APPENDIX 1
Development Committee
98
20 August 2015
Development Committee
99
20 August 2015
Development Committee
100
20 August 2015
APPENDIX 2
Non-Technical Summary of the Viability Work in relation to:
PO/14-1212 - Residential development for a maximum of 78 dwellings, extension to existing
allotments, public open space, surface water attenuation pond and foul sewage pumping station
at Brick Kiln Farm, Rudham Stile Lane, Fakenham
Scheme details
The scheme consists of 78 units:
 43 x 2 bed units
 21 x 3 bed units
 14 x 4 bed units
Full details are contained within the Design and Access statement, but the site also includes:
 Public open space
 Allotments
 Landscaping to protect a proposed school site
 An attenuation basin
 A foul water pumping station
 Adoptable roads to link in with the wider area development brief
Sales Values
Sales values have been calculated with close regard to the existing market and the context of the
wider proposals for the area. They have been prepared in line with best practice.
Costs
The base “unit” construction cost used is in line with recent RICS guidance and DV input. Other
construction costs have been gauged from QS values using standard measured rate calculations
from the plan(s) submitted. Where detailed costs are known (e.g. contamination, demolition & site
clearance), detailed quoted figures have been used.
Remaining costs have been calculated using standard metrics used in previous DV submissions,
comprising of selling agent fees, sales allowances (discounts or sales products) and legal costs, with
financing costs modelled in detail.
Contributions
The following contributions are to be made in the S106 Heads of Terms:
 Play Space
£36,000
 Education
£409,523
 Open Space
£32,000
 Environment £3,900
 Library
£18,174
 Fire/Police
£1,784
TOTAL
£501,381
In addition, £100,000 is proposed to provide significant traffic improvements to Rudham Stile Lane.
Affordable Housing
On completion of the review of the submitted viability by NNDC, it is considered that it is viable to
provide 2 on site affordable dwellings – 2 x 1 bedroom flats as the greatest housing need is for this
type of provision.
Development Committee
101
20 August 2015
Development within the wider scheme proposed in the location
Please refer to separate letter detailing the contribution made by these proposals to the wider
scheme under the current Development Brief.
Land Value
The land value used in appraising the scheme viability is considered appropriate and provides a
competitive return for the land owner which reflects the policy position and also provides a risk
based return for a developer.
Development Committee
102
20 August 2015
APPENDIX 3
Development Committee
103
20 August 2015
Development Committee
104
20 August 2015
Development Committee
105
20 August 2015
APPENDIX 4
Define | Cornwall Buildings
45-51 Newhall Street | Birmingham | B3 3QR
T: 0121 213 4720 W: www.wearedefine.com
Define | Unit 6
133-137 Newhall Street | Birmingham | B3 1SF
T: 0121 237 1901 W: www.wearedefine.com
FAO: Mrs M Moore
Planning Officer
North Norfolk District Council
Holt Road
Cromer
Norfolk
NR27 9EN
07th August 2015
033 MR 070815 NNDC
Dear Sir
LAND OFF RUDHAM STILE LANE
REF: PO/14/1212
I write in respect of the above application on behalf of my clients Trinity College Cambridge. Trinity
College are the major landowner in the allocated development site to the north of Fakenham, that this
application site also forms part of. You will be aware that Trinity College have been working closely
with your colleagues over a number of years now, most recently in the preparation of a Development
Brief for the site in accordance with Policy FO1 (which has now been approved by Members subject
to some specific minor changes). We are now progressing the preparation of an outline planning
application for the main part of the allocation site that reflects that Development Brief, and again have
had productive discussions with officers at the District Council in that regard. We anticipate that we
will be submitting that application to the District Council towards the end of the year.
In light of the above, Trinity College do have a number of concerns with the submitted planning
application for land off Rudham Stile Lane that, should your Committee Members resolve to grant
planning permission, we would urge you to address through the appropriate conditioning of the
planning permission and / or provision of a Section 106 obligation.
Whilst we understand that the Council would ideally have liked to receive a single planning application
for the entirety of the land required to deliver the urban extension as envisaged by the Development
Brief, we do recognise the potential benefits of this planning application in that it would result in the
relocation of the existing chicken farm away from the allocation site. However, for that benefit to be
realised, the planning permission should have an appropriately short time limit attached to it.
