted into the 3D model at the proposed locations and elevations. 4) Wireline generation – The viewpoints are added within the 3D CAD model with each observer point being inserted at 1.5m above the modelled ground plane. The location of the landmarks identified by the photographer may also be included in the model. The view from the viewpoint is then is then replicated using virtual cameras to create a series of single frame images, which also include bearing markers. As with the photographs, these single frame images are joined together using an industry standard application to create a single panoramic image for each viewpoint. These are then saved at a fixed height and resolution to ensure that they are the same size as the photographs. 5) Wireline matching – The photographs are matched to the wirelines using a combination of the visible topography, bearing markers and the landmarks that have been included in the 3D model. 6) For the photomontage, an industry standard 3D rendering application is used to produce a rendered 3D view of the proposed development from the viewpoint. The rendering uses materials to match the intended surface finishes of the development and lighting conditions according to the date and time of the viewpoint photograph. 7) The rendered development is then added to the photograph in the position identified by the wireline (using an image processing application) to ensure accuracy. The images are then layered to ensure that the development appears in front of and behind the correct elements visible within the photograph. Where vegetation is proposed as part of the development, this is then added to the final photomontage.
January 2021 Bulphan Fen Solar Farm
Appendix 6.4 National Planning Policy The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF, February 2019) makes clear that the purpose of planning is to help achieve sustainable development (Section 2), and that design (Section 12), and effects on the natural environment (Section 15) are important components of this. Paragraph 11 sets out that in determining applications for development this means that developments which accord with an up-to-date development plan should be approved. Where the development plan is not fit for the purpose of determining the application, paragraph 11 directs that the permission should be granted unless “any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in this Framework taken as a whole” or “the application of policies in this Framework that protect areas or assets of particular importance provides a clear reason for refusing the development proposed”. The areas or assets of particular importance in respect of landscape and visual matters referred to within the relevant footnote 6 are: Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB); National Parks including the Norfolk Broads; Heritage Coast. The list also includes important and/or irreplaceable habitats, designated heritage assets, areas at risk of flooding or coastal change, and land-use designations (Green Belt, Local Green Space). Section 11 sets out considerations in ‘Making Effective Use of Land’ and notes in paragraph 122 that in respect of development density the considerations should include whether a place is well-designed and “the desirability of maintaining an area’s prevailing character and setting … or of promoting regeneration and change”. Paragraph 127 of the NPPF indicates that decisions should ensure that developments: “a) will function well and add to the overall quality of the area, not just for the short term but over the lifetime of the development; b) are visually attractive as a result of good architecture, layout and appropriate and effective landscaping; c) are sympathetic to local character and history, including the surrounding built environment and landscape setting, while not preventing or discouraging appropriate innovation or change (such as increased densities); d) establish or maintain a strong sense of place, using the arrangement of streets, spaces, building types and materials to create attractive, welcoming and distinctive places to live, work and visit; e) optimise the potential of the site to accommodate and sustain an appropriate amount and mix of development (including green and other public space) …
Section 15 of the NPPF covers both ecological and landscape matters. Paragraph 170 requires that decisions should contribute by: “a) protecting and enhancing valued landscapes, … (in a manner commensurate with their statutory status or identified quality in the development plan);
January 2021 Bulphan Fen Solar Farm
b) recognising the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside, and the wider benefits from natural capital and ecosystem services – including the economic and other benefits of the best and most versatile agricultural land, and of trees and woodland; c) maintaining the character of the undeveloped coast, while improving public access to it where appropriate; …”
In respect of valued landscapes, paragraph 171 notes that planning policy should “distinguish between the hierarchy of international, national and locally designated sites”. Paragraphs 172 and 173 require that: “Great weight should be given to conserving and enhancing 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 these issues. The conservation and enhancement of wildlife and cultural heritage are also important considerations in these areas, and should be given great weight in National Parks and the Broads. The scale and extent of development within these designated areas should be limited. Planning permission should be refused for major development other than in exceptional circumstances, and where it can be demonstrated that the development is in the public interest. Consideration of such applications should include an assessment of: a) 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; b) the cost of, and scope for, developing outside the designated area, or meeting the need for it in some other way; and c) any detrimental effect on the environment, the landscape and recreational opportunities, and the extent to which that could be moderated. 173. Within areas defined as Heritage Coast (and that do not already fall within one of the designated areas mentioned in paragraph 172), planning policies and decisions should be consistent with the special character of the area and the importance of its conservation. Major development within a Heritage Coast is unlikely to be appropriate, unless it is compatible with its special character.”
Footnote 55 notes that “whether a proposal is ‘major development’ is a matter for the decision maker, taking into account its nature, scale and setting, and whether it could have a significant adverse impact on the purposes for which the area has been designated or defined”.
Paragraph 180 requires decisions to ensure that “new development is appropriate for its location” including by limiting the impact of light pollution on local amenity and “intrinsically dark landscapes”.
Planning Practice Guidance for Natural Environment, January 2016 This document is intended to explain the key issues in implementing policy to protect biodiversity, but also contains a section on landscape. This section reiterates the policy set out in the NPPF, clarifying that development outside National Parks and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty “might have an impact on the setting of, and implementation of, the statutory purposes of these protected areas” (para 003), that “National Parks and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty management plans may also be material considerations in making decisions on individual planning applications, where they raise relevant issues” (para 004) and that Natural England has published advice on Heritage Coasts. This guidance indicates that heritage coasts are “managed to conserve their natural beauty and, where appropriate, to improve accessibility for visitors”.
Planning Practice Guidance for Design, March 2014 The guidance sets out principles in respect of the design of a development, noting that:
January 2021 Bulphan Fen Solar Farm
“Achieving good design is about creating places, buildings, or spaces that work well for everyone, look good, last well, and will adapt to the needs of future generations. Good design responds in a practical and creative way to both the function and identity of a place. It puts land, water, drainage, energy, community, economic, infrastructure and other such resources to the best possible use – over the long as well as the short term.”
In respect of the determining applications and the relationship between a proposal and the surrounding townscape, the guidance notes that: “Local planning authorities are required to take design into consideration and should refuse permission for development of poor design. Local planning authorities should give great weight to outstanding or innovative designs which help to raise the standard of design more generally in the area. This could include the use of innovative construction materials and techniques. Planning permission should not be refused for buildings and infrastructure that promote high levels of sustainability because of concerns about incompatibility with an existing townscape, if those concerns have been mitigated by good design…”
In respect of local character, the guidance further notes that: “Development should seek to promote character in townscape and landscape by responding to and reinforcing locally distinctive patterns of development, local man-made and natural heritage and culture, while not preventing or discouraging appropriate innovation.
The successful integration of all forms of new development with their surrounding context is an important design objective, irrespective of whether a site lies on the urban fringe or at the heart of a town centre.
When thinking about new development the site’s land form should be taken into account. Natural features and local heritage resources can help give shape to a development and integrate it into the wider area, reinforce and sustain local distinctiveness, reduce its impact on nature and contribute to a sense of place. Views into and out of larger sites should also be carefully considered from the start of the design process.
Local building forms and details contribute to the distinctive qualities of a place. These can be successfully interpreted in new development without necessarily restricting the scope of the designer. Standard solutions rarely create a distinctive identity or make best use of a particular site. The use of local materials, building methods and details can be an important factor in enhancing local distinctiveness when used in evolutionary local design, and can also be used in more contemporary design. However, innovative design should not be discouraged.
The opportunity for high quality hard and soft landscape design that helps to successfully integrate development into the wider environment should be carefully considered from the outset, to ensure it complements the architecture of the proposals and improves the overall quality of townscape or landscape. Good landscape design can help the natural surveillance of an area, creatively help differentiate public and private space and, where appropriate, enhance security.”
January 2021 Bulphan Fen Solar Farm
Appendix 6.5 Extracts from Landscape Character Assessment Land of the Fanns Landscape Character Assessment (2016) − LCA J: Thurrock Reclaimed Fen
31
3.4 Thurrock Reclaimed Fen
Location and extent Thurrock Reclaimed Fens is located centrally in the Project Area forming a low lying inland basin which contrasts with the rising land of the Brentwood Wooded Hills to the north, Ockendon Rolling Farmland to the west, Langdon Hills to the east and Orsett Lowland Farmland to the south. These areas of adjacent rising land form an important backdrop and setting to this landscape.
This landscape falls within the Greater London Greenbelt and partly within the Thames Chase Community Forest area.
Key Characteristics • London Clay geology with alluvial deposits associated with the upper reaches of the Mardyke and tributaries. • Flat, open and exposed landscape with expansive views extending to the 15-20m contour at its fringes. • Land use is predominately arable in large to medium sized fields but formerly extensive areas of fen. • Within the lowest lying areas there are few field boundaries and fields are drained by ditches. • Hedgerows of mainly blackthorn and elm occur mainly in the outer fringes of the area. • Woodland blocks are infrequent and rectilinear and recently planted with the exception of Clay Tye Wood. • Willow and poplar are prevalent along ditches and watercourses. • Place names reflect former areas of marsh and fen landscape which are steeped in history and folklore. • Sparse settlement comprising dispersed pattern of farms and village of Bulphan and more recent development at West Horndon associated with the railway. • There are numerous waterbodies in this landscape including field ponds and also reservoirs which are not visually significant. • Strong rectilinear patterns as a result of field divisions, drainage
Alison Farmer Associates Land of the Fanns Landscape Character Assessment Final Report Updated August 2016
32
ditches, hedgerows (often gappy) and causeway lanes. • Settlement is dispersed and sparse and restricted to slight rising land or fen edges.
