Case Officer: Sarah Kay File No: CHE/15/00477/FUL Tel. No: (01246) 345786 Plot No: 2/4115 Ctte Date: 7th December 2015

ITEM 2

CONSTRUCTION OF A TEMPORARY SOLAR FARM, TO INCLUDE THE INSTALLATION OF SOLAR PANELS WITH TRANSFORMERS, A DISTRICT NETWORK OPERATOR (DNO) SUBSTATION, SECURITY FENCE AND GATE (INCORPORATING INFRA-RED BEAM SYSTEM) AND OTHER ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE AT LAND AT THE FORMER OXCROFT STOCKING GROUND, EAST OF WOODTHORPE ROAD, CHESTERFIELD FOR ANESCO LIMITED

Local Plan: Open countryside / other open land Ward: Lowgates and Woodthorpe

1.0 CONSULTATIONS

DCC Highways Comments received 13/08/2015 and 02/09/2015 (to BDC) – see report

DCC Strategic Planning Comments received 13/10/2015 – (inc. Landscapes) see report

Derby & Derbyshire DC Comments received 27/08/2015 – Archaeologist see report

Conservation Officer No comments received

Coal Authority Comments received 19/08/2015 and 25/09/2015 – see report

Derbyshire Wildlife Trust Comments received (to BDC) 18/11/2015 – see report

Lead Local Flood Authority Comments received 11/09/2015 – see report

Environment Agency Comments received 07/09/2015 – no objections

Design Services Comments received 27/08/2015 – no objections

Yorkshire Water Comments received 28/08/2015, 02/10/2015 and 20/11/2015 – see report

Derbyshire Constabulary Comments received 01/09/2015 – see report

Environmental Services Comments received 20/08/2015 – see report

Ward Members No comments received from CBC Cllrs but comments received from BDC Cllrs

Neighbours/Site Notice 8 no. letters of representation received

2.0 THE SITE

2.1 The majority of the site lies within District Council, in Derbyshire. The northern part of the site however lies within the boundary of Chesterfield Borough Council (see map showing Borough boundary below). The site is approximately 2 miles north of the town of Bolsover and it lies in close proximity to the M1 Motorway which is within 200 metres to the west. The nearest settlement is Stanfree which lies approximately 0.5 miles to the east of the site.

2.2 The site is approximately 11.8 hectares in size and comprises of a partially restored coal stocking site which once formed part of a larger coal disposal point with a Rail head facility. The Oxcroft Stocking Ground ceased its use as a disposal point in 2009.

2.3 The site is broken up in to three areas separated by woodland. The southern portion of the Site consisted of part of the former Oxcroft Colliery. The south-eastern part of the site was subsequently worked for surface coal until fairly recently. Stock- piles of coal are still being removed from site. The western field (formerly part of the colliery) has since been restored to horse- grazed pasture. The, much smaller, northern part of the site was not part of the colliery, and has been used to graze horses since at least 1999, and potentially considerably earlier.

2.4 The site has belts of trees and shrubbery running through it which segregates the three open sections of the application site. The south of the site has a further belt of trees and shrubbery screening it from Mill Lane whilst the west of the site is bound by a mature hedgerow. A disused railway forms the northern and eastern boundary to the site with intermittent trees and shrubbery in the north-eastern corner.

2.5 Beyond the Borough boundary there is an existing formal vehicular access to the south east of the site from Mill Lane, this is the only access point into the site for both pedestrians and vehicles. Mill Lane is a single carriageway road with one lane in each direction and is approximately 5.5-6m wide. Mill Lane joins Woodthorpe Road to the west and Road to the east. There are no pedestrian footways along Mill Lane and there are no public rights of way within the site.

2.6 There are two small ponds which lie in between the northern and eastern part of the site. These ponds are located within the belts of woodland but lie outside the actual application site boundary.

2.7 The site is bound by the following land uses:  To the north by the disused railway with agricultural land beyond;  To the east by the former rail head and former disposal point;  To the west by agricultural land and the M1 motorway;  To the south by Mill Lane and agricultural land.

3.0 RELEVANT SITE HISTORY

3.1 See table 1 (extracted from the Planning Statement) below:

4.0 THE PROPOSAL

4.1 The application, which is submitted in full, proposes development comprising a Solar Photovoltaic Farm on site. The solar farm is to utilise circa 11.8 hectares of the site to provide a series of solar arrays to generate a combined installed electricity generated capacity of 4.64MWp (p = peak production) of electricity per annum. The proposed development will utilise renewable energy sources to generate electricity, which will be supplied to both domestic and commercial consumers via the local distribution network.

4.2 In summary the proposed development comprises: “Construction of a temporary Solar Farm, to include the installation of Solar Panels with transformers, a District Network Operator (DNO) substation, security fence and gate (incorporating infra-red cameras) and other associated infrastructure”