It is also crucial that the proposed development on the application does not result in an increase in the
costs of developing the wider allocated site to the detriment of its deliverability, and it should in no
way hinder, delay or limit the delivery and form of that future development.
The proposed development on the application site should, therefore, be designed to accord with the
Development Brief as closely as possible. This will ensure that in, the fullness of time, it will form an
integral part of the wider development. For example, the proposed dwellings on the application site
should positively address the adjacent land, and notably the proposed green link along Grove Lane.
The proposals should also provide sufficient public open space to meet the needs of its future
residents, and not rely on provision that will come forward as part of the wider development.
Furthermore, the infrastructure design, notably the surface water drainage and foul drainage
solutions, should take full account of the future development of the surrounding land for residential /
Define is the trading name of Define Planning and Design Ltd | Registered in England and Wales | Company number 06449768 | VAT number 104 9131 47
Registered
C/O
Mazars
LLP | Floor
10 | 45
| Birmingham
| B3 2RTand Wales | Company number 06449768 | VAT number 104 9131 47
Define is theoffice
trading
name
of Define
Planning
andChurch
DesignStreet
Ltd | Registered
in England
Development Committee
Registered office C/O Mazars LLP | Floor 10 | 45 Church Street | Birmingham | B3 2RT
106
20 August 2015
school purposes. Given the allocated status of the wider site, it would clearly not be appropriate to
assume that the surrounding land will remain in agricultural use, and therefore, that it can flood safely
if the proposed drainage solutions fail. I have enclosed a report prepared by ASD that sets out in
detail our concerns in this regard.
Moreover, the access, highways, surface and foul drainage infrastructure required to support the
proposed development should be provided in a manner that does not create an additional burden
(financial or otherwise) for the residual development on the wider allocated site. Therefore,
appropriate/proportionate contributions to off-site infrastructure required to deliver the development of
the allocated site as a whole are required.
Similarly, the proposed development must also make a fair and proportionate contribution towards the
provision of community infrastructure needed to support the development of the allocated site as a
whole; most notably education provision. That contribution should reflect the true cost of making
sufficient provision for meeting education needs through the delivery of a new primary school on the
allocated site (i.e. land costs and full school build costs) as set out in the Development Brief.
It is understood that the applicants have sought to demonstrate that the proposed development on the
application site would not be viable without a reduced contribution to affordable housing provision.
However, the District Council should not seek to make up the affordable housing shortfall in the
residual development on the wider allocated site. Indeed, if necessary, Trinity College would expect
the District Council to take a similarly pragmatic approach to the pending outline planning application
for the wider allocation site to ensure viability and deliverability given the substantial infrastructure that
will need to be provided.
We trust that the above comments are clear, and that you and the Council Members will take them
fully into account when the District Council comes to determine the planning application. However,
should you wish to discuss any of the above matters further then please do not hesitate to contact
me.
Yours faithfully
Mark Rose
Director
Development Committee
107
20 August 2015
BRICK KILN FARM
FAKENHAM, NORFOLK
DELIVERY OF DEVELOPMENT ON
LAND AT RUDHAM STILE LANE
REF:
1007/NMT/BKF/07-15
DATE: JULY 2015
ASD CONSULTANTS
Development Committee
108 - ARCHITECTURE
20 -August
2015
ENGINEERING
SURVEYING
Land at Rudham Stile Lane, Fakenham
Brick Kiln Poultry Farm Development
1. Introduction & Development Proposals
1.1. ASD Engineering has been commissioned by Savills, on behalf of Trinity College, to undertake a brief
review of the proposed residential development by Mr P. Picken at Brick Kiln Poultry Farm (Planning
Application No PO/14/1212 for 84 dwellings) and its potential to adversely affect the proposed
longer term development of land located to the north of Rudham Stile Lane in Fakenham.
1.2. The outline planning application is for the demolition of all existing agricultural buildings on site to
allow redevelopment for residential purposes. The application seeks to retain the existing
bungalow and the latest illustrative Masterplan submitted by Lanpro dated July 2015 shows an
additional 78 properties, with access off Rudham Stile Lane.
1.3. North Norfolk District Council’s Site Allocations Development Plan Document, under Policy F01, has
allocated 85 hectares of land for residential and commercial development that will create a
sustainable urban expansion to the north of Fakenham to 2021 and beyond. This constitutes
approximately 800-900 dwellings, 7 hectares of employment land, community facilities (including a
primary school) and public open space.