What makes the Thurrock Reclaimed Fens special?
Strong Rectilinear Patterns This is a planned landscape with field boundaries marked by drainage ditches and hedgerows. Fields tend to be large and geometric, a pattern reinforced by linear roads along the causeways.
These lanes and tracks are defined by wide grass verges and hawthorn/elm hedgerows. Hedgerow trees are absent but historically, hedgerows would have contained mature Elm trees.
Open Expansive Views Due to limited tree and hedgerow cover and relatively flat topography this area has an expansive character with extensive views in all directions to the rising land particularly to the Brentwood Hills in the north. The higher land at the edges of this landscape type define its extent and contrast with its simple character and patterns. Vertical structures are highly visible and large farm or industrial buildings, sometimes associated with conifer shelterbelts, form focal points. Wide skies are also a distinguishing feature of this landscape.
Watery Place Names The village of Bulphan is a significant feature in this otherwise sparsely settled landscape. It lies in the south east of the character area. It is recorded in the Domesday Survey as Bulgenen meaning marshland in a fortified place. Phan, relates to fan, the Saxon word for fen. There are a number of moated houses in the village, including Appleton’s Farm, dating from 15th century and Spring Farm on the Orsett Road. The land at Bulphan was owned and farmed by the Abbey of Barking. Farming would not have been the arable farming which now predominates as the landscape will have comprised a mosaic of large tracts of swamp, marsh and perhaps willow scrub and Alder woodland.
West Horndon, in the north of the character area appears to be a larger settlement because there is an industrial estate associated with it. The village was part of land belonging to a number of manors including Tillingham Hall and Little Warley. Tillingham Hall which still exists today, was the seat of the largest manor. It is recorded in the Domesday Book and was passed to the Tillingham family who owned it for several hundred years before it was conveyed to Coggeshall Abbey which restricted the rights of commons in the area meaning that the land became a mixture of scrub, marsh and woodland, ideal as a hunting ground for later landowners.
Little Warley, a small, linear hamlet in the north west of the character area was associated with Little Warley Hall, a 15th century manor house partly
Alison Farmer Associates Land of the Fanns Landscape Character Assessment Final Report Updated August 2016
33 rebuilt during the 16th century. There are fragments of a moat to the south and west of the site which suggests a previous manor may have stood on the site. This was a wooded landscape during the medieval period with marshland sheep pasture.
Highlights in this Area • Low lying geometric landscape with strong lines and repetitive patterns reflecting early enclosure of fenland and marsh. • Open and extensive views giving rise to a feeling of relative remoteness and wide skies. • Bulphan is a medieval village. • High potential for paleo-environmental deposits and surviving archaeology. • Significant number of medieval moated sites in area indicative of a dispersed settlement pattern. • Remnant fen landscape at Orsett Fen, Bulphan Fen and Stringcock Fen. • Area popular for cycling due to flat topography.
What is changing in this area? • Intensive agriculture resulting in loss of wet pasture/fen to arable land use, significant field aggregation and loss of infield ponds. • Loss of traditional boundary features such as hedges impacts on the pattern of the landscape and visual cohesion. • Development of large farms and associated large scale buildings with planting of conifer wind breaks. • Growth of settlement and in particular West Horndon with associated industrial estate due to location on railway line. • Urbanisation adjacent to this landscape can cause visual intrusion on the flat and open character. • Recreational uses, such as golf courses impact upon the agricultural character of the landscape.
How should we manage the change? This landscape has a moderate-low landscape quality as a result of intensive farming and gradual loss of defining characteristics which reflected its wetland past. Opportunities include:
• Restore fen landscapes at Orsett Fen, Bulphan Fen and Stringcock Fen - all of which have been lost in the last 50 years, by altering current drainage and land use. • Restore/reinstate infield ponds and improve management of those that survive.
Alison Farmer Associates Land of the Fanns Landscape Character Assessment Final Report Updated August 2016
34
• Improve interpretation into the historic place names and features in this landscape through use of existing recreational routes, or specific new trails. • Enhance people's connections with and understanding of this landscape through community archaeological excavations which can help to tell the story of this landscape. • Restore hedgerows and some areas of small copses and hedgerow trees where feasible to improve landscape structure and legibility whilst still retaining the predominate expansive character of the area.
Alison Farmer Associates Land of the Fanns Landscape Character Assessment Final Report Updated August 2016
January 2021 Bulphan Fen Solar Farm
Appendix 6.6 Consultation Consultation with Thurrock Council
PlumbAssociates
Communities Environment
Magnolia Lodge, Franklin Road, North Fambridge, Essex, CM3 6NF
Tel: 01621 744710 Email: [email protected] Web: www.plumb-associates.co.uk
Your ref: 20/01296/SCO
Lucy Mannion Planning Department Civic Offices New Road Grays Essex RM17 6SL
27th October 2020 Dear Lucy
Location: Land At Bulphan Fen Harrow Lane Bulphan Essex Proposal: Request for an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Scoping Opinion: Proposed solar farm and battery storage
Plumb Associates is contracted to provide landscape, arboriculture and ecology advice with regard to planning matters to Thurrock Council; the comments set out below are provided as part of this arrangement.
Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment
The site is within the Mardyke Valley, an area which has few settlements and is mainly used for agriculture. The former fenland character means there are long, expansive views with relatively few trees or hedges present. It is an area of locally high landscape character.
It is proposed to provide a standalone Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment undertaken in accordance with the best practice guidance.
Section 4.1 of the Request for Screening Opinion refers to the Thurrock Landscape Capacity Study, which was prepared in 2005 principally to inform large-scale residential development. It is recommended that the landscape architects review the Land of the Fanns Landscape Character Assessment prepared in 2016 which will be more appropriate.
The zone of visual influence has been prepared and submitted (appendix 2). It is necessary for the consultants to agree viewpoints and photomontages/visualisations.
The broad principles to minimise landscape and visual effects are considered appropriate. The LPA would welcome opportunities to comment on emerging designs to ensure that they complement and enhance green infrastructure objectives within this area.
It is noted that the site is close to the proposed Lower Thames Crossing. More detail of proposed landscape mitigation for that scheme are available now and the landscape architects should consider any opportunities to ensure these two schemes complement each other.
Ecological Impact Assessment
Section 4.3 summarises the surveys that have been undertaken to date. Most of the site is still in arable production and I would agree that ecologically important habitats will be confined to the field edges and watercourses. I agree with the list of species to be scoped out given the lack of suitable habitat for them on site.
The overall approach including the proposal for a Landscape and Ecology Management Pan are supported. As mentioned above consideration should be given to how mitigation on this site could complement being proposed for the adjacent Lower Thames Crossing.
The scheme will seek to deliver Biodiversity Net Gain. At present Thurrock Council does not have an official policy for BNG. The Defra metric is being used for other schemes; however this is something that is being reviewed by the council.
Conclusion
A landscape and visual impact assessment and ecological impact assessment carried out in accordance with standard best practice will be provided with the application. It is considered that these should be sufficient to determine the overall effects. It will be important that consideration is given to the cumulative effects of the proposed Lower Thames Crossing and opportunities for mitigation measures to complement each other.
Yours sincerely,
Steve Plumb Director
Registered company limited by guarantee No: 06558777 - Directors: Steve Plumb, Julia Plumb
Lucy Mannion Planning Department Civic Offices New Road Grays Essex RM17 6SL SENT VIA EMAIL
7509/LM/RK 17 November 2020 Land at Bulphan Fen, Harrow Lane, Bulphan, Essex LPA ref. 20/01296/SCO
Dear Lucy LDA Design Consulting Ltd (LDA Design) has been appointed to provide professional landscape services in support of the proposed solar farm and battery storage facility Land at Bulphan Fen, Harrow Lane, Bulphan, Essex (the “Site”), on behalf of the applicant ENSO Energy. Part of LDA Design’s appointment is to prepare a Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) that will be submitted as part of the forthcoming planning application. This letter serves to further set out LDA Design’s intended approach following the submission of the screening and scoping report to Thurrock Council (ref. 20/01296/SCO), and to confirm agreement to our proposed location of viewpoints, extent of study area and key reference documents that would inform the assessment of potential landscape and visual effects. We would be grateful if you could review the following information and confirm your agreement to the LVIA’s approach; viewpoint locations; and study area at the earliest opportunity. Methodology The approach to the assessment will follow LDA Design’s established LVIA methodology, which considers impacts to both landscape character and visual receptors and draws upon established and best practice guidance. These include:
A 17 Minster Precincts Peterborough PE1 1XX United Kingdom T 01733 310 471
W www.lda-design.co.uk
LDA Design Consulting Ltd Registered No. 09312403 17 Minster Precincts, Peterborough, PE1 1XX
2 of 5
The Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (3rd Edition), Landscape Institute and Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment, 2013; and An Approach to Landscape Character Assessment, Natural England, 2014. LVIA Study Area It is proposed that a study area defined by a 3km radius from the site boundary is used for the purposes of the LVIA. This extent is based on the findings of a field survey; preliminary Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) modelling, desk-based analysis; and previous experience of the Site’s local context and similar projects of this nature. It is judged that a 3km study area would cover all potential significant landscape and visual effects arising from the proposed development and any associated construction works. The study area includes the settlements of Bulphan, Orsett, part of South Ockendon, North Ockendon and West Horndon alongside numerous recreational routes (footpaths, bridleways etc.) and local roads. Landscape Character The LVIA will include an assessment of the effects of the proposed development on landscape character within the extent of the study area. Consideration will also be given to the effects of the proposed development on the physical fabric of the Site itself. Reference will be made to the following relevant landscape character assessments: National Character Area Profiles. Thurrock Council Landscape Capacity Study, 2005. Land of the Fanns Landscape Character Assessment, 2016. The framework for the assessment of effects on landscape character will be the Land of the Fanns Landscape Character Assessment supplemented with information from the other sources listed above; relevant policy and guidance documents; and field observations. Viewpoints and Visual Receptors A variety of visual receptors can reasonably be anticipated to be affected by the proposed development. Initial ZTV modelling and fieldwork have been used to determine which visual receptors are likely to be affected and merit detailed consideration in the assessment effects. In accordance with guidance (GLVIA, 3rd Edition, 2013), representative, illustrative, and specific viewpoints may be identified to inform the assessment. It is important to note that the ZTV represents a theoretical model of potential visibility of the proposed development, and is based on a computer-generated terrain model that often has not accounted for any localised features such as small copses, hedgerows or individual trees; and / or small elements of built form. As a result, the extent of actual visibility on the ground will be less than suggested by the ZTV study.