4.3 The principle elements of the proposed development as a whole are as follows:  The proposed development is to be composed of a multi- hectare, fixed tilt, ground mounted PV solar array, which will deliver power to the electrical grid;  The key components include the solar modules, support frames for the modules, inverters and transformers;  The array is to consist of a maximum of 16,872 (265 Watt) solar modules attached to a fixed ground mounted steel and aluminium racking system with a total height of 2.4m;  To achieve maximum solar gain the panels are laid out in east – west rows with space of approximately 4-5.5 metres between each row to prevent overshadowing. The fixed modules will be tilted at a site-specific angle of 17.5 degrees based upon the topography and latitude of the site and mounted facing due south developed with non-reflective material to ensure that there is no glare. The maximum height of the mounted modules will be no higher than 2.4m from ground level to the top of the panel frame;  The solar radiation is converted into electricity in each individual cell of the PV module and converted from Direct Current (DC) to Alternating Current (AC) in the inverter. The circuit is then connected to a transformer which enables the power generated from the solar array to be distributed over the licensed Distribution Network Owner’s (‘DNO’) electrical lines at the correct voltage;  The direct current (DC) from the panels will be fed to 125 string inverters, which will convert it to alternating current (AC). These are painted dark green in colour and located along a central site axis;  The erection of a single low voltage sub-station is to be included to export the electricity generated at the farm;  An ‘Energy Storage Unit’ could potentially be located within the site which would be used to store energy generated by the Solar Farm to allow electricity output to be adjusted to match demand. This would also allow electricity generation during the night if required;  A new 2.2 metre high security fence (deer fence) is to be erected around the perimeter of the site with associated landscaping;  1.2m high pole mounted infra-red cameras set within the boundary of the perimeter fence to provide additional security (see Infra-Red Camera Specification Details);  The existing access off Mill Lane will be utilised for construction and light maintenance work with an area of hardstanding provided for maintenance vehicles to park and turn;  Temporary access tracks will be formed using bog mats during the construction period with a permanent bridge being constructed over Clowne Brook to allow for permanent access to the northern part of the site;  Swales which are 3 metres in width and up to 150mm in depth will be inserted within the eastern part of the site to ensure any contaminants from the construction phase will not run off into the existing water courses; and  Introduction of new tree and hedgerow planting and the seeding of the northern and western parts of the site with a wildflower meadow mix such as Emorsgate EM1.

It is however noted that the Borough boundary runs along the alignment of the Clowne Brook and therefore of the development described above only the northern field, which comprises entirely of module array and security fencing, and the northern edge of the proposed bridge lies within the Borough boundary of CBC and it is only this element of the application proposals upon which the planning decision by CBC can be based.

4.4 The installation will be carried out utilising a variety of powered equipment, such as a crane, post pounders, forklifts and trenchers. The majority of the work will, however involve manual labour utilising hand tools. The installation period is expected last between 10-12 weeks, with activities taking place between 07.30- 19.30 hours Monday to Friday and 07.30-16.00 hours on Saturdays with no working on Sundays.

4.5 The solar panels are designed with an operational life of 39 years, whereby upon conclusion the solar panels will be dismantled and removed prior to the site being reinstated.

4.6 The works required to connect the solar farm to the National Grid will be undertaken by an ICP on behalf of the DNO utilising their permitted development rights prescribed in s17 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995. The connection into the grid therefore does not form part of the Application. The route will be within the site boundary with the connection made into the grid off site. The exact design for connection will be confirmed by the statutory undertaker nearer the time once the necessary surveys have been undertaken.

4.7 The application submission was originally supported by the following documentation:  Application form and plans;  Planning Statement (prepared Barton Willmore)  Design and Access Statement (prepared by Anesco and Barton Willmore)  Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (prepared by Barton Willmore)  Flood Risk Assessment (prepared by RMA Environmental)  Transport Statement (prepared by SCP Transport)  Extended Phase I Habitat Survey inc. Biodiversity Management Plan (prepared by SLR Consulting)  Agricultural Land Classification Report (prepared by Reading Agricultural Consultants)  Heritage Assessment (prepared by Cotswolds Archaeology)  Glint & Glare Assessment (prepared by Pager Power)

4.8 The following revisions / additional documentation were submitted throughout the application process:  Ground Investigation Report (prepared by South West Geotechnical) - received 09/09/2015  Revised site plan (Rev D) and North field site plan (Rev A) - received 09/09/2015  Revised site plan (Rev E) received 18/09/2015  Traffic Construction Management Plan - received 29/09/2015  Statement of Community Involvement - received 15/10/2015  Addendum to LVIA - received 19/10/2015  Revised site plan (Rev F) - received 19/10/2015  Revised site plan (Rev G) - received 10/11/2015  Revised site plan (Rev I) – received 26/11/2015  Revised Landscape Strategy Plan – received 26/11/2015  Revised Traffic Management Plan – received 26/11/2015

5.0 CONSIDERATIONS

5.1 Planning Policy Background

5.1.1 The application site is situated in the open countryside / other open land as defined in the Chesterfield Local Plan: Core Strategy 2011 – 2031. Having regard the nature of the application proposals the National Planning Policy Framework and National Planning Policy Guidance (NPPF and NPPG); and Policies CS1 (Spatial Strategy), CS2 (Location of Development), CS3 (Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development), CS5 (Renewable Energy), CS9 (Green Infrastructure), CS13 (Economic Development), CS19 (Historic Environment) and CS20 (Demand for Travel) of the Core Strategy apply.

