Mr Marcus Trinick Our Ref: APP/D2510/A/14/2213150 Eversheds LLP Bridgewater Place Your Ref: 181407.000006 Water Lane Leeds LS11 5DR 20 March 2015 Dear Sir TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 – SECTION 78 APPEAL BY ASC RENEWABLES LTD LAND AT BISHOPTHORPE FARM, TETNEY, GRIMSBY - APPLICATION REF: N/178/01969/12 1. I am directed by the Secretary of State to say that consideration has been given to the report of the Inspector, Philip Major BA (Hons) DipTP MRTPI, who opened an inquiry on 5 August 2014 into your client’s appeal against the failure of East Lindsey District Council (‘the Council’) to give notice within the prescribed period of a decision on an application for planning permission for the erection of 8 wind turbines (with a maximum height from the ground to the blade tip of between 105m and 115m, between 63m and 75m to hub and between 70m and 93m rotor diameter) and associated infrastructure including foundations, transformers, and crane hardstanding areas; new and upgraded on-site access tracks and one new site access point and one upgraded site access point; a new switchgear and control building; underground cabling; a meteorological mast; and 2 temporary construction compounds (application ref N/178/01969/12). 2. On 17 June 2014, the appeal was recovered for the Secretary of State's determination, in pursuance of section 79 of, and paragraph 3 of Schedule 6 to, the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 on the grounds that it involves a renewable energy development. Inspector’s recommendation and summary of the decision 3. The Inspector, whose report is enclosed with this letter, recommended that the appeal be allowed and planning permission granted. For the reasons given below, the Secretary of State agrees with the Inspector’s conclusions, except Julian Pitt, Decision Officer Tel: 0303 44 41630 Department for Communities and Local Government Email: [email protected] 3rd Floor, Fry Building, 2 Marsham Street, London SW1P 4DF where indicated otherwise, and agrees with his recommendation. All paragraph numbers, unless otherwise stated, refer to the Inspector’s report (IR). Procedural matters 4. In reaching this position the Secretary of State has, like the Inspector, taken into account the Environmental Statement (ES), Supplementary Environmental Information (SEI) and further SEI which was submitted under the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2011 (IR3). The Secretary of State is content that the Environmental Statement complies with the above regulations. He considers that the ES and SEI, together with other information which is referred to in Appendix 2 of this letter, has provided sufficient information for him to assess the environmental impact of the application. Policy Considerations 5. In deciding the appeal, 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. In this case, he agrees with the Inspector (IR12) that the development plan comprises the saved policies of the East Lindsey Alteration Local Plan (adopted 1999); the saved policies of the Lincolnshire minerals Local Plan (1991); and the saved policies of the Lincolnshire Waste Local Plan (2006). 6. In accordance with section 66(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (the LB Act), the Secretary of State has paid special regard to the desirability of preserving those listed structures potentially affected by the proposals before him or their settings or any features of special architectural or historic interest which they may possess. 7. The Secretary of State agrees with the Inspector and the parties that the most relevant policies as they relate to this appeal are those set out at IR13-19. 8. Other material considerations which the Secretary of State has taken into account include the National Planning Policy Framework (“the Framework”) and the accompanying planning practice guidance; the National Policy Statements (NPS) for Energy (EN-1) and Renewable Energy (EN-3) the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Regulations 2010 as amended; and Planning Policy Statement (PPS) 5 Planning for the Historic Environment Practice Guide of March 2010. The Secretary of State has also taken into account the Written Ministerial Statements on renewable energy published in June 2013 by the Secretaries of State for Energy and Climate Change and for Communities and Local Government and the Written Ministerial Statement on renewable energy published by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government in April 2014. 