3 of 5
The initial ZTV study (shown on the enclosed plan 7509_LVIA_004) has been modelled on solar panel heights of 3.5m and indicates that theoretical visibility of the proposed development would be possible in all directions from the Site. A preliminary assessment from desk-study and fieldwork indicates that potential landscape character and visual effects would likely be limited to the Site and its local context up to approximately 3km in all directions. Areas at greater distance (i.e. beyond approximately 3km from the Site’s boundary) are unlikely to experience any notable or perceptible change to their prevailing characteristics, owing to the limited intervisibility of the proposed development as a result of vegetation, built development and landform within the intervening landscape. The viewpoints have been selected in publicly accessible locations and generally where the greatest potential effects are anticipated to be experienced. The viewpoint locations represent a wide range of receptors, providing a ‘sample’ of the potential effects from the locality, with some locations purposely selected outside of that zone of greatest effects to either demonstrate the reduction of effects with distance; or to specifically ensure the representation of a particularly sensitive receptor. The proposed study area and location of the 11 proposed viewpoints are shown on the plan 7509_LVIA_004 enclosed with this letter. The locations identified may be used for either representative or illustrative viewpoints to illustrate and describe particular points made within the assessment. Details of the proposed viewpoints are presented in Table 1 below.
TABLE 1: PROPOSED VIEWPOINT LOCATIONS Direction & Approx. Grid Viewpoint Reference Representative Receptors Distance Reference Viewpoint 1 Public rights of way users 280m North 562244, Junction of 185023 Bridleway 219 and Footpaths 136 and 89 Viewpoint 2 Public rights of way users 0m within 563069, Footpath 159 near the Site 184842 The Downes Viewpoint 3 Public rights of way/open 500m South 562724, Footpath 90 through access land users 183621 Orsett Fen Viewpoint 4 Public rights of way users 0m West 561177, Footpath 135 along 184838 site boundary near Fen Farm Cottages Viewpoint 5 Public rights of way users 1km East 561067, LB Havering 186043 Footpath 233
4 of 5
Viewpoint 6 Public rights of way users 1.7km 561998, Footpath 4 near North 187079 Tillingham House Viewpoint 7 Residents and public rights of 470m North 563587, Bulphan (Footpath way users East 185773 160) Viewpoint 8 Public rights of way users 2.2km East 565474, Footpath 91 on rising 185533 landform near Langdon Hill Viewpoint 9 Residents and public rights of 2.1km 563268, Footpath 90 near way users South 182078 Orsett Viewpoint 10 Residents and public rights of 2km South 560138, South Ockendon way users West 182752 (Footpath 134) Viewpoint 11 Public rights of way users 1.1km West 560046, Footpath 135 north of 184168 The Widlerness
Supporting Visualisations The LVIA will include panoramic photographs from representative and illustrative viewpoints that will be illustrated on annotated panels in accordance with Landscape Institute best practice guidance. We also propose that 2-3 fully rendered photomontage visualisations are produced to support the LVIA. The proposed locations for these will be determined following a further site visit to take photography and determine the most suitable locations for the visualisations. However, initial site visits indicate that Viewpoints 7 and 11 would form a good basis for understanding how the proposals fit within the surrounding context. Designated Landscapes No designated landscapes (National Parks, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty or locally designated landscapes) have been identified within the extent of the proposed study area. It is acknowledged that the Site lies within the extent of the Metropolitan Green Belt. Whilst this is a spatial-planning designation, the application will include a separate assessment on the potential harm to the Green Belt designation. Cumulative Assessment Cumulative assessment relates to the assessment of the effects of more than one development. In accordance with LDA Design’s methodology, operational and consented development are treated as being part of the landscape and visual baseline. i.e. it is assumed that consented schemes will be built except for occasional exceptions where there is good
5 of 5
reason to assume that they will not be constructed. The consented solar farm at South Ockendon Quarry would fall within this category. It is assumed that the Lower Thames Crossing proposals should be considered as part of the cumulative assessment. Please confirm if there are any other in-planning developments that are to be included within the cumulative LVIA assessment. Design The Landscape Architect plays a leading role in the design process; and the masterplanning, design and assessment stages are inevitably iterative with stages overlapping in parts. Details of any mitigation measures incorporated within the proposals to help reduce identified potential landscape and visual effects will be set out in the relevant sections of the LVIA. A Landscape and Ecology Management Plan, joint authored by LDA Design, will be submitted as part of the application. Next Steps As stated at the beginning of this letter, I would be grateful if you could review the information above and confirm your agreement. Should you have any queries or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me by return email. If more convenient to speak over the phone, I would welcome an opportunity to discuss this with you. I look forward to receiving your response in due course. Yours sincerely,
Ruth Knight Associate [email protected]
Enc. 7509_LVIA_004 LEGEND
Sitebounda ry
Distan c efrom Sitebounda an2 d3km(1, ry )
Settlem en t
Woodlan d
ZoneTheoreticaof Visibility l (computer(ZTV) gen erated)- b a sedonma ximumpan elheight 3.5mof
6 . Viewpoints .
5
. Thisdrawing bais sedupon computer gen eratedZone Theoreticaof Visibility l (ZTV) 7 studiesproduced using theviewshed routinein the ESRIArcGIS The Suite. area s shownarethe ma ximumtheoretica visibility, l taking intoac ctopography, ount princ ipal . woodlan dsan dsettlem which en ts, ha vebeen inc ludedinthe model with theheights 8 obtainedfromNextma should beIt noted25. p inthasome t area woodlan s dsinc luded withintheZTV ma ycomprise ac resulting tive forestry, in the felling an dreplan tingof . somearea modelled s inthe ZTVThe study. ZTVstudy reflec apatternthisat ts spec ificbapointinis time, asit sed onrea height l informa Whilst tion. thefelling cycle :70_ALY OA_AM NDBTEY TRG\GSPOET\59LI_0_T.XD STORAGE\8GIS\PROJECTS\7509_LVIA_004_ZTV.MX AN D_BATTERY_ SOLAR_FARM_ Z:\7509_WARLEY_ willaltertheheights differenof area overforestry t oftime, s altering loca lisedvisual effecthewider ts, patternwill rem a inrelatively constan t. 1 Themodel does takenot intoac can ount yloca lisedfea such tures assma llcopses, 4 . 2 hedgerowsindividual or antrees dtherefore givesstill an exaggerated impression of theexten visibility.of t The ac tualexten visibilityof t onthe ground will be lesstha ntha t . . suggestedby planthis .
TheZTVinc ludesan adjustmen allowstha t Earth’s t forcurva an ture dlight refrac tion. It is bais sedIt onNextma terrain25da p an ta dha a25m s 2 resolution.
11 .
3 . PROJECTTITLE WARLEY SOLAR FARM
10 DRAWINGTITLE . ZoneTheoreticaof Visibility l Study(ZTV) inc ludingwoodlan dsan dsettlem en ts
9 ISSUEDBY Peterborough T: 01733310471 . DATE N ov2020 DRAWN VW SCALE@A3 1:30,000 CHECKED RK STATUS Draft APPROV ED RK
DWG. NO. 7509_LVIA_004
Nodimensionsfrom drawing.scaled be this toare All dimensions checkedAll onsite. be toare Areameasurem purposes forindicative ents only. ©LDAQuality AssuredDesign2015 Consulting : Ltd. BS EN9001 ISOto 0 1k m Sources: OrdnanceSurvey, NextMap25 N orth
Thisdrawing ma ycontain: Ordn a n c eSurvey ma terialby permission Ordnof a n c eSurvey onbeha lftheofController HerofMa jesty’sStationery Office ©Crown Copyright, Allrightsreserved. 2019Referen c enumb er 0100031673. OSOpen ©daNa / taEnglan tural ©DEFRA © d/ DECC ©/ Historic Englan / Contains d. Ordn a n c eSurvey da ta. AerialPhotography - From: To: Cc: Subject: Re: Proposed Solar Farm - Land at Bulphan Fen, Harrow Lane, Bulphan, Essex (Ref 20/01296/SCO) Date: 24 November 2020 12:27:37 Attachments: 137dbc55-f47e-4381-9482-bab40be7e672.png Bulphan Fen LVIA addional viewpoints.pdf
Here is the plan showing 2 additional viewpoints that I wish to see. They are both on PROW and VP13 will give a clearer indication of potential effects from the slightly higher ground.
