Mr M Hard Our Ref: APP/T3535/A/13/2193543 DLP Planning Consultants DLP Planning Ltd Your Ref: N/SF114/1P Sophia House 28 Cathedral Road 16 October 2013 Cardiff CF11 9LJ Dear Sir, TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 – SECTION 78 BY MRS J WALL OF LARK ENERGY AT LAND AT AND ADJACENT TO ELLOUGH AIRFIELD, BENACRE ROAD, ELLOUGH, SUFFOLK APPLICATION REFERENCE DC/12/1113/FUL 1. I am directed by the Secretary of State to say that consideration has been given to the report of the Inspector, Neil Pope BA (hons) MRTPI, who held a public local inquiry on 11 and 12 June 2013 into your client's appeal against the decision of Waveney District Council (the Council) to refuse planning permission for the installation of a 24MW solar farm and associated infrastructure at land at and adjacent to Ellough Airfield, Benacre Road, Ellough, Suffolk, in accordance with application reference DC/12/1113/FUL, dated 19 February 2013. 2. On 14 March 2013, the appeal was recovered for the Secretary of State's determination, in pursuance of section 79 of, and paragraph 3 to Schedule 6 to, the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 because the appeal involves proposals of major significance for the delivery of the Government’s climate change programme and energy policies. Inspector’s recommendation and summary of the decision 3. The Inspector recommended that the appeal be allowed and planning permission granted subject to conditions. For the reasons given below, the Secretary of State disagrees with the Inspector’s recommendation and has decided to dismiss the appeal and refuse planning permission. A copy of the Inspector’s report (IR) is enclosed. All references to paragraph numbers, unless otherwise stated, are to that report. Department for Communities and Local Government Tel: 0303 444 0000 Planning Central Casework Division, Email: [email protected] 1/H1, Eland House Bressenden Place London SW1E 5DU Procedural Matters 4. The Secretary of State notes that prior to the Council’s determination of the application the scheme was amended, which reduced the capacity of the proposed solar farm from 30MW to 24MW (IR1). He has determined the appeal on this basis. 5. The Secretary of State has determined the appeal on the basis of the details shown on the plans and drawings listed in IR2. 6. The Secretary of State notes that late representations, in the form of Planning and Landscape Statements, were accepted by PINS and a Rebuttal Statement was dealt with as part of the Inquiry (IR4-5). As the Inspector has considered these matters in his conclusions, the Secretary of State is satisfied that no interests would be prejudiced by him taking these representations into account. 7. The application for costs made by your client at the Inquiry (IR1) is the subject of a separate decision letter, also being issued today by the Secretary of State. 8. The Secretary of State has taken into account that in April 2013 the Council granted planning permission for application DC/13/0239 for the installation of a 14.1MW solar farm and associated infrastructure on the northern part of the appeal site (the permitted scheme) (IR27). Matters arising after the close of the inquiry 9. Following the close of the Inquiry, on 29 July 2013, the Government published ‘Planning practice guidance for renewable and low carbon energy’ (the Guidance), which the Secretary of State has taken into account as a material consideration in these appeals The Secretary of State wrote to parties on 6 August 2013 inviting comment on the Guidance. A single response from the Council was received in response to the Secretary of State’s letter and this response was copied to the main parties on 27 August 2013 for any final comments. No further responses were received. The Secretary of State has taken the Council’s correspondence into account in reaching his decision. Copies of this correspondence may be obtained, on written request, from the address at the bottom of the first page of this letter. Policy considerations 10. In deciding the application, the Secretary of State has had regard to section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 which requires that proposals be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. 11. The Secretary of State agrees with the Inspector that, in this case, the development plan comprises the 2009 Waveney District Council Core Strategy (CS) and the Council’s 2011 Development Management Policies (DMP) (IR16). He considers the development plan policies relevant to this appeal to be those set out by the Inspector at IR17-18. 12. Other material considerations which the Secretary of State has taken into account include the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework); the Overarching NPS for Energy (EN-1); Circular 11/95: The Use of Conditions in Planning Permissions; and Planning practice guidance for renewable and low carbon energy. He has not taken into account Planning for Renewable Energy: A Companion Guide to PPS22 (PPS22CG), which was cancelled by paragraph 2 of the Guidance. 