5.2 Policy Considerations

National Planning Policy

5.2.1 NPPF and NPPG on Renewable Energy Section 10 of the NPPF relates to renewable energy, particularly para 97, which states that: - local planning authorities should recognise the responsibility on all communities to contribute to energy generation from renewable or low carbon sources Para 98 states that when determining planning applications, local planning authorities should: - not require applicants for energy development to demonstrate the overall need for renewable or low carbon energy - approve the application if its impacts are (or can be made) acceptable, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

5.2.2 NPPG on renewable and low carbon energy (para 007) makes it clear that the need for renewable or low carbon energy does not automatically override environmental protections, and that protecting local amenity is an important consideration which should be given proper weight in planning decisions. It also states that cumulative impacts require particular attention, local topography is an important factor in assessing whether solar farms could have a damaging effect on landscape. The NPPG goes on to say that large-scale solar farms can have a negative impact on the rural environment, particularly in undulating landscapes. However, the visual impact of a well-planned and well-screened solar farm can be properly addressed within the landscape if planned sensitively.

5.2.3 In addition to the above para 013 of the NPPG sets out particular considerations that relate to large scale ground-mounted solar photovoltaic farms. These include:  encouraging the effective use of land by focussing large scale solar farms on previously developed and non-agricultural land, provided that it is not of high environmental value;  where a proposal involves greenfield land, whether (i) the proposed use of any agricultural land has been shown to be necessary and poorer quality land has been used in preference to higher quality land; and (ii) the proposal allows for continued agricultural use where applicable and/or encourages biodiversity improvements around arrays.  that solar farms are normally temporary structures and planning conditions can be used to ensure that the installations are removed when no longer in use and the land is restored to its previous use;  the proposal’s visual impact, the effect on landscape of glint and glare and on neighbouring uses and aircraft safety;  the extent to which there may be additional impacts if solar arrays follow the daily movement of the sun;  the need for, and impact of, security measures such as lights and fencing;  great care should be taken to ensure heritage assets are conserved in a manner appropriate to their significance, including the impact of proposals on views important to their setting.  the potential to mitigate landscape and visual impacts through, for example, screening with native hedges;  the energy generating potential, which can vary for a number of reasons including, latitude and aspect.

5.2.4 The PPG requirement to consider whether the proposed use of any agricultural land has been shown to be necessary suggests adopting a sequential approach. The NPPG criteria noted above are mentioned in the submitted planning statement (para 5.24), and para 6.5 makes reference to site selection and the need to be close to suitable grid connection. There is, however, no information on other sites assessed. In this case however due to the regeneration and brownfield element of the site within Bolsover, the use of a relatively small area of lower grade agricultural land in Chesterfield is accepted and it is not considered necessary to require the applicant to demonstrate a search for alternative sites.

Local Plan Policy

5.2.5 EVR2 – Open Countryside The site is currently designated as open countryside under the saved 2006 Local Plan Policy EVR2. . This policy states that: Within the areas of open countryside and other open land planning permission will only be granted for new development which is necessary for the needs of agriculture and forestry or is related to recreation, tourism or other types of farm or rural diversification provided that: (a) the location of the development outside the settlement framework is sustainable; (b) the proposal would not detract from an area where the open character of the countryside is particularly vulnerable because of its prominence or narrowness (including the quality of the landscape and any nature conservation interest); and (c) the scale, siting, design, materials and landscape treatment are such that the visual effect of the proposal is minimised and buildings are in keeping with their surroundings and reflect local character; and (d) the proposal would not lead to undue disturbance by the creation of excessive noise or traffic or the attraction of large numbers of people. (e) the proposed development including any activities outside the building would avoid unnecessary urbanisation and sprawl and not materially harm the rural landscape

5.2.6 The proposal broadly accords with this policy as such development can be said to be related to rural diversification, although it is worth noting that the agricultural use will not be retained alongside the proposed use. This policy is being saved until the Local Plan; Sites and Boundaries is adopted. It is worth noting that the Local Plan; Core Strategy does not propose any protective designations for the site (Green Wedges or Strategic Gaps), although as open countryside, it will be considered as part of the network of Green Infrastructure and thus covered by CS9. In terms of criteria b and e, comments on impact on the landscape are dealt with under policy CS5 and CS9. Visual impact (criteria c) and amenity (e) is dealt with under policy CS5.

5.2.7 Local Plan; Core Strategy CS2 Principles for Location of Development states that: In allocating new development, or assessing planning applications for developments that are not allocated in a DPD, sites will be assessed by the extent to which the proposals meet the following requirements: b) are on previously developed land that is not of high environmental value; c) are not on the best and most versatile agricultural land; d) deliver wider regeneration and sustainability benefits to the area; All developments will be required to have an acceptable impact on the amenity of users or adjoining occupiers, taking into account things such as …appearance…shading or other environmental, social or economic impacts.

5.2.8 The part of the proposed site within Chesterfield is grade 4 agricultural land classification which is not the best agricultural land. Although it is not best quality land, and the applicant has not demonstrated a search for previously developed sites, the proposal does deliver regeneration and wider sustainability benefits for the brownfield land within BDC and therefore overall it can be concluded that the proposal accords with this policy. The impacts on amenity are dealt with under policy CS5.

5.2.9 Local Plan; Core Strategy CS5 Renewable Energy states that: The council will support proposals for renewable energy generation particularly where they have wider social, economic and environmental benefits, provided that the proposals: a) minimise adverse impacts on the historic environment including heritage assets and their setting b) minimise adverse impacts on natural landscape and townscape character c) minimise adverse impacts on nature conservation d) minimise adverse impacts on amenity – in particular through noise, dust, odour, and traffic generation e) reduce impact in the open countryside by locating distribution lines below ground where possible f) include provision to reinstate the site if the equipment is no longer in use or has been decommissioned.