I am happy with the others.
Kind regards
Steve
From: Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2020 11:03 AM To: Cc: Subject: RE: Proposed Solar Farm - Land at Bulphan Fen, Harrow Lane, Bulphan, Essex (Ref 20/01296/SCO)
Dear Lucy and Steve,
Are you able to advise when we might receive a response on our proposed viewpoint locations? We ideally need to undertake the site visit to take the photography this week to meet our clients timetable for delivery.
Many thanks Ruth
Ruth Knight Associate
17 Minster Precincts, Peterborough, PE1 1XX Tel: email: Please consider the environment before printing this e‑mail|Confidentiality Notice
The pandemic shows the world needs a new baseline. Read Space & Time, our thinking during six weeks in lockdown. From: Sent: 17 November 2020 10:14 To: Cc: Subject: FW: Proposed Solar Farm - Land at Bulphan Fen, Harrow Lane, Bulphan, Essex (Ref 20/01296/SCO)
Lucy,
Apologies, I should have copied Steve in on the original email as he provided the landscape comments on the scoping opinion.
Kind regards Ruth
From: Sent: 17 November 2020 09:19 To: Cc: Subject: Proposed Solar Farm - Land at Bulphan Fen, Harrow Lane, Bulphan, Essex (Ref 20/01296/SCO)
Dear Lucy,
LDA Design are providing professional landscape services in support of the proposed solar farm and battery storage facility at Land at Bulphan Fen, Harrow Lane, Bulphan, Essex, on behalf of the applicant Bulphan Fen limited.
Part of LDA Design’s appointment is to prepare a Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) that will be submitted as part of the forthcoming planning application. The attached information serves to further set out LDA Design’s intended approach and confirm agreement to our proposed location of viewpoints, extent of study area and key reference documents that would inform the assessment of potential landscape and visual effects.
We would be grateful if you could review the attached information and confirm your agreement and / or return any comments at the earliest opportunity so we may meet our project programme.
Should you have any queries, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Kind regards Ruth
January 2021 Bulphan Fen Solar Farm
Appendix 6.7 Figures
Figure 6.1 Site Location
Figure 6.2 Landscape Policy and Context
Figure 6.3 Topography Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) Study including Figure 6.4 woodlands and settlements Figure 6.5 Local Landscape Character
Figure 6.6 Cumulative schemes within 3km study area
Figure 6.7 Representative Views
Figure 6.8 Photomontages
LEGEND
Sitebounda ry
Distancefrom Sitebounda excluding ry ca 2 b leroute(1, a nd3km )
A RoadA
B RoadB
MinorRoad
Railwa yLine
W a tercourse
W a terbody :70_ RE_OA_AM NDBTEYSOAE8I\RJCS70_VA01LCTO M D .MX AN D_BATTERY_STORAGE\8GIS\PROJECTS\7509_LVIA_001_LOCATION ARLEY_SOLAR_FARM_ Z:\7509_W
PROJECTTITLE WARLEY SOLAR FARM
DRAWINGTITLE Figure6.1: SiteLoca tion
ISSUEDBY Peterborough T: 01733310471 DATE Jan2021 DRAWN VW SCALE@A3 1:30,000 CHECKED RK STATUS Final APPROVED RK
DWG. NO. 7509_LVIA_001
Nodimensions froscaledto arembethis drawing. All dimensions All onsite.checkedtoare be Areameasurements purposes forindicative only. © LDA© DesignConsulting QualityAssured Ltd. 2015 : toBS EN9001 ISO 0 1km Sources: OrdnanceSurvey N orth
Thisdrawing ma ycontain:Ordnance Survey ma terialby permission Ordnanceof Survey behaon lftheofController HerofMa jesty’sStationery Office ©Crown Copyright, Allrightsreserved. 2019Reference num b er 0100031673. OSOpen ©daNa / ta turalEngland ©DEFRA © / DECC ©/ Historic England. / Contains Ordnance Survey da ta. AerialPhotography Source:Ma - Esri, GeoEye, xa r, EarthstarGeographics, CN ES/AirbusUSDA,DS, USGS, AeroGRID, andIGN the , GISUser Com m unity LEGEND
F o o t p at h 3 9 Sitebounda ry
Distan c efrom Sitebounda excluding ry ca 2 b(1, leroute Brentwood District (B) a n d3km )
District boundaDistrict ry Basildon District (B)
Footpa th 8 OpenAcc ess
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! RegisteredComm onLan d !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! PublicRights Waof y(PROW)
Bridlewa y
F o o t p at h 1 4 2 Bywa yopenall trafficto
Footpath
Footpa th 4
Footpa th 7
Bridlewa y 91
Havering London Boro
Footpath 160
F o o t p at h 1 5 9
Footpath91 :70_ALY OA_AM NDBTEY TRG\GSPOET\59LI_0_OIY_CNTX.XD _ TEXT.MX CON STORAGE\8GIS\PROJECTS\7509_LVIA_002_POLICY AN D_BATTERY_ SOLAR_FARM_ Z:\7509_WARLEY_ F o o t p at h 2 5 4 Footpath 136 Footpath Bridlewa y 178 F o o t p at h 1 5 8 Footpath 151 F o o t p at h 1 0 1 Footpath 135 Footpath 89
Footpa th 1 Thurrock (B) Footpath 10
Footpath102
Bridlewa y 219 y Bridlewa PROJECTTITLE BULPHAN FEN SOLAR FARM F o o t p at h 1 3 9 Footpath 210 F o o t p at h 1 5 F o o t p at h 1 5 3 F o o t p at h 1 2
F o o t p at h 1 3 2 DRAWINGTITLE
F o o t p at h 9 0 Footpath 134 F o o t p at h 1 0 0 F o o t p at h 1 3 8 Figure6.2: Lan dsca pePolicy an dContext Footpath 84 Footpath Footpath 11
F o o t p at h 1 1 0 Footpath 157 F o o t p at h 8 1 ISSUEDBY Peterborough T: 01733471310 Footpath 103 DATE Jan2021 DRAWN MSo F o o t p at h 1 3 1 SCALE@A3 1:30,000 CHECKED RK STATUS Fina l APPROV ED RK Bridlewa y 161 F o o t p at h 1 0 4 DWG. NO. Footpa th 2 7509_LVIA_002 Footpath 156 F o o t p at h 8 2 F o o t p at h 9 3 Nodimensionsfrom drawing.scaled be this toare All dimensions checkedAll onsite. be toare Footpath96 Areameasurem purposes forindicative ents only. F o o t p at h 1 0 5 Footpath 94 Footpath Footpath 207 Assured©LDAQuality 2008 Design ConsultingBS EN : toLtd. 9001 ISO Bridlewa y 206 0 F o o t p at h 1 0 6F o o t p at h 41 6k m Footpath42 Sources: OrdnanceForestyHistoric England,Survey,Natural England, Com m ission,
N orth SUSTRANS,DCLG ESRI,
Thisdrawing ma ycontain: Ordn a n c eSurvey ma terialby permission Ordnof a n c eSurvey onbeha lftheofController HerofMa jesty’sStationery Office ©Crown Copyright, Allrightsreserved. 2015Referen c enumb er 79 0100031673. Footpath 45 Footpath Footpath 97 Footpath OSOpen ©daNa / taEnglan tural ©DEFRA © d/ DECC ©/ English / Heritage. Contains Ordn a n c eSurvey da ©Crown ta copyright an dda tabAerial a | seright2015 Photography - WorldIma gery: LEGEND
Sitebounda ry
Distan c efrom Sitebounda excluding ry ca 2 b(1, leroute a n d3km )
Wa tercourse
Wa terbody
Elevation(mAOD)
55 - 60 - 55 20 - 15
50 - 55 - 50 15 - 10
45 - 50 - 45 10 - 5
40 - 45 - 40 5 - 0
35 - 40 - 35 0 - -5
30 - 35 - 30 -5 - -10
25 - 30 - 25 -10 - -15
20 - 25 - 20 :70_ALY OA_AM NDBTEY TRG\GSPOET\59LI_0_OORPYM D STORAGE\8GIS\PROJECTS\7509_LVIA_003_TOPOGRAPHY.MX AN D_BATTERY_ SOLAR_FARM_ Z:\7509_WARLEY_
PROJECTTITLE BULPHAN FEN SOLAR FARM
DRAWINGTITLE Figure6.3: Topography
ISSUEDBY Peterborough T: 01733310471 DATE Jan2021 DRAWN VW SCALE@A3 1:30,000 CHECKED RK STATUS Fina l APPROV ED RK
DWG. NO. 7509_LVIA_003
Nodimensionsfrom drawing.scaled be this toare All dimensions checkedAll onsite. be toare Areameasurem purposes forindicative ents only. ©LDAQuality AssuredDesign2015 Consulting : Ltd. BS EN9001 ISOto 0 1k m Sources: OrdnanceSurvey, NextMap25 N orth
Thisdrawing ma ycontain: Ordn a n c eSurvey ma terialby permission Ordnof a n c eSurvey onbeha lftheofController HerofMa jesty’sStationery Office ©Crown Copyright, Allrightsreserved. 2019Referen c enumb er 0100031673. OSOpen ©daNa / taEnglan tural ©DEFRA © d/ DECC ©/ Historic Englan / Contains d. Ordn a n c eSurvey da ta. AerialPhotography - LEGEND
Sitebounda ry
Distan c efrom Sitebounda excluding ry caan 2 b d(1, leroute 3km )
Settlem en t
Woodlan d
ZoneTheoreticaof Visibility l (computer(ZTV) gen erated)- b a sedonma ximumpan elheight 3mof
ZoneVisualof Influen c(approxima e ba - sed te) onsite 6 . observations . Represen tativeViewpoint
. Represen tativeViewpoint an dPhotomontage loca tion
5
. Thisdrawing bais sedupon computer gen eratedZone Theoreticaof Visibility l (ZTV) 7 studiesproduced using theviewshed routinein the ESRIArcGIS The Suite. area s shownarethe ma ximumtheoretica visibility, l taking intoac ctopography, ount princ ipal . 8 woodlan dsan dsettlem which en ts, ha vebeen inc ludedinthe model with theheights obtainedfromNextma should beIt noted25. p inthasome t area woodlan s dsinc luded . withintheZTV ma ycomprise ac resulting tive forestry, in the felling an dreplan tingof somearea modelled s inthe ZTVThe study. ZTVstudy reflec apatternthisat ts spec ificbapointinis time, asit sed onrea height l informa Whilst tion. thefelling cycle :70_ALY OA_AM NDBTEY TRG\GSPOET\59LI_0_T.XD STORAGE\8GIS\PROJECTS\7509_LVIA_004_ZTV.MX AN D_BATTERY_ SOLAR_FARM_ Z:\7509_WARLEY_ willaltertheheights differenof area overforestry t oftime, s altering loca lisedvisual 1 effecthewider ts, patternwill rem a inrelatively constan t. . Themodel does takenot intoac can ount yloca lisedfea such tures assma llcopses, 4 hedgerowsindividual or antrees dtherefore givesstill an exaggerated impression of . 2 theexten visibility.of t The ac tualexten visibilityof t onthe ground will be lesstha ntha t . suggestedby planthis . TheZTVinc ludesan adjustmen allowstha t Earth’s t forcurva an ture dlight refrac tion. It is bais sedIt onNextma terrain25da p an ta dha a25m s 2 resolution. 12 11 . .