9. A draft East Lindsey Local Plan is in preparation which will replace the extant Local Plan. However the draft Local Plan has made limited headway and the Secretary of State agrees with the Inspector that it can be afforded little if any weight at this stage (IR21). Main Considerations 10. The Secretary of State agrees with the Inspector that the main issues in this case are those set out at IR372. Landscape and Visual Impact 11. For the reasons given by the Inspector at IR373-397, the Secretary of State agrees with the Inspector’s summary of his findings (IR398) on the impact of the proposed development on the character and visual qualities of the area. He agrees too that when assessed against the development plan, it is not clear that the landscape character and visual impacts would be significantly harmful to the amenities of people living and working in the area in the sense that it would impact upon the conditions experienced as they go about their lives. Like the Inspector, the Secretary of State does not find there is a conflict with the thrust of Local Plan Policy A4. However, he agrees that there would be some apparent conflict with Policies A5 and C14, though for reasons given at IR15 and 19 the weight attached to this conflict is minimal as a result of the limited weight attaching to these policies (IR399). Heritage Assets 12. The Secretary of State agrees with the Inspector that the issue in regard to heritage assets is the effect of the proposed wind turbines on the setting of heritage assets and whether or not this would affect their significance (IR400). 13. The Secretary of State has carefully considered the Inspector’s findings on heritage assets at IR401-423. The Secretary of State accepts the Inspector’s overall conclusion that there is less than substantial harm to the setting of the Grade I Tetney Church, but no harm to the setting of any other designated or undesignated heritage asset (IR424). For the reasons given by the Inspector at IR412, the Secretary of State agrees that although the harm to Tetney Church is less than substantial, the desirability of preserving the setting is a matter of considerable importance and weight, and must form part of the planning balance. Living Conditions 14. The Secretary of State agrees with the Inspector’s assessment of the impact on the outlook from the chalets at Thorpe Park and from dwellings surrounding the appeal site at IR425-433. He also agrees with the Inspector’s assessment about the issue of noise (IR434-438). He therefore agrees with the Inspector’s overall conclusion (IR455 vi) that there are no grounds to conclude that the living conditions of nearby residents or visitors would be unacceptably harmed. Tourism 15. For the reasons given by the Inspector at IR439-443, the Secretary of State agrees that there is no evidence of the likelihood of any material impact on tourism in the area (IR443). SPA and Ramsar Sites 16. The Secretary of State has considered the Inspector’s assessment at IR444-448 and the proposed conditions 24 and 25 on ecology in the Appendix to the IR. 17. The Secretary of State, as competent authority for the purposes of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010, agrees that he needs to carry out an Appropriate Assessment. This is at Appendix 2 to this letter and sets out his independent consideration the relevant technical information. On the basis of his assessment he agrees with the Inspector that he can safely conclude that the proposed development would not adversely affect the integrity of any European site so long as suitable conditions are imposed (IR448), in this case being conditions 24 and 25. Other matters 18. For the reasons given by the Inspector at IR449-454, the Secretary of State agrees that none of the matters considered by the Inspector in those paragraphs militate against the proposal. Benefits of the Proposal 19. For the reasons at IR458-459 the Secretary of State agrees with the Inspector, that the renewable energy and CO2 saving benefits are clearly of substantial weight in favour of the proposal in the overall balance (IR459). For the reason at IR460 he also agrees that there is a need to do more to ensure security of supply, in accordance with Government policy, and concurs with the Inspector’s view that this is of significant weight. 20. In terms of other aspects of sustainability, the Secretary of State has carefully considered the Inspector’s conclusions at IR461 and agrees that social benefits would be provided by the provision of renewable energy and the assistance in combating climate change. However, like the Inspector, he recognises that the case against the proposal includes matters related to the enjoyment of the locality, and these matters can also be taken to be of some social relevance. 21. Turning to economic benefits, the Secretary of State agrees that there would be undoubted gains in the provision of employment and services associated with the proposal, but like the Inspector (IR461) he considers that these economic benefits would not be guaranteed to be felt in the local area and there is no firm basis for accepting the figures advanced by the appellant.