5.2.10 In relation to criteria a, it is likely that the proposal would have a less than substantial impact on the setting of nearby heritage assets within Chesterfield and beyond the Borough boundary in Bolsover. This policy requires that proposals minimise adverse impacts on landscape character and in this respect it is considered that the landscape character of the site, ‘Estate Farmlands’ is prevalent in large areas of the Borough and is not fragmented or threatened. The key characteristics of this landscape character are: - Broad, gently undulating landform - Mixed farming dominated by arable cropping - Localised woodland blocks and occasional trees - Hedgerows enclose medium size, semi regular fields - Small villages, hamlets and scattered farmsteads - Open landscape with long distance views

5.2.11 It has to be acknowledged that the scheme as a whole will have adverse impacts on the landscape, but these are not considered to be significant within Chesterfield, where the northern part of the site is in a natural dip and very well screened. The cumulative impacts of other similar installations in the surrounding area have not been considered within the submitted Landscape and Visual Assessment however it is noted that the Zones of Theoretical Visibility between such installations are lessen by the fact they are low level and are often only seen in accumulation from higher vantage points. Consideration has however been had to the recently consented scheme at Breck Lane, the array to the rear of Croft Farm (between Calow and Arkwright Town) and the Tom Lane, Duckmanton schemes where it was concluded that there would only be a negligible cumulative landscape effect within Chesterfield borough.

5.2.12 The Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment highlights appropriate mitigation measures, such as the planting of a 10m wide tree belt along the northern edge of the plot within Chesterfield (identified as area 3 in the LVIA), and wildflower seeding. This would help to assimilate the development into the landscape and enhance biodiversity. The overall adverse effect on the character of the landscape in Chesterfield would be less than significant. It is set out in the application documentation that after 30 years and 6 months the site will be restored to its current condition which would need to be secured through an appropriate planning condition.

5.2.13 It is noted that there are no footpaths which cross the site. The nearest footpath is Staveley FP 29 to the west of the site, running in a north to south direction. Due to the topography there are very limited views of the site from this footpath, and the amenity of users will not be adversely affected.

5.2.14 Local Plan; Core Strategy CS6 Management of the Water Cycle Although the part of the site within Chesterfield (Area 3) is flood zone 3, solar farms can be considered as essential infrastructure (NPPG para 066 and 067 Tables 2 and 3), and as such can be located in flood zone 3 areas provided that they are designed and constructed to remain operational and safe in times of flood. It is clear that a sequential approach has been taken within the site as a whole in terms of the locations of the substation etc and it is noted that the Lead Local Flood Authority, the Environment Agency and Yorkshire Water Services have raised no objections to the scheme as revised (Rev F) and on this basis the proposal accords with policy CS6.

5.2.15 Local Plan; Core Strategy CS9 Green Infrastructure Development proposals are required to meet the following criteria where appropriate, and should: e) conserve or enhance the local distinctiveness and character of the landscape f) enhance the borough’s biodiversity and where possible link habitats g) Protect existing ancient and non-ancient woodland and increase tree cover in suitable locations in the borough

5.2.16 Detailed landscape considerations are dealt with under CS5. Although the proposals do not enhance the character of the landscape, as a temporary use, there is no irreversible impact, and arguably, in the long term the landscape will be enhanced by the new tree planting, which also accords with criteria g. The Biodiversity Management Plan identifies appropriate biodiversity objectives and suitable maintenance arrangements which have been endorsed by Derbyshire Wildlife Trust (see Ecology section below).

5.3 Highways

5.3.1 In respect of the potential traffic impact of the development proposals the application is accompanied by a Transport Statement and Traffic Construction Management Plan which have been prepared by SCP Transport. Traffic arising from the development proposals are likely to be characterised by three distinct phases of the development comprising the construction phase, the operation phase and the site decommissioning phase.

5.3.2 Initially the Local Highways Authority (LHA) reviewed the application submission submitted to Chesterfield Borough Council raising no objections to the development on the basis the proposals exclusively in the Borough boundary included no apparent alterations to the site access from Woodthorpe Road; but they sought the submission of a Construction Management Plan (CMP) for written approval prior to commencement of any works. The case officer is however aware that detailed comments on the main element of the development proposals were provided to BDC from the LHA dated 02/09/2015 which triggered the submission of a Construction Management Plan by the applicant on 29/09/2015; which ultimately addressed the concerns the LHA had raised to CBC about the scheme within the Borough boundary.

5.3.3 The CMP submitted details that the delivery routes for the construction period will utilise J30 of the M1 and traffic will thereafter be directed to Mastin Moor and along Bolsover Road, therefore traffic movements will take place through the Borough boundary incidental to the wider development proposals.

5.3.4 Having regard to the above it is not considered that the development proposals pose any threat to highway safety or raise any adverse highway issues. The principles of the CMP are considered to be acceptable and there have been no adverse comments raised to this following consultation with the LHA. An appropriate condition can be imposed, if development is permitted, accordingly to require the construction phase of development to take place in accordance with the CMP and thereafter, an appropriate Management Plan can be required to deal with site decommissioning. 5.4 Ecology

5.4.1 Having regard to siting and land uses characteristics of the application site an ecological presence and / or interest may exist which could potentially be effected as a result of its redevelopment for the purposes the subject of this application. To this effect the application submission is accompanied by an Extended Phase I Habitat Survey inc. Biodiversity Management Plan (prepared by SLR Consulting)

5.4.2 In respect of the above views of both Natural (NE) and the Derbyshire Wildlife Trust (DWT) on the Habitat Survey have been provided direct to BDC. NE have indicated they have no comments to make on the application submission and DWT have responded as follows:

‘We have considered the relevant documents submitted as part of the planning application with particular reference to the following reports prepared by SLR Consulting dated July 2015 ref: 424.05075.00008:  Biodiversity Management Plan V01  Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey & Phase 2 Protected Species Surveys (Great crested newt, Reptiles & Woodlark) V03 and the Revised Layout Plan Drawing number 001427_200 Rev G dated 10/11/2015

Following the undertaking of an initial Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey on 5th June 2015, further protected species surveys were undertaken based upon the findings of the initial survey.