3 . PROJECTTITLE BULPHAN FEN SOLAR FARM
10 13 DRAWINGTITLE . . Figure6.4: ZoneTheoreticaof Visibility l Study(ZTV) inc ludingwoodlan dsan dsettlem en ts
9 ISSUEDBY Peterborough T: 01733310471 . DATE Jan2021 DRAWN VW SCALE@A3 1:30,000 CHECKED RK STATUS Fina l APPROV ED RK
DWG. NO. 7509_LVIA_004
Nodimensionsfrom drawing.scaled be this toare All dimensions checkedAll onsite. be toare Areameasurem purposes forindicative ents only. ©LDAQuality AssuredDesign2015 Consulting : Ltd. BS EN9001 ISOto 0 1k m Sources: OrdnanceSurvey, NextMap25 N orth
Thisdrawing ma ycontain: Ordn a n c eSurvey ma terialby permission Ordnof a n c eSurvey onbeha lftheofController HerofMa jesty’sStationery Office ©Crown Copyright, Allrightsreserved. 2019Referen c enumb er 0100031673. OSOpen ©daNa / taEnglan tural ©DEFRA © d/ DECC ©/ Historic Englan / Contains d. Ordn a n c eSurvey da ta. AerialPhotography - LEGEND
Sitebounda ry
Distancefrom Sitebounda excluding ry ca 2 b leroute(1, a nd3km )
LandtheofFanns Landsca peCha racterArea s
BelhusLowland Qua Farmland rry
BrentwoodWooded Hills
LangdonHills and Farmland
Ma rdyke
Orsett Lowland Orsett Hills
ThurrockReclaim edFen
WThurrock est Qua Townsca rry pe
District boundaDistrict ry :70_ RE_OA_AM NDBTEYSOAE8I\RJCS70_VA05LCCAATRM D AN D_BATTERY_STORAGE\8GIS\PROJECTS\7509_LVIA_005_LSC_CHARACTER.MX ARLEY_SOLAR_FARM_ Z:\7509_W
PROJECTTITLE BULPHAN FEN SOLAR FARM
DRAWINGTITLE Figure6.5: LocaLandsca l peCha racter
ISSUEDBY Peterborough T: 01733310471 DATE Jan2021 DRAWN MSo SCALE@A3 1:30,000 CHECKED RK STATUS Final APPROV ED RK
DWG. NO. 7509_LVIA_005
Nodimensionsfrom drawing.scaled be this toare All dimensions checkedAll onsite. be toare Areameasurem purposes forindicative ents only. ©LDAQuality AssuredDesign2015 Consulting : Ltd. BS EN9001 ISOto 0 1k m Sources: OrdnanceSurvey, NextMap25 N orth
Thisdrawing ma ycontain:Ordnance Survey ma terialby permission Ordnanceof Survey behaon lftheofController HerofMa jesty’sStationery Office ©Crown Copyright, Allrightsreserved. 2019Reference num b er 0100031673. OSOpen ©daNa / ta turalEngland ©DEFRA © / DECC ©/ Historic England. / Contains Ordnance Survey da ta. AerialPhotography - LEGEND
Sitebounda ry
Distancefrom Sitebounda excluding ry ca 2 b leroute(1, a nd3km )
District boundaDistrict ry
Cum ulative_ schem es
Consented
In Planning In
LowerTha m esCrossing
P0888.18 P0888.18 P0888.18
17/01683/FUL
19/01662/FUL
P0528.20 :70_ RE_OA_AM NDBTEYSOAE8I\RJCS70_VA06CMLTV.XD AN D_BATTERY_STORAGE\8GIS\PROJECTS\7509_LVIA_006_CUMULATIVE.MX ARLEY_SOLAR_FARM_ Z:\7509_W
PROJECTTITLE BULPHAN FEN SOLAR FARM
17/01435/CV
DRAWINGTITLE Figure6.6: Cum ulativesites
ISSUEDBY Peterborough T: 01733310471 DATE Jan2021 DRAWN MSo SCALE@A3 1:30,000 CHECKED RK STATUS Final APPROV ED RK
DWG. NO. 7509_LVIA_006
Nodimensionsfrom drawing.scaled be this toare All dimensions checkedAll onsite. be toare Areameasurem purposes forindicative ents only. ©LDAQuality AssuredDesign2015 Consulting : Ltd. BS EN9001 ISOto 0 1k m Sources: OrdnanceSurvey, NextMap25 N orth
Thisdrawing ma ycontain:Ordnance Survey ma terialby permission Ordnanceof Survey behaon lftheofController HerofMa jesty’sStationery Office ©Crown Copyright, Allrightsreserved. 2019Reference num b er 0100031673. OSOpen ©daNa / ta turalEngland ©DEFRA © / DECC ©/ Historic England. / Contains Ordnance Survey da ta. AerialPhotography - Representative Viewpoint 1 (Left)-Junction of Bridleway 219and Footpaths 136 and 89 © LDADesign ConsultingLtd. QualityAssured toBS ENISO9001:2008 DATE DWG. NO. SCALE@A3 STATUS ISSUED BY Jan 2021 NTS Final Peterborough 7509_PP_001_L Harrow Lane/Footpath89 DRAWN CHECKED APPROVED t: 01733310471 MSo RK RK (Actual development area maybelessthanthatshown) (Actual development Approximate extentofthe Site intheview Approximate extentofsite Footpath 136crossesfield diagonally Figure 6.7.1: PhotographPanel1(Left) Representative Viewpoint 1 WARLEY SOLARFARM DRAWING TITLE PROJECT TITLE
Z:\7509_Warley_Solar_Farm_and_Battery_Storage\6docs\Photopanels\7509_PP_001.indd Z:\7509_Warley_Solar_Farm_and_Battery_Storage\6docs\Photopanels\7509_PP_001.indd © LDADesign ConsultingLtd. QualityAssured toBS ENISO9001:2008 vegetation alongMarDykewouldscreenthisovertime. Tothesouth,panelsinnorthernareaofField4,north of the and enhancement west, vegetationalongMarDykewouldscreenallbut thetopsofpanelsinitially.Management field, wouldpreventvisibilityofpanelsinthe easternpartofthesite.To Harrow Lanebythewidthofanintervening To theeast, with theproposedsolarpanelsbeingsetbackfrom the trees andvegetationalongHarrowLane,combined to MarDykepreventsviewstowardsthesitefromfurthernorth. parallel Lane acrossMarDykeandthegrasslandaroundit. to thenorthofand Beyond FenLane,vegetationonafieldboundary Farm. shown, thereareopenviewstowardsFen To thenorth oftheviewpoint,beyondedgesphotograph trees inthegardensofpropertiesatJudds and treesalongHarrowLane,including (to theeast),thereisahedgerow (to thewest),vegetationisvisiblealongMarDykeatedgeofarablefield.Toleftphotograph photograph southwards acrossarablefieldstowardstheSite,withintermittentvegetationalongsiteboundary.To therightof 219 andFootpaths13689,adjacenttoHarrowLane.Thereareviews This viewisfromthejunctionofBridleway Representative Viewpoint 1 (Right) - Junction of Bridleway 219and Footpaths 136 and 89 DWG. NO. DATE SCALE@A3 STATUS ISSUED BY 7509_PP_001_R Jan 2021 NTS Final Peterborough DRAWN CHECKED APPROVED t: 01733310471 MSo RK RK Paper Size: Horizontal Fieldof View: Distance toSite: Direction ofView: bearingfromNorth(0°): Ground Level (mAOD): Camera Location(OSGridReference): 420mm x297mm(A3) 120° (Cylindricalprojection) 301m 163° 5m 562269E 185072N Approximate extentofsite Height ofCameraLens above Ground(mAOD): Lens Make,Model and FocalLength: Camera ModelandSensorFormat: Photo Date/Time: Visualisation Type: Enlargement Factor: and, onbalance,Neutral. effects once proposedvegetationhasbecomeestablished,wouldreduce to semi-permanently, In theshorttomediumterm, effects would beof over time. screening boundary toprovideadditional vegetation isproposedalongthis 500m fromtheviewpoint.Additional These panelswouldbelocatedapproximately of thefield. retained lineofpoplartrees,wouldbevisiblethroughthegapsinvegetationalongnorthernboundary Panels locatedbehindvegetation along MarDyke 1.5m Canon EF50mmf/1.8 STM Canon EOS6D,FFS 26/11/2020 14:23 Type 1(forcontext) TBC Medium-Small scaleand,onbalance,Adverse. Figure 6.7.1: PhotographPanel1(Right) Bridleway 219 Representative Viewpoint 1 Small-Negligible WARLEY SOLARFARM In thelong-termto DRAWING TITLE PROJECT TITLE scale Representative Viewpoint 2 (Left)-Footpath 159 nearThe Downes © LDADesign ConsultingLtd. QualityAssured toBS ENISO9001:2008 DATE DWG. NO. SCALE@A3 STATUS ISSUED BY Jan 2021 NTS Final Peterborough 7509_PP_002_L Hedgerow alongboundarywith The Downes DRAWN CHECKED APPROVED t: 01733310471 MSo RK RK Approximate extentofsite Figure 6.7.2: PhotographPanel2(Left) Representative Viewpoint 2 WARLEY SOLARFARM DRAWING TITLE PROJECT TITLE