1.4. Brick Kiln Farm covers an area of only 3 hectares and although included within the overall
Development Brief for the full allocated land, has been submitted as a standalone proposal ahead
of the main submission.
Latest Proposed Layout
1007/NMT/Brick Kiln Farm Development
Development Committee
Page 1 of 5
109
20 August 2015
Land at Rudham Stile Lane, Fakenham
Brick Kiln Poultry Farm Development
ASD Engineering
Trinity College
___________________________________________________________________________________
1.5. Details have been submitted by Create Consulting Engineers Ltd of highway improvements on
Rudham Stile Lane, to the west of the site at the junction with Claypit Lane, mainly consisting of
providing a direct footway access route to the school. It is assumed that these have been approved
by Norfolk County Council, although it has always been understood that the Highway Authority
would like to see the whole development area brought forward as one, with the infrastructure
requirements co-ordinated and provided as part of the full application.
1.6. Foul Drainage for the site is to be taken to a pumping station located in the north-east corner of the
development, and Anglian Water has confirmed that the flows may be connected into the existing
network at a rate of 3.8l/sec. The pumping station will apparently be designed to adoptable
standards and the discharge will be into Manhole 3602 within Elizabeth Avenue. This will involve
approximately 120m of off-site rising main.
1.7. The Surface Water Drainage Strategy is somewhat less definitive and a series of possible solutions
have been suggested but none proven at this stage. However, it is clear that surface water flows
will be held in an attenuation basin, again constructed in the north-east corner of the site adjacent
to existing arable land, before being disposed of at Greenfield run-off rates.
1.8. Because of poor infiltration rates it is not possible to dispose of surface water into the ground using
shallow soakaways but according to the submitted Flood Risk Assessment ‘subject to appropriate
site investigation at the detailed design stage and based on the nearby borehole logs, it is envisaged
a deep borehole solution can be facilitated within the underlying sands and gravels approximately
10m below existing ground level’.
1007/NMT/Brick Kiln Farm
Development Committee
Page 2 of 5
110
20 August 2015
Land at Rudham Stile Lane, Fakenham
Brick Kiln Poultry Farm Development
ASD Engineering
Trinity College
___________________________________________________________________________________
1.9. The normal preferred disposal of surface water from an attenuation basin is through the gradual
release to a watercourse via gravity, but given the distance to the nearest watercourse is
approximately 1.0 kilometre across third party land and the embanked A148, this option is not
feasible.
1.10. However, Anglian Water has surprisingly agreed to a discharge into the surface water sewer within
Rudham Stile Lane, but because a gravity solution is not possible, a pumped connection at a rate of
11.2 l/sec has been confirmed into Manhole 3751, as shown below.
2. Affect on Long Term Development
2.1. Whilst giving general support to the allocated land, the Environment Agency, Anglian Water and
Natural England raised concerns regarding the adequacy of the foul sewers through the centre of
the Town and the capacity of Fakenham Sewage Treatment Works. Many of these concerns
related to impacts on the River Wensum and The Broad’s Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) and
these were to be addressed in delivering the overall growth in Fakenham.
2.2. Anglian Water has previously stated that they require the full allocation of dwellings to be drained
in a strategic manner rather than ad-hoc additions to the existing system. This is to be achieved for
the overall development by providing a new foul pumping station discharging all flows directly to
the treatment works, which is actually situated at Hempton to the south of the River Wensum.
2.3. Development could change surface water drainage patterns, i.e. result in an increase in flashier
flows in periods of rainfall due to an increase in impermeable surfaces on site. Sustainable
Drainage Systems (SuDS) should be actively encouraged to lessen the impact of new development
and increased surface water runoff. Discharges from the overall development area were to be
directed northwards towards the River Stiffkey, rather than to the River Wensum to the south.
1007/NMT/Brick Kiln Farm
Development Committee
Page 3 of 5
111
20 August 2015
Land at Rudham Stile Lane, Fakenham
Brick Kiln Poultry Farm Development
ASD Engineering
Trinity College
___________________________________________________________________________________
2.4. None of the above concerns have been taken into account with the proposed development at Brick
Kiln Farm. Both foul and surface water flows are being pumped into existing sewerage networks
that drain southwards through the centre of Fakenham. Any existing deficiencies in these
networks will be further exacerbated by the increased flows.