The main ecological issue associated with the proposal is the location of solar arrays on the eastern compartment of the site which supports substantive habitat and species interest including open mosaic priority habitat. While we note that a proportion of the eastern compartment will be left free of solar panels and that the area under the solar panels will be maintained as open mosaic habitat, we are of the view that the habitat under the panels will be adversely affected by shading and changes in microclimate. The species associated with open mosaic habitat prefer open sites and many of the species in light demanding groups are likely to be disadvantaged and as such the communities characteristic of full sun open conditions are unlikely to be maintained. We would therefore advise that the panels should be removed entirely from this eastern compartment or significantly reduced.

In relation to reptiles and amphibians, the presence of a grass snake population comprising varying age ranges was confirmed from the survey area but the results of the great crested newt surveys were rather inconclusive. Use of eDNA proved positive for great crested newt in one of the ponds but subsequent traditional surveys found no evidence of the species although we would advise that the timing of the surveys were not in accordance with guidance. It is therefore important that the Reasonable Avoidance Measures (RAM’s) outlined in the ecology report are adhered to with the additional provision that any areas of potential reptile and amphibian interest shall not be disturbed or removed during the hibernation period which extends from October to March inclusive.

If the Council is minded to grant permission in the absence of a revision of the layout to reduce the extent of arrays in the eastern compartment we would advise that conditions to secure the following should be attached to any consent:  The development shall be carried out in strict accordance with the Great Crested Newt Reasonable Avoidance Measures (RAM.s) outlined in Section 5.2 of the Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey & Phase 2 Protected Species Surveys (Great crested newt, Reptiles & Woodlark) V03 prepared by SLR Consulting dated July 2015 ref: 424.05075.00008 (once revised to include the hibernation constraints  The development shall be carried out in strict accordance with the Biodiversity Management Plan V01 prepared by SLR Consulting dated July 2015 ref: 424.05075.00008  The development shall be carried out in strict accordance with the Revised Layout Plan Drawing number 001427_200 Rev G dated 10/11/2015 and the Landscape Strategy Plan Rev. B dated 03.08.2015’

5.4.3 Having regard to the comments and advice given above it is not considered that the proposals pose an adverse threat to ecology or biodiversity and accordingly subject to the imposition of appropriate planning conditions which secure measures to protect any ecological interest on site and implementation of the biodiversity management plan the proposal development is considered to demonstrate compliance with the provisions of policy CS9 of the Core Strategy and the wider NPPF. 5.5 Other Issues

Archaeology/Heritage

5.5.1 It is noted, as outline in the supporting Planning Statement, that the site has undergone extensive re-landscaping during the late 20th and early 21st centuries. Such landscaping is likely to have affected potential buried archaeological remains, if present.

5.5.2 An assessment has been made of potential effects of the proposed development upon the settings of designated heritage assets within the proposed development’s ZTV, and Bolsover Castle to the south of the site. It has been determined that the proposed development will not affect the significance of any designated heritage assets due to the negligible contribution of the site to their setting, and hence architectural and historic interest, of the assets. The proposed development would therefore not affect these heritage assets, and would not conflict with the requirements of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, the National Planning Policy Framework or Local Planning Policy.

5.5.3 In respect of the conclusions reached above there have been no adverse comments received from the Council’s Conservation Officer and the following comments have been received from the DC Archaeologist as follows:

‘The site lies in an area with little known archaeology, though it is close to the medieval site at Romeley Hall (c650m north-east). Much of the site has been subject to disturbance in the context of coal workings, with opencast extraction to the western side, and use of the eastern part of the site for coal stocking (both within ). This will have removed archaeological potential across the majority of the site area, leaving a possibly undisturbed area of c1.8ha to the north (within Chesterfield Borough), described as an ‘agricultural field’ in the Design and Access Statement. Given the proximity of this area to the motorway and railway cutting, however, it is also likely to have experienced significant disturbance. I therefore advise that the site is unlikely to retain any archaeological potential and recommend that there is no planning requirement for archaeological work under the NPPF and local plan policies. The applicant has provided a heritage study by Cotswold Archaeology presenting an assessment of setting impacts to designated heritage assets within the viewshed of the development. This suggests that there will be some visibility of the development from the Grade II building at Romeley Hall, though beyond its immediate agricultural setting c650m to the south, and extremely limited visibility from the stone walkway at Bolsover Castle, within the wider landscape to the north, which is a patchwork of rural and modern elements. I therefore concur with the conclusions of the heritage assessment that these very minor changes do not pose significant harms to the setting of designated heritage assets.’