13. The Secretary of State has also had regard to the Suffolk Landscape Character Assessment (2008); the East of England Landscape Framework; the Waveney District Landscape Character Assessment; the 2005 Kyoto Protocol; the EU Renewable Energy Directive; the Stern Review; the Energy White Paper 2007; the Energy Act 2008; the 2008 Energy Market Outlook-Electricity Demand Forecast Narrative; the Renewable Energy Roadmap Update 2012; and the statements made by the Minister of State for Climate Change on 16 January and 7 February 2013. 14. The Secretary of State has also had regard to the fact that on 28 August 2013 Government opened a new national planning practice guidance web-based resource. However, given that the guidance has not yet been finalised, he has attributed it limited weight. 15. The Secretary of State notes that there are several listed buildings within the surrounding area (IR15). In accordance with section 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, he has paid special regard to the desirability of preserving these listed structures or their settings or any features of special architectural or historic interest which they may possess. Main issues 16. The Secretary of State agrees that the main issue in this case is whether the benefits of the scheme, including the production of electricity from a renewable source, outweigh any harmful impacts, having particular regard to the effect upon the character and appearance of the countryside, including the likely impact upon the Hundred Tributary Valley Farmland Landscape Character Area (HTLCA) (IR37). Preliminary Matters 17. The Secretary of State has carefully considered the Inspector’s conclusions regarding the impact of the proposal on the listed buildings within the surrounding area at IR76-79 and has paid special regard to the desirability of preserving these listed structures and their settings and any features of special architectural or historic interest which they may possess. He agrees with the Inspector (IR77) and the main parties (IR36) that the appeal site does not form part of the setting of any listed building or monument and as a consequence there is no requirement to consult English Heritage (IR77). 18. The Secretary of State agrees with the Inspector, for the reasons given at IR80, that there is no requirement to consult Natural England on the loss of agricultural land. 19. The Secretary of State agrees with the Inspector and the main parties that the most relevant development plan policies for the determination of this appeal are DMP policies DM03 and DM27 (IR81). For the reasons given at IR81, he agrees with the Inspector that, with regards to policy DM27, policies relevant to the WLCA should be given moderate weight. Benefits of the Scheme 20. The Inspector considers the proposal to offer wider environmental benefits by providing a considerable amount of clean, renewable and sustainable electricity, which would contribute to national and local targets for renewable energy (IR82). Reflecting the Framework, the Guidance recognises that all communities have a responsibility to help increase the use and supply of green energy (paragraph 97 of Framework and paragraph 5 of Guidance); however, the Guidance makes it clear that this does not mean that the need for renewable energy automatically overrides environment protections and the planning concerns of local communities (paragraph 5 of the Guidance). Although the Secretary of State agrees with the Inspector that the wider environmental benefits should be afforded significant weight (IR82), taking account of the Guidance, he recognises that new renewable and low carbon energy infrastructure should only be provided in locations where the local environmental impact is acceptable (paragraph 3 of the Guidance). 21. The Secretary of States agrees with the Inspector that, for the reasons given at IR83, the local environmental benefits of the scheme resulting from the new hedgerow planting are important considerations that carry much weight. In coming to this conclusion he notes that the Guidance encourages biodiversity improvements such as these. However, he considers that the scheme already permitted by the Council will provide comparable benefits to the local environment whilst having less of an environmental impact and considers this a material consideration in the determination of this appeal. 22. The Secretary of State has had regard to the Inspector’s conclusions regarding the economic benefits of the scheme at IR84 and his view that these benefits should be afforded significant weight. Whilst he recognises that the construction of the development would support around 100 jobs and that this would benefit the national economy, he has also taken into consideration that the employment created would not be local and that the benefit to local services, businesses and facilities would be limited to the construction phase of the development.