Z:\7509_Warley_Solar_Farm_and_Battery_Storage\6docs\Photopanels\7509_PP_002.indd Z:\7509_Warley_Solar_Farm_and_Battery_Storage\6docs\Photopanels\7509_PP_002.indd © LDADesign ConsultingLtd. QualityAssured toBS ENISO9001:2008 screening overtime. provide additional to management isproposedalongallboundaries vegetation andhedgerow 270m. Additional distance ofapproximately present. Totheeast,ismoreintermittent andpanelswouldbevisibleintheshorttomediumtermata the hedgerow through andabovethepanels,withvisibilityreducinginsummer monthswhenmoreleafsare would beglimpsed are largelyintactandpanels be locatedbeyondthefieldboundaryhedgerows.To thenorthandwest,hedgerows There wouldbenosolarpanelslocatedwithinthefield intheforeground.Tonorth,eastandwest, solar panelswould within theSite. are internalhedgerows visible aroundtheforeroundgrassland hedgerows into thegroundsofTheDownes.Footpath159crossesgrasslandandField9viaasmallfootbridge. Allofthe of Field14andtheSite,atpointwherefootpathcrosses This viewisfromFootpath159onthesouthernboundary Representative Viewpoint 2 (Left-Centre)-Footpath 159 nearThe Downes DWG. NO. DATE SCALE@A3 STATUS ISSUED BY 7509_PP_002_LC Jan 2021 NTS Final Peterborough DRAWN CHECKED APPROVED t: 01733310471 MSo RK RK Hedgerow alongboundarywithFields15and16 Paper Size: Horizontal Fieldof View: Distance toSite: Direction ofView: bearingfromNorth(0°): Ground Level (mAOD): Camera Location(OSGridReference): 420mm x297mm(A3) 120° (Cylindricalprojection) Within Site 315° 5m N 563112 E184734 Approximate extentofsite Height ofCameraLens above Ground(mAOD): Lens Make,Model and FocalLength: Camera ModelandSensorFormat: Photo Date/Time: Visualisation Type: Enlargement Factor: Neutral. vegetation hasbecomeestablished,effects permanently, onceproposedwouldreduceto In theshorttomediumterm, effects would beof 1.5m Canon EF50mmf/1.8 STM Canon EOS6D,FFS 26/11/2020 11:12 Type 1(forcontext) TBC Medium scale and,onbalance,Adverse. Figure 6.7.2: PhotographPanel2(Left-Centre) Small scaleand,onbalance, In thelong-termtosemi- Representative Viewpoint 2 WARLEY SOLARFARM DRAWING TITLE PROJECT TITLE Representative Viewpoint 2 (Centre-Right)-Footpath 159 nearThe Downes © LDADesign ConsultingLtd. QualityAssured toBS ENISO9001:2008 DATE DWG. NO. SCALE@A3 STATUS ISSUED BY Nov 2020 NTS Final Peterborough 7509_PP_002_CR DRAWN CHECKED APPROVED t: 01733310471 MSo RK RK Footpath 159 Approximate extentofsite Hedgerow alongboundarywithField9 Figure 6.7.2: PhotographPanel2(Centre-Right) Representative Viewpoint 2 WARLEY SOLARFARM DRAWING TITLE PROJECT TITLE
Z:\7509_Warley_Solar_Farm_and_Battery_Storage\6docs\Photopanels\7509_PP_002.indd Z:\7509_Warley_Solar_Farm_and_Battery_Storage\6docs\Photopanels\7509_PP_002.indd © LDADesign ConsultingLtd. QualityAssured toBS ENISO9001:2008 Representative Viewpoint 2 (Right) - Footpath 159 nearThe Downes DWG. NO. DATE SCALE@A3 STATUS ISSUED BY 7509_PP_002_R Nov 2020 NTS Final Peterborough DRAWN CHECKED APPROVED t: 01733310471 MSo RK RK Hedgerow alongboundarywithField13 Approximate extentofsite Figure 6.7.2: PhotographPanel2(Right) Representative Viewpoint 2 WARLEY SOLARFARM DRAWING TITLE PROJECT TITLE Representative Viewpoint 3 (Left)-Footpath 90 north of Orsett Fen © LDADesign ConsultingLtd. QualityAssured toBS ENISO9001:2008 DATE DWG. NO. SCALE@A3 STATUS ISSUED BY Jan 2021 NTS Final Peterborough 7509_PP_003_L DRAWN CHECKED APPROVED t: 01733310471 MSo RK RK Vegetation along Mardyke (Actual development area maybelessthanthatshown) (Actual development Approximate extentofthe Site intheview Poplar withinsite Approximate extentofsite Footpath 90 Figure 6.7.3: PhotographPanel3(Left) Representative Viewpoint 3 WARLEY SOLARFARM DRAWING TITLE PROJECT TITLE
Z:\7509_Warley_Solar_Farm_and_Battery_Storage\6docs\Photopanels\7509_PP_003.indd Z:\7509_Warley_Solar_Farm_and_Battery_Storage\6docs\Photopanels\7509_PP_003.indd © LDADesign ConsultingLtd. QualityAssured toBS ENISO9001:2008 provide furtherscreeningovertime. along thesouthernboundaryofSiteto vegetation andmanagementisproposed proposed solarpanels.Additional 500m fromtheviewpoint.BeyondField4,layers ofexistingvegetationwouldcombinetopreventvisibilitythe along thesouthernboundary.Thepanelswouldbelocated atadistanceofapproximately currently gapsinthehedgerow There willbesomevisibilityofpanelswithinthesouthern areaofField4intheshorttomediumterm, where thereare the Site. of the wintermonthswhenvegetationisnotinleaf.There aresomegapsinthevegetationalongsouthernboundary effect Fen andOrsett.withintheviewcombinetocreateascreeninginmanylocations, evenduring Layers ofhedgerows with thelandformfallingawayslightlytowardssiteandalsotosouthOrsett located onaslightridgeline, This viewisfromFootpath90,locatedtothesouthofSiteandnorthopenaccesslandat Orsett Fen. It is Representative Viewpoint 3 (Right) - Footpath 90 north of Orsett Fen DWG. NO. DATE SCALE@A3 STATUS ISSUED BY Judds Farm 7509_PP_003_R Jan 2021 NTS Final Peterborough DRAWN CHECKED APPROVED t: 01733310471 MSo RK RK Paper Size: Horizontal Fieldof View: Distance toSite: Direction ofView: bearingfromNorth(0°): Ground Level (mAOD): Camera Location(OSGridReference): Approximate extentofsite 420mm x297mm(A3) 120° (Cylindricalprojection) 500m 342° 7m N 562724 E183620 Height ofCameraLens above Ground(mAOD): Lens Make,Model and FocalLength: Camera ModelandSensorFormat: Photo Date/Time: Visualisation Type: Enlargement Factor: and, onbalance,Neutral. effects once proposedvegetationhasbecomeestablished,wouldreduceto semi-permanently, In theshorttomediumterm, effects would beof 1.5m Canon EF50mmf/1.8 STM Canon EOS6D,FFS 26/11/2020 14:55 Type 1(forcontext) TBC Medium-Small scaleand,onbalance,Adverse. Figure 6.7.3: PhotographPanel3(Right) Representative Viewpoint 3 Small-Negligible WARLEY SOLARFARM In thelong-termto DRAWING TITLE PROJECT TITLE scale Representative Viewpoint 4 (Left)-Footpath 135 along site boundary near Fen Farm Cottages © LDADesign ConsultingLtd. QualityAssured toBS ENISO9001:2008 DATE DWG. NO. SCALE@A3 STATUS ISSUED BY Jan 2021 NTS Final Peterborough 7509_PP_004_L DRAWN CHECKED APPROVED t: 01733310471 Rear gardenofFenFarm Cottages MSo RK RK Vegetation around FenFarm (Actual development area maybelessthanthatshown) (Actual development Approximate extentofthe Site intheview Judds Farm Approximate extentofsite Figure 6.7.4: PhotographPanel4(Left) Representative Viewpoint 4 WARLEY SOLARFARM DRAWING TITLE PROJECT TITLE