2.5. The natural fall of the land north of Rudham Stile Lane is northwards towards the A148 Fakenham
bypass, and this applies equally to the Brick Kiln Farm development. This dictates the drainage for
the site, with both foul and surface water flows draining naturally to the north-east corner where it
is proposed to construct the pumping station(s) and attenuation basin. At the moment, surface
water flowing off the existing chicken sheds and hardstanding drains onto the adjacent arable land,
which currently does not pose a major problem.
Topographical Survey of Allocated Land
2.6. Obviously, when this land is developed with residential dwellings in the future, any failure of the
proposed drainage facilities on the Brick Kiln Farm development could have a severe negative
impact on the downstream properties.
2.7. It is very unusual to provide a pumping station to deal with surface water, and in this instance it is
because the natural fall of the site is away from the receiving sewerage network. The natural
catchment for the Brick Kiln Farm site is northwards across the remaining allocated land, and
obviously would be better dealt with as part of an overall drainage strategy. It is very unusual for
Anglian Water to accept a pumped discharge for surface water, particularly since it will eventually
drain to the River Wensum which, as explained, previously raised concerns with the Environment
Agency.
1007/NMT/Brick Kiln Farm
Development Committee
Page 4 of 5
112
20 August 2015
Land at Rudham Stile Lane, Fakenham
Brick Kiln Poultry Farm Development
ASD Engineering
Trinity College
___________________________________________________________________________________
2.8. The provision of duty/standby pumps will provide some benefit should the duty pump fail when
required, but neither pump will operate if the power fails in a thunder storm, the very time that
the maximum surface water will be generated. The attenuation basin will provide some storage
but the adjacent land will certainly be at greater risk of flooding.
2.9. Similarly, failure of the foul pumping station will result in flooding of the adjacent arable land, but
in this case with untreated sewage.
2.10. The alternative option for dealing with the surface water into borehole soakaways after the
attenuation basin has not been proven as being possible, but again, any failure of this method of
disposal will result in overland flows affecting the proposed development to the north. The use of
deep bore soakaways is also strongly discouraged by the Environment Agency for groundwater
protection reasons and in this instance the site is underlain by a Chalk Principal Aquifer. The
attenuation basin and the boreholes would be located within a groundwater source protection
zone SPZ2 (Outer Zone) associated with a food and drink abstraction.
2.11. The Environment Agency has already objected to the application because the Flood Risk
Assessment is not considered to comply with the requirements of the National Planning Policy
Framework. It does not adequately demonstrate that the development will not increase the flood
risk elsewhere, which it obviously does to the proposed development to the north.
3. Summary
3.1. Any available capacity within the existing highway and drainage infrastructure will be taken up by
the Brick Kiln Farm application, which will result in costly up-front infrastructure works being
required before any development can take place on the remaining allocated land.
3.2. Although capacity cannot be ‘reserved’ and can only be determined on a ‘first-come first-served’
basis, the apportionment of infrastructure costs should be equally distributed across the whole
allocation.
3.3. Apart from the ‘unfair’ financial affect on the remaining allocated land, the main cause for concern
is the additional risk of flooding posed by the development at Brick Kiln Farm and the cost of
possible mitigation measures that will be required to ensure that future properties are not
adversely affected. These costs could be avoided if all the land is designed simultaneously, with
appropriate measures taken as part of the layout of the development as a whole.
1007/NMT/Brick Kiln Farm
Development Committee
Page 5 of 5
113
20 August 2015
16A Bridge Street
Halesworth
Suffolk
IP19 8AQ
DX 51201 HALESWORTH
Tel. (01986) 872250
Fax. (01986) 872228
Development Committee
114
enquiries@asd-consultants.co.uk
20 August 2015
APPENDIX 5
From: Cathy Batchelar
Sent: 17 December 2014 11:30
To: Martha Moore
Subject: RE: PO/14/1212- Residential development for a maximum of 84 dwellings,
extension to existing allotments, public open space, surface water attenuation pond and foul
sewage pumping station at Brick Kiln Farm, Rudham Stile Lane, Fakenham
Martha,
The confirmation below that the 4.5m x 90m visibility splay is required implies that, in
accordance with the recommendations in the Preliminary Arboricultural Implications
Assessment (Ravencroft Arboricultural Services, Drawing No 150914/012), three Category B
sycamore trees will need to be removed to achieve this. This will negatively impact on the
established streetscene of Rudham Stile Lane, the character of which is largely defined by
the existing hedged field boundary and intermittent mature trees to the north.
