Appendix 10
Geoff Lyon
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Hamilton, Ken [ken.hamilton@norfolk.gov.uk]
08 June 2012 16:46
Geoff Lyon
EVE, David; Phil Godwin
PF/11/0983 Wind turbine at Pond Farm, Bodham
Dear Geoff
PF/11/0983 Wind turbine at Pond Farm, Bodham Our ref.: CNF42637_3
Thank you for consulting us on this application.
The impact of the proposed development falls into two categories: impact on below
ground archaeological deposits, and impact on the setting of heritage assets.
The proposed development lies within a number of linear cropmarks visible on aerial
photography. The exact nature of these cropmarks is not known, but the likelihood that
they comprise nationally important heritage assets that would preclude development on
this site is very small. On that basis, while a programme of archaeological works will
be necessary should planning permission be granted, it can be secured by planning
conditions, in accordance with paragraph 141 of the NPPF. I have appended an
appropriate set of conditions to this email.
The proposed development impacts on the setting on a number of heritage
assets:
St. Peter's Church, North Barningham
The turbine is unlikely to be visible from the churchyard as the church is largely
surrounded by vegetation. However, the turbine will dominate the view of the church
from the south, as illustrated in Photomontage No. 46. The significance of the church
lies not only in its fabric and monuments, but also as a potential marker for former
settlement, either as the location of a deserted or shifted settlement, or as the
focus of a dispersed settlement. Moving the focus of views such as that illustrated in
Photomontage No. 46 will therefore reduce the primacy of the church in the landscape,
thereby damaging its significance. In this instance, even at the distance illustrated
in Photomontage No. 46, the turbine will be more than twice the height of the church
tower. The size of the turbine, together with the motion of the blades will dominate
the scene, and significantly affect the setting of the church, damaging its
significance.
All Saints' Church, Bodham
The view from within the churchyard of All Saint's Church towards the turbine includes
modern housing and telegraph poles. The addition of a turbine to this view would not
cause substantial harm to the setting of the church. As with St. Peter's Church, the
impact of the turbine on the setting of the church within the wider landscape is more
marked, and views of the church from the west and north-west will be dominated by the
turbine, thereby damaging the setting of the church, and hence its significance.
Whilst there is an existing telecommunications mast close to the turbine, that is a
stationary, latticework structure, and much less likely to catch the eye.
St. Mary's Church, Barningham Winter
The main impact of the turbine on St Mary's Church, Barningham Winter is illustrated
in Photomontage No. 39. The view from the north door of the church is a planned view,
and one of the key views envisaged by Humphrey Repton (evidenced by a number of
illustrations drawn by Repton, and the maintenance of the south porch drawing the
viewer to the north door).
Whilst the presence of the turbine will harm this view, it is a partial view, away
from the central axis of the planned vista, in a portion of the view already
compromised by a line of telegraph poles, and so the impact on the setting is
considered to be less than substantial.
Barningham Hall
1
10.1
The turbine will be visible from both Barningham Hall and Barningham Park, including
as one approaches the Hall from the south (a key view of the Hall, illustrated by
Repton). However, the turbine is not directly adjacent to the house in this view, and
hence while there will be harm to the setting of the Hall, it is less than
substantial. Similarly with the park, the main focus is on the east - west avenue. The
park itself was, in all probability, designed to be enjoyed at all points, rather than
as a series of key vistas. The presence of the avenue draws the eye along an east west axis. Hence while there will be harm to the setting of the park, it is considered
to be less than substantial.
Baconsthorpe Castle
Baconsthorpe Castle sits within a valley that is very rural in character, and its
setting is very rural in nature. The addition of a turbine overlooking the castle from
the east will alter this setting.
While the effect of the presence of the turbine will be masked from the castle by
trees, the turbine will be very visible in three locations: by the entrance
(overshadowing the former pleasure gardens) (Photomontage No. 12), along the north
wall (looking east) (Photomontage No. 16) and looking at the castle from west of the
site (Photomontage No. 43). Hence the impact of the turbine will be to significantly
damage the setting of the perimeter of the heritage asset, constituting a change to
the general character of the asset, and to reduce the prominence of the castle in the
landscape.