Z:\7509_Warley_Solar_Farm_and_Battery_Storage\6docs\Photopanels\7509_PP_004.indd Z:\7509_Warley_Solar_Farm_and_Battery_Storage\6docs\Photopanels\7509_PP_004.indd © LDADesign ConsultingLtd. QualityAssured toBS ENISO9001:2008 into theSiteandofProposedDevelopment. along partsofthewesternboundarySite.Overtimethesewouldreducevisibility vegetation isproposed enhanced planting isproposedwithinthenorthern boundaryofthesiteand as wellfromthenearbyproperties.Woodland In thesorttomediumterm,solarpanels, batterystorageandsubstationwouldbevisiblefromthislocation, the proposed South Ockendonlandfill,thelocationofaconsented solarfarm, is visibletotherightofextentviewshown. of thesite.Towest(therightphotograph),landformbeginsto gentlyriseuptowardstheM25. remainder along MarDyke,combinetopreventvisibilityofthe layers ofvegetation,particularly 2. BeyondtheseFields,intervening of theSiteislargelyopen,withvisibilityintoFields1 and3,toalesserextentField Cottages. Thewesternboundary of FenFarmisalsovisible,adjacenttothegarden Non-native vegetationalongthewesternboundary the site,adjacenttoreargardenofFenFarmCottages.ThereareopenviewsintoSitefrom Farm Cottages. This viewisfromfootpath135alongthewesternboundaryofSite.Theviewpointlocatedatnorth-west cornerof Representative Viewpoint 4 (Right) - Footpath 135 along site boundary near Fen Farm Cottages DWG. NO. DATE SCALE@A3 STATUS ISSUED BY 7509_PP_004_R Jan 2021 NTS Final Peterborough DRAWN CHECKED APPROVED t: 01733310471 MSo RK RK Paper Size: Horizontal Fieldof View: Distance toSite: Direction ofView: bearingfromNorth(0°): Ground Level (mAOD): Camera Location(OSGridReference): Approximate extentofsite 420mm x297mm(A3) 120° (Cylindricalprojection) 14m 119° 6m N 561177 E184838 Height ofCameraLens above Ground(mAOD): Lens Make,Model and FocalLength: Camera ModelandSensorFormat: Photo Date/Time: Visualisation Type: Enlargement Factor: proximity of the Proposed Development and, onbalance,Adverse proximity oftheProposedDevelopment permanently, once proposed vegetation hasbecomeestablished,effects permanently, onceproposedwouldreducetoLarge- In theshorttomediumterm, effects would beof Footpath 135 1.5m Canon EF50mmf/1.8 STM Canon EOS6D,FFS 26/11/2020 15:38 Type 1(forcontext) TBC Large scaleand,onbalance,Adverse . Figure 6.7.4: PhotographPanel4(Right) . In the long-termto semi- Representative Viewpoint 4 Medium WARLEY SOLARFARM South Ockendonlandfill scale duetothe DRAWING TITLE PROJECT TITLE Representative Viewpoint 7 (Left)-Bulphan (Footpath 160) © LDADesign ConsultingLtd. QualityAssured toBS ENISO9001:2008 DATE DWG. NO. SCALE@A3 STATUS ISSUED BY Jan 2021 NTS Final Peterborough 7509_PP_007_L DRAWN CHECKED APPROVED t: 01733310471 MSo RK RK (Actual development area maybelessthanthatshown) (Actual development Approximate extentofthe Site intheview Approximate extentofsite Figure 6.7.5: PhotographPanel5(Left) Representative Viewpoint 7 WARLEY SOLARFARM DRAWING TITLE PROJECT TITLE
Z:\7509_Warley_Solar_Farm_and_Battery_Storage\6docs\Photopanels\7509_PP_007.indd Z:\7509_Warley_Solar_Farm_and_Battery_Storage\6docs\Photopanels\7509_PP_007.indd © LDADesign ConsultingLtd. QualityAssured toBS ENISO9001:2008 management isproposedalongtheeasternboundary oftheSitetoprovidefurtherscreeningovertime. vegetation and The topsofpanelswithinField11mayalsobevisible abovetheboundaryhedgerow.Additional along theeasternboundary.Thepanelswouldbelocatedatadistanceofjust over400mfromtheviewpoint. hedgerow There willbesomevisibilityofpanelswithinField10 intheshorttomediumterm, where therearecurrentlygapsinthe vegetation issparse.Interveninglayersof combinetopreventvisibilityintotheremainderofsite. of into Field10whereboundary along theeasternboundarySiteisvisiblefrom thislocation,withviewspossible rear gardens,aswellaroundthehorsepaddocksrestrictviewswestwardfrommajorityofvillage. Veetation separate thereargardensofpropertiesalongChurchLanefromarablefarmland.Layersvegetationwithin andaround This viewisfromfootpath160onthewesternedgeofBulphan.It runs adjacent toanumberofhorsepaddocksthat Representative Viewpoint 7 (Right) - Bulphan (Footpath 160) DWG. NO. DATE SCALE@A3 STATUS ISSUED BY 7509_PP_007_R Jan 2021 NTS Final Peterborough DRAWN CHECKED APPROVED t: 01733310471 MSo RK RK Vegetation around site boundary Approximate extentofsite Paper Size: Horizontal Fieldof View: Distance toSite: Direction ofView: bearingfromNorth(0°): Ground Level (mAOD): Camera Location(OSGridReference): The GlassHouse Retreat 420mm x297mm(A3) 120° (Cylindricalprojection) 417m 223° 8m N 563541 E0185748 Buildings atCaylock’s Farm Height ofCameraLens above Ground(mAOD): Lens Make,Model and FocalLength: Camera ModelandSensorFormat: Photo Date/Time: Visualisation Type: Enlargement Factor: and, onbalance,Neutral. effects once proposedvegetationhasbecomeestablished,wouldreduceto semi-permanently, In theshorttomediumterm, effects would beof Footpath 160 1.5m Canon EF50mmf/1.8 STM Canon EOS6D,FFS 26/11/2020 10:21 Type 1(forcontext) TBC Medium-Small scaleand,onbalance,Adverse. Figure 6.7.5: PhotographPanel5(Right) Representative Viewpoint 7 Small-Negligible WARLEY SOLARFARM In thelong-termto DRAWING TITLE PROJECT TITLE scale Z:\7509_Warley_Solar_Farm_and_Battery_Storage\6docs\Photopanels\7509_PP_008.indd © LDADesign ConsultingLtd. QualityAssured toBS ENISO9001:2008 as partoftheschemewouldfutheraddtothis filteringeffect distant andfiltered.Vegetationproposed over time. However, giventhedistancefromSiteandlayers ofvegetationinthelowerlyinglandscape,anyviewswouldbe amongst existing vegetationfromthislocation. It may beglimpsed is possiblethatareas oftheProposedDevelopment Laindon. shown thereisanexistingsolarfarmvisible,located around1.8kmtothenorthatFairwindFarm, Lower DuntonRoad, due tothelayersofvegetationinview.Beyond righthandedgeof Site itselfisnotdistinguishable the photograph of vegetationandthelandform.The the eastofthispoint,whereviewstowardsSitearepreventedbyacombination Country Club,atthebreakofslope.Thefootpathpassesaroundedgegolfclubandacrossarable fieldsto Hills Golfand Hills andtheLangdon This viewisfromelevatedgroundtotheeastofSite,nearLangdon Representative Viewpoint 8 -Footpath 91 on rising landform near Langdon Hill DWG. NO. DATE SCALE@A3 STATUS ISSUED BY 7509_PP_008 Jan 2021 NTS Final Peterborough Thurrock Airfield DRAWN CHECKED APPROVED t: 01733310471 MSo RK RK Paper Size: Horizontal Fieldof View: Distance toSite: Direction ofView: bearingfromNorth(0°): Ground Level (mAOD): Camera Location(OSGridReference): 420mm x297mm(A3) 120° (Cylindricalprojection) 2208m 256° 27m N 565439 E185601 Approximate extentofsite New development east of A128 east Height ofCameraLens above Ground(mAOD): Lens Make,Model and FocalLength: Camera ModelandSensorFormat: Photo Date/Time: Visualisation Type: Enlargement Factor: term tosemi-permanently. differences) intheshorttomediumtermandInlong- with barelyperceptible unchanged line wouldbefundamentally Effects thebase would notexceedNegligiblescale(veryminoralterationstokeyelementssuchthatpostdevelopment The GlassHouse Retreat Bulphan 1.5m Canon EF50mmf/1.8 STM Canon EOS6D,FFS 26/11/2020 13:38 Type 1(forcontext) TBC Figure 6.7.6: PhotographPanel6 Representative Viewpoint 8 WARLEY SOLARFARM DRAWING TITLE PROJECT TITLE - Representative Viewpoint 11 (Left)-Footpath 135 north of South Ockendon landfill © LDADesign ConsultingLtd. QualityAssured toBS ENISO9001:2008 DATE DWG. NO. SCALE@A3 STATUS ISSUED BY Jan 2021 NTS Final Peterborough 7509_PP_011_L DRAWN CHECKED APPROVED t: 01733310471 MSo RK RK (Actual development area maybelessthanthatshown) (Actual development Approximate extentofthe Site intheview Fen Farm Cottages Fen Farm The GlassHouse Approximate extentofsite Retreat Figure 6.7.7: PhotographPanel7(Left) Representative Viewpoint 11 WARLEY SOLARFARM DRAWING TITLE Footpath 135 PROJECT TITLE