In order to retain these trees and achieve the required access, I recommend that other
solutions should be explored, such as a no-dig surface, so that the trees can be retained.
Regards
Cathy
Development Committee
115
20 August 2015
North Norfolk District Council
Conservation, Design and Landscape
MEMORANDUM
To:
Martha Moore, Planning Officer
Ref:
PO/14/1212
From:
Cathy Batchelar, Landscape Officer
Date:
Dec 3rd 2014
Outline: Access only for max 84 dwellings, extension to
allotments, public open space provision, access and
surface water attenuation pond and foul water sewage
pumping station, Brick Kiln Farm, Rudham Stile Lane,
Fakenham.
Given that this site forms part of a larger scale mixed use proposal allocated in the current
Local Development Framework, there can be no sustainable objections to the principle of
residential development in this location.
Access
The access directly off Rudham Stile Lane does not feature within the emerging
Development Brief for the wider Masterplan that incorporates this site. Grove Lane,
running along the eastern boundary of the site is identified as forming a green corridor, and
is a key feature extending through the wider site. This is envisaged as primarily a vegetated
pedestrian and cycle route leading to a linked access to Fakenham Town centre. Introducing
a new vehicle access so close to this strategic landscape feature could compromise its design
and introduce user conflict. Links across Rudham Stile Lane that favour pedestrians and
cyclists are envisaged and their design will play an important role in incorporating the large
new development into the existing built form. The access as proposed does not fit with this
intention.
The submitted arboricultural information notes that the visibility splays required in
conjunction with the new access onto Rudham Stile Lane will impact on the line of mature
trees on the west boundary of the site. Provision of the standard dimension splay is
considered to be feasible as only 16% of the RPA of T1 would be affected. However if the
wider splay, as put forward in the Transport Statement, is required by Highways, then 3
sycamores that make a significant contribution to the streetscene would have to be
removed. While the final scheme would no doubt include a substantial amount of new tree
planting as mitigation, the loss of 3 mature trees in such a prominent position would be
regrettable and should be avoided if possible. Confirmation is required as to whether these
trees can be retained.
The landscape impact of the proposed access does raise issues as outlined above. However,
if, in consideration of the all of the implications of this proposal, it is deemed acceptable,
these concerns should be taken into account as the design detail is worked up.
Development Committee
116
20 August 2015
Design
While the layout is only indicative at this outline stage, the following comments relating to
design issues should be considered on any future Reserved Matters application.
The site lies within Rolling Open Farmland, as defined in the North Norfolk Landscape
Character Assessment. This particular area has been substantially degraded over time and
the underlying landscape structure such as field patterns and settlement structure has been
lost. The land north of Rudham Stile Lane is made up of large arable fields with remnants of
older field boundaries. Any mature vegetation such as the linear tree groups along the
western site boundary therefore form significant landscape features and should be retained
and enhanced.
The dense linear layout of the dwellings, although illustrative only, does not lend itself to an
integrated development where the built form and the landscape are successfully merged. In
places the dwellings are sited tight up against the eastern site boundary which is identified
as the main Greenway running through the wider mixed use site. There should be a much
wider margin all along the eastern site boundary to allow for the required width of surface
and a sequence of vegetated margins of differing heights, in order that the required green
infrastructure can be achieved.
The proposed public open space indicates some amount of play provision. This needs to be
integrated into the identified areas for play provision within the Development Brief.
Currently an area for play is allocated immediately east of Grove Lane where it joins Rudham
Stile Lane.
The additional allotment provision is in keeping with the Development Brief. The margin
between the allotments and the main access road will require a landscape solution to
provide a degree of screening.
Attenuation Pond
Located immediately south of the proposed school and public square as proposed in the
wider Development Brief, and adjacent to the identified green spine running through the
wider site, the proposed attentuation pond has the potential to form a key landscape
feature of the natural green space linkage and provision within the Masterplan. The design
of this feature should include for it to be incorporated into the landscape proposals for the
wider Masterplan and not designed as a separate enclosed element within this site.
Ecology
The site lies 1.3km from the River Wensum SAC and SSSI. Natural England does not consider
that the development will have a significant effect on the interest features of these
designated habitats and Conservation Design & Landscape agrees with this assessment.