5.5.4 Given the conclusions reached above, it is not considered that the application proposals pose an adverse impact upon any nearby surrounding designated heritage assets. The application has correctly assessed the impact of the development with the submission of a Historic Environment Assessment and it is concluded that the development accords with the provisions of policy CS19 of the Core Strategy and the wider NPPF.

Noise

5.5.5 The application proposals, albeit located within the open countryside, include the installation of site transformers and generators which could be a source of noise for the smallholdings and farmhouses which surround the application site. The Councils Environmental Services (ES) team have reviewed the application proposals accordingly and have requested that further information is provided about all sources of noise and the sound output produced by the electrical equipment.

5.5.6 Having regard to the comments of the ES team above it is noted that the development is reliant upon transformers, invertors and metering equipment which are all detailed to be located securely in various buildings within the site. Whilst it is unlikely any noise output form this equipment will impact upon the amenity of any nearby residential properties (given their separation) further details of their noise output should be required to ensure the development does not pose any impact at all.

5.5.7 It is therefore considered appropriate to require the submission of further details of the sound output from the equipment to ensure any resulting noise levels are agreed and can be monitored, if this is considered necessary. Accordingly an appropriate planning condition can be imposed, if permission is granted, to this effect in the interests of protecting amenity in accordance with policies CS2 and CS18 of the Core Strategy.

Security/Crime Prevention

5.5.8 In respect of security and crime prevention comments from the Crime Prevention Design Advisor (CPDA) at Derbyshire Constabulary have been received following their consideration of the application proposals. They have concerns about the detail of the proposed 2m high ‘deer’ fence bounding the application site given that this type of fencing in their opinion offers very little security or resistance against intruders. They advise that more substantial security fencing 2.4m high conforming to SEAP government standard would provide a better deterrent against theft as sites of this nature are attracting criminal interest. They have asked whether the developer can confirm the CCTV will be monitored 24/7 and whether the applicant has considered a perimeter alarm system?

5.5.9 Notwithstanding the comments of the CPDA above the site lies within the open countryside and the use of ‘deer’ fencing is typical of such installations given the fact its visual impact in minimal. To require security fencing of the type suggested by the CPDA would in the opinion of the Local Planning Authority be a retrograde step as the site is proposed to be secured and monitored by a CCTV system and this would offer an acceptable degree of security and monitoring against theft which would be in the control of the applicant (who has a vested interest in maintaining security at their own sites). It is not considered necessary to seek the installation of a perimeter alarm system (this has not been a requirement on any other similar installations in the Borough) and on balance of the issues weighing up security and visual impact it is considered that there would be an adverse visual impact of requiring substantial security fencing in this location which would be harmful to the open character of the landscape. It is therefore considered that the proposed combination of 2m high ‘deer’ fencing and CCTV monitoring of the site would be an acceptable combination of security measures balanced against visual amenity.

Drainage/Flood Risk

5.5.10 The application proposals have been reviewed by the Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA), the Councils Design Services (DS) team and the Environment Agency (EA) in respect of drainage and flood risk matters.

5.5.11 The EA confirmed that they have no objections to the proposed scheme on flood risk grounds but commented that consultation would need to take place with the LLFA given the presence of a watercourse running through the site.

5.5.12 In respect of the above the LLFA commented as follows: ‘The proposed development includes a swale in the drainage design to accommodate for an increase in surface water with climate change, the maintenance of which is stated to be with the landowner. Furthermore there are areas of the site which are identified as being in very close proximity to an ordinary watercourse. The applicant should ensure there is a sufficient buffer strip in place which will allow for efficient maintenance to take place of both the swales and the ordinary watercourses within the site. We would recommend an easement of approximately 3m if the channel is less than 2m in width and 4.5m for channels over 2m in width. Whilst this is not stipulated within any legal byelaw DCC would recommend these distances in order to safeguard access for essential maintenance and inspection purposes.

The TIN101 Natural England technical note referenced in the Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) suggests ‘compact areas of soil should be loosened’. The applicant should consider this option post construction for areas of the site which may have become compacted during the construction phase of the development. Whilst the FRA states that light vehicles will be utilised and that waterlogged ground will be avoided during construction, there is still potential for areas of the site to become compacted.

It is noted within the application that a bridge will be installed over an ordinary watercourse. Any works in or nearby to an ordinary watercourse require consent under the Land Drainage Act (1991) from Derbyshire County Council. Whilst the bridge design is free spanning the works may require temporary consent to create a dry working area whilst the bridge is installed.’

5.5.13 It is noted that in respect of the scheme design and proposed drainage swale neither the Council’s DS team or the LLFA have requested any further information and therefore it is assumed that the details submitted are acceptable. An appropriate condition can be imposed requiring the development to take place in accordance with the submitted Flood Risk Assessment. This approach accords with the provisions of policy CS7 of the Core Strategy and the wider NPPF.

5.5.14 In respect of the development layout it is noted and commented that the variations in layout affecting the northern field (located in the CBC boundary) have been ongoing following liaison with Yorkshire Water Services (YWS). Alongside the northern boundary of the Clowne Brook there is an existing sewer which YWS have sought to see protected by the provision of an easement. The latest drawing (Rev G) has been accepted by YWS in their latest comment dated 20/11/2015.

6.0 REPRESENTATIONS

6.1 Publicity was undertaken on this application jointly with Bolsover District Council and a joint site notice was posted on 11/09/2015 and a joint advertisement was placed on the local press on 20/08/2015. CBC did not notify any neighbours directly by letter as those closest the application site boundary are all located in the administrative boundary of BDC who were the lead LPA.