Z:\7509_Warley_Solar_Farm_and_Battery_Storage\6docs\Photopanels\7509_PP_011.indd Z:\7509_Warley_Solar_Farm_and_Battery_Storage\6docs\Photopanels\7509_PP_011.indd © LDADesign ConsultingLtd. QualityAssured toBS ENISO9001:2008 into theSiteandofProposedDevelopment. Enhanced vegetationisproposedalongpartsofthe western boundaryoftheSite.Overtimethiswouldreducevisibility In thesorttomediumterm,solarpanels, batterystorageandsubstationwouldbevisiblefromthislocation. the proposed shown. of thesite.SouthOckendonlandfill,locationaconsentedsolarfarm, remainder is visibleintherightofview layers ofalongMarDyke,combine topreventvisibilityofthe Beyond theseFields,interveningvegetation, particularly route begintorestrictvisibilityfurtherthewest.ThereisintoFields1and3,alesserextent Field2. to running atright-anglesthe hedgerows the viewpoint,butfieldboundary Site. Thelandformcontinuestorisebehind This viewisfromFootpath135tothewestofSite.It is locatedongently risingground,slightlyelevatedabovethe Representative Viewpoint 11 (Right) - Footpath 135 north of South Ockendon landfill DWG. NO. DATE SCALE@A3 STATUS ISSUED BY 7509_PP_011_R Jan 2021 NTS Final Peterborough DRAWN CHECKED APPROVED t: 01733310471 Approximate extentofsite Vegetation along MSo RK RK Mardyke Paper Size: Horizontal Fieldof View: Distance toSite: Direction ofView: bearingfromNorth(0°): Ground Level (mAOD): Camera Location(OSGridReference): South Ockendonlandfill Vegetation around 420mm x297mm(A3) 120° (Cylindricalprojection) 692m 75° 13m N 560483 E184252 Height ofCameraLens above Ground(mAOD): Lens Make,Model and FocalLength: Camera ModelandSensorFormat: Photo Date/Time: Visualisation Type: Enlargement Factor: balance, effects once proposedvegetationhasbecomeestablished,wouldreduceto semi-permanently, In theshorttomediumterm, effects would beof Adverse. 1.5m Canon EF50mmf/1.8 STM Canon EOS6D,FFS 26/11/2020 16:01 Type 1(forcontext) TBC Medium-Small scaleand,onbalance,Adverse. Figure 6.7.7: PhotographPanel7(Right) Representative Viewpoint 11 Small scaleand,on WARLEY SOLARFARM In thelong-termto DRAWING TITLE PROJECT TITLE Representative Viewpoint 12 (Left)-Footpath 158, nearParker’sFarmLane © LDADesign ConsultingLtd. QualityAssured toBS ENISO9001:2008 DATE DWG. NO. SCALE@A3 STATUS ISSUED BY Jan 2021 NTS Final Peterborough 7509_PP_012A_L DRAWN CHECKED APPROVED t: 01733310471 MSo RK RK (Actual development area maybelessthanthatshown) (Actual development Approximate extentofthe Site intheview Poplars withinSite Trees alongboundaryof Field 16 Approximate extentofsite Figure 6.7.8: PhotographPanel8(Left) Representative Viewpoint 12 WARLEY SOLARFARM DRAWING TITLE PROJECT TITLE
Z:\7509_Warley_Solar_Farm_and_Battery_Storage\6docs\Photopanels\7509_PP_012.indd Z:\7509_Warley_Solar_Farm_and_Battery_Storage\6docs\Photopanels\7509_PP_012.indd © LDADesign ConsultingLtd. QualityAssured toBS ENISO9001:2008 over time. further screening vegetation andmanagementisproposedalongthesouthernboundary oftheSitetoprovide solar panels.Additional from theviewpoint.BeyondField4,layersofexisting vegetationwouldcombinetopreventvisibilityoftheproposed along thesouthernboundary.Thepanelswouldbelocated atadistanceofover500m currently gapsinthehedgerow There willbesomevisibilityofpanelswithinthesouthern areaofField4intheshorttomediumterm, where thereare of theSite. vegetation alongthesouthernboundary effect in manylocations, evenduringthewintermonthswhenvegetationisnotinleaf.Therearesomegaps within theviewcombinetocreateascreening from theroadandfurthersouthonFootpath.Layersofhedgerows to thewestofFootpathestrictingviewstowardssite hedgerows the viewpoint,withfieldboundary located behind This viewisfromFootpath158,locatedtothesouth-eastofSiteandcloseParker’sFenLane. FenLaneis Representative Viewpoint 12 (Right) - Footpath 158, nearParker’sFarmLane DWG. NO. DATE SCALE@A3 STATUS ISSUED BY 7509_PP_012A_R Jan 2021 NTS Final Peterborough Barn at The Downes DRAWN CHECKED APPROVED t: 01733310471 MSo RK RK Coniferous vegetation around The Downes The around Footpath 159 Paper Size: Horizontal Fieldof View: Distance toSite: Direction ofView: bearingfromNorth(0°): Ground Level (mAOD): Camera Location(OSGridReference): Approximate extentofsite 420mm x297mm(A3) 120° (Cylindricalprojection) 516m 299° 5m N 563518 E184325 Height ofCameraLens above Ground(mAOD): Lens Make,Model and FocalLength: Camera ModelandSensorFormat: Photo Date/Time: Visualisation Type: Enlargement Factor: balance, effects once proposedvegetationhasbecomeestablished,wouldreduceto semi-permanently, In theshorttomediumterm, effects would beof Neutral. 1.5m Canon EF50mmf/1.8 STM Canon EOS6D,FFS 26/11/2020 13:03 Type 1(forcontext) TBC Small-Negligible scaleand,onbalance,Adverse. Figure 6.7.8: PhotographPanel8(Right) Representative Viewpoint 12 Negligible WARLEY SOLARFARM In thelong-termto scaleand,on DRAWING TITLE PROJECT TITLE Z:\7509_Warley_Solar_Farm_and_Battery_Storage\6docs\Photopanels\7509_PP_013.indd © LDADesign ConsultingLtd. QualityAssured toBS ENISO9001:2008 term tosemi-permanently. differences) intheshorttomediumtermandInlong- with barelyperceptible unchanged line wouldbefundamentally Effects the base would notexceed Negligiblescale(veryminoralterationstokeyelementssuchthat postdevelopment would notbevisiblefromthislocation. The ProposedDevelopment behind theviewpoint,combinedwithlandform,furtherpreventviewfromsouth. and hedgerows to preventviewstowardstheSite.Furtherwoodland to thenorth-westcombining landform andlargeareasofwoodland This viewisfromFootpath100tothenorthofOrsett.valley, withthe The landformgently slopesdownintoalocalised Representative Viewpoint 13 -Footpath 100 north of Orsett DWG. NO. DATE SCALE@A3 STATUS ISSUED BY 7509_PP_013 Jan 2021 NTS Final Peterborough DRAWN CHECKED APPROVED t: 01733310471 MSo RK RK Paper Size: Horizontal Fieldof View: Distance toSite: Direction ofView: bearingfromNorth(0°): Ground Level (mAOD): Camera Location(OSGridReference): 420mm x297mm(A3) 120° (Cylindricalprojection) 1985m 320° 8m N 564132 E182752 Approximate extentofsite - Height ofCameraLens above Ground(mAOD): Lens Make,Model and FocalLength: Camera ModelandSensorFormat: Photo Date/Time: Visualisation Type: Enlargement Factor: 1.5m Canon EF50mmf/1.8 STM Canon EOS6D,FFS 26/11/2020 12:30 Type 1(forcontext) TBC Figure 6.7.9: PhotographPanel9 Representative Viewpoint 13 WARLEY SOLARFARM DRAWING TITLE PROJECT TITLE