In order to comply with the Habitat Regulations 2010 (as amended), an Appropriate
Assessment was undertaken at the Site Allocations stage. This identified that significant
likely effects of increased visitor pressure on the North Norfolk Coast SAC/SPA and Ramsar
sites could not be ruled out. Therefore a scheme of monitoring and mitigation was to be
secured by way of condition. An adopted approach to discharge this condition is a financial
contribution of £50 per dwelling secured via a legal agreement. If this is not secured, an
additional Appropriate Assessment will be required.
An Ecological Constraints & Opportunities Assessment carried out in June 2014 by Enims
recommends further surveys in respect of reptiles to be undertaken specifically between
March and September. Timing of works to avoid the bird nesting season and biodiversity
Development Committee
117
20 August 2015
enhancement measures also form part of the assessment. These requirements should be
addressed via a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP), prepared in
accordance with the format laid out in BS42020:2013 Biodiversity- Code of Practice for
Planning and Development.
Should the proposals go forward for approval, the following conditions should be included:

Prior to commencement of the development hereby approved, precise details of
tree protection measures shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA.
This shall include an Arboricultural Method Statement & Tree Protection Plan
compiled in accordance with BS 5837:2012 Trees in Relation to Construction –
Recommendations. The tree protection measures shall then be carried out in
accordance with the approved details.

Prior to commencement of the development hereby approved, hard and soft
landscape proposals shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local
Planning Authority and shall include the following details.
a) the location, species, number and size of new trees, hedges, shrubs and
perennials and seeding at the time of planting with measures for protection during
establishment.
b) accurate plotting of existing trees and hedgerows on the site including species
c) all boundary treatments
d) all proposed surfaces
e) the proposed attenuation basin, including sections to show profiles, construction
methodology, planting

Prior to commencement of the development hereby approved, a Construction
Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) prepared in accordance with the format
laid out in BS42020:2013 Biodiversity- Code of Practice for Planning and
Development shall be submitted to and approved by the LPA. The Plan shall be
informed by the results of the Ecological Constraints & Opportunities Assessment
carried out in June 2014 by Enims. The development shall be carried out strictly in
accordance with the approved CEMP and any mitigation or compensation measures
shall be erected or installed according to the approved details and thereafter
maintained in a suitable condition to serve the intended purpose.
Regards
Development Committee
118
20 August 2015
APPENDIX 6
Development Committee
119
20 August 2015
Development Committee
120
20 August 2015
Development Committee
121
20 August 2015
APPENDIX 7
15/0936 and 15/09398 National and Local Policy Guidance
National Policy Guidance
The National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) came into effect on 27 March
2012. The Framework replaced a series of national policy statements, circulars and
guidance.
Chapter 10 of the NPPF - Meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and
coastal change states at paragraph 93:
‘Planning plays a key role in helping shape places to secure radical reductions in
greenhouse gas emissions, minimising vulnerability and providing resilience to the impacts
of climate change, and supporting the delivery of renewable and low carbon energy and
associated infrastructure. This is central to the economic, social and environmental
dimensions of sustainable development’.
At paragraph 97 the NPPF states:
‘To help increase the use and supply of renewable and low carbon energy, local planning
authorities should recognise the responsibility on all communities to contribute to energy
generation from renewable or low carbon sources. They should:





have a positive strategy to promote energy from renewable and low carbon sources;
design their policies to maximise renewable and low carbon energy development
while ensuring that adverse impacts are addressed satisfactorily, including
cumulative landscape and visual impacts;
consider identifying suitable areas for renewable and low carbon energy sources,
and supporting infrastructure, where this would help secure the development of such
sources;
support community-led initiatives for renewable and low carbon energy, including
developments outside such areas being taken forward through neighbourhood
planning; and
identify opportunities where development can draw its energy supply from
decentralised, renewable or low carbon energy supply systems and for co-locating
potential heat customers and suppliers’.
More specifically, when assessing development proposals paragraph 98 of the NPPF states:
‘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 and also recognise that even small-scale projects
provide a valuable contribution to cutting greenhouse gas emissions; and
approve the application [unless material considerations indicate otherwise] if its
impacts are (or can be made) acceptable. Once suitable areas for renewable and low
carbon energy have been identified in plans, local planning authorities should also
expect subsequent applications for commercial scale projects outside these areas to
demonstrate that the proposed location meets the criteria used in identifying suitable
areas’.
