Our ref: APP/Y2430/A/12/2186471 Phil Cookson Holistics Ideas The Greenhouse Old Brewery Golden Hill 31 January 2018 Wiveliscombe Somerset TA4 2NY Dear Sir TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 – SECTION 78 APPEAL B - MADE BY PROFESSOR GARY ENGLAND, HALL FARM, THORPE SATCHVILLE - LAND AT HALL FARM, KLONDYKE LANE, THORPE SATCHVILLE, MELTON MOWBRAY, LE14 2TB - APPLICATION REF: 14/02601/AOP 1. I am directed by the Secretary of State to say that consideration has been given to the report of Inspector, Alan Novitzky BArch(Hons) MA(RCA) PhD RIBA, who held a Hearing on dates between 5 August 2014 and 17 December 2014 into your client’s appeal under Section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against the decision of Melton Borough Council (“the Council”) to refuse an application for the erection of a single wind turbine with a maximum height to blade tip of 46.1m height, dated 26 June 2012, in accordance with application Ref: 12/00460/FUL. 2. The Secretary of State initially issued his decision in respect of the initial appeal by way of his letter dated 23 May 2013. That decision was challenged by way of an application to the High Court and was subsequently quashed by order of the Court. The appeal was redetermined by the Secretary of State, following a new inquiry into this matter. On 30 June 2014, this 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. 3. The Secretary of State issued his decision in respect of the second appeal on 11 November 2015. That decision was also challenged by way of an application to the High Court and was subsequently quashed by order of the Court dated May 2016. This decision supersedes that issued in November 2015. Inspector’s recommendation and summary of the decision 4. The Inspector recommended that the appeal be allowed and planning permission granted. Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government Tel: 0303 444 2853 Phil Barber, Decision Officer Email: [email protected] Planning Casework Unit 3rd Floor Fry Building 2 Marsham Street London SW1P 4DF 5. For the reasons given below, the Secretary of State agrees with the Inspector’s conclusions, except where stated, and agrees with his recommendation. He has decided to grant planning permission. A copy of the Inspector’s report (IR) is enclosed. All references to paragraph numbers, unless otherwise stated, are to that report. Matters arising since the close of the inquiry 6. Following the quashing of the appeal decision, on 7 September 2017 the Secretary of State issued a letter under Rule 19 of the Town and Country Planning (Inquiries Procedure) (England) Rules 2000 to all interested parties setting out a written statement of the matters with respect to which further representations were invited for the purposes of his re-determination of the appeal. These matters were whether there were any material change in circumstances, fact or policy, that may have arisen since his decision of 11 November 2015. A list of representations which have been received following his letter is at Annex A. The Secretary of State has taken account of the representations received in reaching his decision. Electronic copies of the correspondence can be made available upon written request at the foot of the first page of this letter. Policy and statutory considerations 7. In reaching his decision, 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. 8. In this case the development plan consists of the saved polices of the Melton Local Plan (1999) (LP). The Secretary of State agrees with the Inspector that the most relevant policies for this case are those set out at IR8. The Secretary of State, in applying paragraph 215 of the Framework, has taken into account the degree of consistency between the development plan policies and the Framework. Although there are differences between the policies OS2 and C2 and the Framework, such as in relation to countryside protection, he is satisfied that the policies are broadly consistent with the Framework insofar as they endeavour to conserve the natural environment and to encourage the diversification of agricultural businesses, and to this extent he considers that the relevant policies merit significant weight. 9. The Secretary of State has had regard to his Written Ministerial Statement (WMS) of 18 June 2015 as a material consideration. The statement explained that the Secretary of State was setting out the latest considerations to be applied to proposed wind energy development. Given its relevance to this case, the Secretary of State attaches substantial weight to the statement as the most recent expression of Government planning policy for onshore wind development. 10. The WMS includes a transitional provision for where a valid planning application for wind energy development had already been submitted to a local planning authority at the date on which the statement was made and the development plan does not identify suitable sites. In such instances, local planning authorities can find the proposal acceptable if, following consultation, they are satisfied it has addressed the planning impacts identified by affected local communities and therefore has their backing. In applying the transitional provision to this appeal proposal the Secretary of State has considered the representations reported in the Inspector’s report and the correspondence referred to in paragraph 6 above. 2 11. Other material considerations which the Secretary of State has taken into account include the National Planning Policy Framework (“the Framework”) and the planning practice guidance published March 2014; the National Policy Statements (NPS) for Energy (EN-1) and Renewable Energy (EN-3); and Planning Practice Guidance for Renewable and Low Carbon Energy (2013). The Secretary of State has also taken into account the WMSs on renewable energy published in June 2013 by the Secretaries of State for Energy and Climate Change and for Communities and Local Government; the WMS on renewable energy published by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government in April 2014; and the English Heritage/Historic England guidance entitled “The Setting of Heritage Assets” as updated in July 2015. 12. In accordance with section 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (LBCA), the Secretary of State has paid special regard to the desirability of preserving listed structures or their settings or any features of special architectural or historic interest which they may possess. The Secretary of State has also paid special attention to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of conservation areas, as required by section 72(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. Emerging plan 13. The emerging plan comprises the draft Melton Local Plan, which was submitted in October 2017 and is being considered at an examination in January 2018. The Secretary of State considers that the emerging policy of most relevance to this case is Policy EN10 which identifies the appeal site as an area of low or low to moderate sensitivity to wind turbine development and where turbines of up to 50 metres in height would be acceptable. 14. Paragraph 216 of the Framework states that decision makers may give weight to relevant policies in emerging plans according to: (1) the stage of preparation of the emerging plan; (2) the extent to which there are unresolved objections to relevant policies in the emerging plan; and (3) the degree of consistency of relevant policies to the policies in the Framework. The Secretary of State has considered the weight to be attached to the emerging Melton Local Plan. Although the plan is reasonably advanced, policy EN10 is the subject of extant objections, which will be considered at the examination. The Secretary of State considers that limited weight can be attributed to it (and the emerging plan) in the determination of the appeal. Main issues 15. The Secretary of State agrees that the main considerations are set out by the Inspector at IR45 along with the WMS on Local Planning of 18 June 2015, and the representations referred to at paragraph 6 above. Character and Appearance 16. The Secretary of State notes the Inspector’s remarks at IR46-51, in particular his reference to the Council’s Landscape Sensitivity Study (2014) adopted as informal guidance and the low-medium sensitivity to heights from 25-50m. He further notes that an aim of the guidance is to prevent wind energy developments becoming a key characteristic of the landscape (IR50). 3 Landscape Appearance 17. The Secretary of State agrees with the Inspector’s comments regarding the effect of the Hall Farm turbine on public views and has considered the cumulative impacts of the current turbines within 5 km of the site and a number of individual turbines or wind farms with multiple turbines approximately 13 – 15 km from the site. (IR52-58) The Hall Farm turbine is visible alongside a number of other turbines dispersed across the panorama, all displayed below the horizon. In reaching his conclusion on cumulative impact, the Inspector took account of the potential cumulative impact with the proposal for a 70 m high turbine nearby Park Farm. As an appeal for this turbine has been since dismissed and planning permission refused, the Secretary of State considers that the potential cumulative impact of the Hall Farm proposal would be less than envisaged by the Inspector and accords low weight to this. 18.