6.2 As a result of the application publicity, 8 no. representations were received by CBC from residents outside the Borough and as summarised below:

11, 16, 24 Oxcroft View, Stanfree A Local Resident (Sheffield business email address only) 22 (x2) Appletree Road, Stanfree (BDC Cllr Paul & Cllr Pat Cooper) 6 Croft View, Clowne 90 Low Road, Clowne  I object to the application as there have been no proper public consultation by the developer;  there would be a change to the character of the landscape and the development does not fit with the local area / the character of the landscape will be visually impaired and the visual impact of the development on the green open spaces will have an adverse impact, particularly as the site is located in a valley;  we would lose the public footpath which runs through the site;  we have always understood that the screening site would be restored to look similar to what it did before the coal stocking took place;  recent rumours of a country park really appealed to me and this would have been in character with the area;  conditions of the previous planning permission have never been met by UK coal – why were they allowed to flout this, how can they be trusted with future development, what exit strategy is in place for the solar farm after the 25year period?  UK coal have failed to keep the site secure and there are ongoing problems with anti-social behaviour and nuisance from scrambling bikes and fly tipping – how can we be sure the security measures they propose will be enough given their current track record?  the development will create a loss of habitat for several endangered species and there will be an adverse effect on biodiversity / flora will suffer due to loss of light below the panels;  there were 40 reasons for the setting of conditions on the previous planning permission and amongst them was the site restoration as agricultural land, amenity woodlands and nature conservation – the application proposed meets none of these conditions;  there is very little regeneration taking place in these communities, only what the residents are doing themselves to their own properties and to the local area by raising funds – just when they thought they were getting somewhere with the development of a country park along comes this planning application to take it away again;  this sought of development should take place on brownfield sites such as markham vale or coalite;  we are already surrounded by wind turbines and solar farms with more initiatives planned therefore we are doing more than our fair share to promote sustainable energy;  enough green sites have been lost to development, the coal stocking yard is the only part of the site that has been returned to green space and it should remain so with the rest of site also returned to agriculture and community open space.

The applicant Anesco arranged 2 no. public consultation events. The first was held on the 3rd September 2015 at Waterloo Court, Markham Vale and the second was held on the 29th September 2015 at the Oxcroft Miners Welfare, Stanfree / Shuttlewood Road.

See 5.2 and 5.5 above re: landscape character.

The conditions of the previous planning permissions do not relate to any permissions issued by CBC as Local Planning Authority as they are for the site located within BDC. Compliance with them is not a matter which is enforceable by CBC, this is a matter for BDC or DCC.

6.3 In addition to the above, it is noted from discussions with BDC that they notified 51 no. neighbours by letter and received 46 no. representations which will need to be addressed by BDC separately to those received by the Borough Council.

7.0 HUMAN RIGHTS ACT 1998

7.1 Under the Human Rights Act 1998, which came into force on 2nd October 2000, an authority must be in a position to show:

 Its action is in accordance with clearly established law  The objective is sufficiently important to justify the action taken  The decisions taken are objective and not irrational or arbitrary  The methods used are no more than are necessary to accomplish the legitimate objective  The interference impairs as little as possible the right or freedom

7.2 It is considered that the recommendation is objective and in accordance with clearly established law.

7.3 The recommended conditions are considered to be no more than necessary to control details of the development in the interests of amenity and public safety and which interfere as little as possible with the rights of the applicant.

7.4 Whilst, in the opinion of the objector, the development affects their amenities, it is not considered that this is harmful in planning terms, such that any additional control to satisfy those concerns would go beyond that necessary to accomplish satisfactory planning control

8.0 STATEMENT OF POSITIVE AND PROACTIVE WORKING WITH APPLICANT

8.1 The following is a statement on how the Local Planning Authority (LPA) has adhered to the requirements of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) (Amendment No. 2) Order 2012 in respect of decision making in line with paragraphs 186 and 187 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

8.2 Given that the proposed development does not conflict with the NPPF or with ‘up-to-date’ Development Plan policies, it is considered to be ‘sustainable development’ and there is a presumption on the LPA to seek to approve the application. The LPA has used conditions to deal with outstanding issues with the development and has been sufficiently proactive and positive in proportion to the nature and scale of the development applied for.

8.3 The applicant / agent and any objector will be provided with copy of this report informing them of the application considerations and recommendation / conclusion.

9.0 CONCLUSION

9.1 Nationally renewable energy developments are strongly supported and the Council has a clear commitment to addressing climate change, as set out in the principles of Policy CS5 of the Chesterfield Local Plan: Core Strategy 2011 – 2031. Where it is considered that proposed renewable energy generation developments meet the criteria of Policy CS5, the policy is explicit in stating the Council will support these developments.

9.2 Having regard for all of the material considerations which have been set out and considered in this report it is concluded that the benefits of the development in so far as the provision of renewable energy and a reduction in carbon emissions amount to circumstances which outweigh the minor / less than substantial landscape and visual impacts of the development such that it is recommended planning permission be granted. Overall it is considered that the proposals accord with the provisions of policies CS2, CS5, CS9, CS18 and CS19 of the Chesterfield Local Plan: Core Strategy 2011 – 2031 and the wider National Planning Policy Framework and are therefore acceptable.