Development Committee
122
20 August 2015
In considering this proposal, officers have taken account of the advice set out within
paragraph 14 of the NPPF which states:
‘At the heart of the National Planning Policy Framework is a presumption in favour of
sustainable development, which should be seen as a golden thread running through both
plan-making and decision-taking.
…….. For decision-taking this means:


approving development proposals that accord with the development plan without
delay; and
where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out-of-date,
granting permission 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
 specific policies in this Framework indicate development should be restricted’.
The Department for Communities and Local Government published the online Planning
Practice Guidance on 27 March 2015. The guidance includes an assessment of the
particular planning considerations that relate to large-scale ground-mounted solar
photovoltaic farms at Paragraph 13 Reference ID: 5-013-20150327.
Particular factors a local planning authority will need to consider include:
1. encouraging the effective use of land by focusing large scale solar farms on previously
developed and non-agricultural land, provided that it is not of high environmental value;
2. 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;
3. the proposal’s visual impact, the effect on landscape of glint and glare and on
neighbouring uses and aircraft safety;
4. the need for, and impact of, security measures such as lights and fencing;
5. 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. As the significance of a heritage asset derives not only from its physical
presence, but also from its setting, careful consideration should be given to the impact of
large scale solar farms on such assets. Depending on their scale, design and
prominence, a large scale solar farm within the setting of a heritage asset may cause
substantial harm to the significance of the asset;
6. the potential to mitigate landscape and visual impacts through, for example, screening
with native hedges;
7. the energy generating potential, which can vary for a number of reasons including,
latitude and aspect
Other relevant National Planning Guidance includes National Policy Statements for Energy
(NPS) published in July 2011 including:
1. Overarching National Policy Statement for Energy (EN-1) ; and
Development Committee
123
20 August 2015

National Policy Statement for Renewable Energy Infrastructure (EN-3)
Whilst the NPS are designed to guide decision makers in relation to nationally significant
infrastructure, the guidance can also be considered relevant in the assessment of smaller
schemes below 50MW capacity onshore.
Local Plan Policy - North Norfolk Core Strategy
The site is located within the Countryside policy area where Core Strategy Policy SS 2 would
support the principle of renewable energy projects, subject to compliance with other relevant
Core Strategy policies.
Policy SS4 states that renewable energy will be supported where impacts on amenity,
wildlife and landscape are acceptable.
Policy EN 7 states:
‘Renewable energy proposals will be supported and considered in the context of sustainable
development and climate change, taking account of the wide environmental, social and
economic benefits of renewable energy gain and their contribution to overcoming energy
supply problems in parts of the District.
Proposals for renewable energy technology, associated infrastructure and integration of
renewable technology on existing or proposed structures will be permitted where individually,
or cumulatively, there are no significant adverse effects on;



the surrounding landscape, townscape and historical features / areas;
residential amenity (noise, fumes, odour, shadow flicker, traffic, broadcast
interference); and
specific highway safety, designated nature conservation or biodiversity
considerations.
In areas of national importance large scale renewable energy infrastructure will not be
permitted unless it can be demonstrated that the objectives of the designation are not
compromised. Small-scale developments will be permitted where they are sympathetically
designed and located, include any necessary mitigation measures and meet the criteria
above.
Large scale renewable energy proposals should deliver economic, social, environmental or
community benefits that are directly related to the proposed development and are of
reasonable scale and kind to the local area’.
When considering landscape and visual impact, officers have taken account of advice not
only within CS Policy EN 7 (Renewable Energy) but also advice within Policy EN 2
(Protection and Enhancement of Landscape and Settlement Character) which states:
‘Proposals for development should be informed by, and be sympathetic to, the distinctive
character areas identified in the North Norfolk Landscape Character Assessment and
features identified in relevant settlement character studies.
Development Committee
124
20 August 2015
Development proposals should demonstrate that their location, scale, design and materials
will protect, conserve and, where possible, enhance:








the special qualities and local distinctiveness of the area (including its historical,
biodiversity and cultural character)
gaps between settlements, and their landscape setting
distinctive settlement character
the pattern of distinctive landscape features, such as watercourses, woodland, trees
and field boundaries, and their function as ecological corridors for dispersal of wildlife
visually sensitive skylines, hillsides, seascapes, valley sides and geological features
nocturnal character
the setting of, and views from, Conservation Areas and Historic Parks and Gardens.
the defined Setting of Sheringham Park, as shown on the Proposals Map’.
Development Committee
125
20 August 2015