9.3 Bolsover District Council is considering the same application as almost two thirds of the application site is on land which is within their District. It is noted that the application submitted to Bolsover District Council has similarly been recommended for approval to their own Planning Committee with the same conclusions reached that their sites are also well screened by existing and proposed tree and hedge planting and topography from general views from nearby highways, footpaths and the countryside.

10.0 RECOMMENDATION

10.1 It is therefore recommended that the application be GRANTED subject to the following:

01. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason - The condition is imposed in accordance with section 51 of the Planning and Compensation Act 2004.

02. The planning permission is granted for a period of 40 years from the commencement of development of the solar farm. Not less than 6 months from the expiry of the 40 years or on cessation of electricity generation on site (whichever is sooner) details of the removal of the array and associated equipment; the restoration of the land to agricultural use; and the phasing of works shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for consideration / approval. Not less than 6 months from the expiry of the 40 years or on cessation of electricity on site (whichever is sooner) all development hereby permitted shall be removed and the land restored to agricultural land in accordance with the approved scheme. Written notice is to be given to the Local Planning Authority at least 5 working days prior to construction commencing on site.

Reason - In the interests of visual amenity and the amenities of nearby residential properties.

03. The development shall take place in accordance with the proposals and recommendations of the Biodiversity Management Plan prepared by SLR Ref 424.05075.00008 July 2015, including the aftercare and maintenance operations, all generally in accordance with the timetable contained within chapter 5 of the Biodiversity Management Plan.

Reason - The condition is imposed in order to enhance the appearance of the development and in the interests of the area as a whole.

04. If, within a period of five years from the date of the planting of any tree or plant, that tree or plant, or any tree or plant planted as a replacement for it, is removed, uprooted or destroyed or dies, or becomes, in the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, seriously damaged or defective, another tree or plant of the same species and size as that originally planted shall be planted at the same place.

Reason - The condition is imposed in order to enhance the appearance of the development and in the interests of the area as a whole.

05. The development shall take place in accordance with the Reasonable Avoidance Measures specified in chapter 5 of the Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey and Phase 2 Protected Species Survey Report by SLR reference 424.05075.00008 July 2015.

Reason - To protect, and minimise any harmful effects upon protected species and other wildlife from the development in compliance with policy CS9 of the Core Strategy and the principles and policies of the National Planning Policy Framework in the context of sustainable development .

06. The development shall take place in accordance with the proposals and recommendations of the Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment and the Landscape Strategy Plan by Barton Willmore reference 24920-L9 Revision D (received 26/11/2015) prepared as Figure 6 of the Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment which shall be implemented generally in accordance with the timetable contained within chapter 5 of the Biodiversity Management Plan referred to in condition 3 above.

Reason - To minimise any visual impacts of the development through the retention of existing vegetation and provision of additional planting including its maintenance in the interests of the landscape setting and visual appearance of the site in compliance with policies CS2, CS5 and CS9 of the Core Strategy and the principles and policies of the National Planning Policy Framework in the context of sustainable development .

07. The development shall take place in accordance with the revised Traffic Management Plan dated 24/11/2015 by Anesco (received 26/11/2015).

Reason - For the avoidance of doubt to ensure a satisfactory development which minimises any impacts and in compliance with policies CS2 and CS20 of the Core Strategy and the principles and policies of the National Planning Policy Framework in the context of sustainable development .

08. In the event that unexpected contamination is found at any time when carrying out the approved development, it must be reported in writing immediately to the Local Planning Authority. An investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken in accordance with current guidance and where remediation is necessary a remediation scheme must be prepared and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme a verification report must be prepared, which is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority.

Reason - The site has the potential to be contaminated because of past uses on or near the site to ensure there is no risk to human health, property and wildlife in compliance with policies CS8 of the Core Strategy and the principles and policies of the National Planning Policy Framework in the context of sustainable development . 09. All electricity cables shall be installed below ground, with the exception of any cabling which may pass over the Clowne Brook bridge.

Reason - In the interests of visual amenity.

10. No development shall take place until space is provided within the site curtilage, for site accommodation, storage of plant and materials, parking and manoeuvring of site operative's and visitor's vehicles together with the loading/unloading and manoeuvring of goods vehicles. The space shall be constructed and laid out to enable vehicles to enter and leave the site in a forward gear, in surface materials suitable for use in inclement weather and maintained free from impediment throughout the duration of construction works.

Reason - In the interests of highway safety.

11. Prior to their installation details of the operating noise output levels from any of the switchgear, transformers, invertors and metering equipment shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Only those details which receive the written approval of the Local Planning Authority shall be carried out on site. Thereafter during the operational phase of the development, the noise emanating from works or machinery for operation of the solar farm shall be no more than 35dB LA90, when measured* or calculated at a point 1 metre from the boundary of any non-related residential property. * This level does not need to be measured if the generated noise is deemed inaudible at the boundary of any non- related property during any period of the day or night.

Reason – In the interests of nearby neighbouring properties amenity.

12. All external dimensions and elevational treatments shall be as shown on the approved plans, with the exception of any approved non material amendment.

Reason - In order to clarify the extent of the planning permission in the light of guidance set out in "Greater Flexibility for planning permissions" by CLG November 2009.

13. The development shall take place in accordance with the Flood Risk Assessment prepared RMA Environmental.

Reason – To ensure that the development is resilient to any potential flood risk and in the interests of policy CS7 of the Core Strategy and the wider National Planning Policy Framework.