In summary, therefore, the proposed development causes substantial harm to three
designated heritage assets: St. Peter's Church, North Barningham, All Saints' Church,
Bodham and Baconsthorpe Castle, and we therefore recommend that it be refused, in
accordance with paragraph 132 of the NPPF and policy EN8 of the North Norfolk Core
Strategy.
Yours aye
Ken
Appendix. Appropriate conditions should planning permission be granted:
A) No development shall take place until a Written Scheme of Investigation for a
programme of archaeological works has been submitted to and approved by the local
planning authority in writing. The scheme shall include:
1. An assessment of the significance of heritage assets present 2. The programme and
methodology of site investigation and recording 3. The programme for post
investigation assessment of recovered material 4. Provision to be made for analysis of
the site investigation and recording 5. Provision to be made for publication and
dissemination of the analysis and records of the site investigation 6. Provision to be
made for archive deposition of the analysis and records of the site investigation 7.
Nomination of a competent person or persons/organization to undertake the works set
out within the Written Scheme of Investigation
B) No demolition/development shall take place other than in accordance with the
Written Scheme of Investigation approved under condition (A).
C) The development shall not be occupied until the site investigation and post
investigation assessment has been completed in accordance with the programme set out
in the Written Scheme of Investigation approved under condition (A) and the provision
to be made for analysis, publication and dissemination of results and archive
deposition has been secured.
__________________________
Ken Hamilton PhD MIfA
Senior Historic Environment Officer (Planning) Historic Environment Service
Environment, Transport and Development Union House Gressenhall Dereham Norfolk NR20
4DR
Direct: 01362 869275
Mobile: 07748 761354
Fax: 01362 860951
ken.hamilton@norfolk.gov.uk
2
10.2
The information contained in this email is intended only for the person or
organization to which it is addressed. If you have received it by mistake, please
disregard and notify the sender immediately. Unauthorized disclosure or use of such
information may be a breach of legislation or confidentiality and may be legally
privileged.
Emails sent from and received by Members and employees of Norfolk County Council may
be monitored. They may also be disclosed to other people under legislation,
particularly the Freedom Of Information Act 2000.
Unless this email relates to Norfolk County Council business it will be regarded by
the Council as personal and will not be authorized by or sent on behalf of the
Council. The sender will have sole responsibility for any legal actions or disputes
that may arise.
3
10.3
Page 1 of 2
Geoff Lyon
From:
Albone, James [james.albone@norfolk.gov.uk]
Sent:
19 September 2011 18:29
To:
Planning Department
Subject: PF/11/0983 Land at Pond Farm, Bodham: Erection of wind-turbine
Our Ref: CNF42637_2
Dear Mr Lyon,
RE: PF/11/0983 Land at Pond Farm, Bodham: Erection of wind‐turbine
Thank you for consulting with us on this application. The proposed wind turbine is located at a site containing heritage assets with archaeological interest (cropmarks of unknown date and function) and within a wider landscape containing a variety of designated heritage assets (scheduled monuments, listed buildings, registered parks and gardens). The development has the potential to impact on the historic environment in two ways;
z The construction of the wind turbine and its associated infrastructure has the potential to have a direct negative impact on heritage assets with archaeological interest (buried archaeological remains) at the turbine site itself. z The wind turbine will be a prominent structure and consequently has the potential to have a negative impact on the setting, and therefore significance, of designated heritage assets in the surrounding landscape.
Norfolk County Council Historic Environment Service (then Norfolk Landscape Archaeology) was consulted by the applicant on a previous wind turbine proposal at this location in December 2009. Our advice at that time related only to the potential impact on buried archaeological remains and was based on the available historic environment information and the then current Planning Policy Guidance 16: Archaeology and Planning. This planning guidance document was superseded in 2010 by Planning Policy Statement 5: Planning for the Historic Environment. The preapplication recommendations by NHES in 2009 stated that, “The proposed development lies within a number of linear crop marks visible on aerial photography. The exact nature of these cropmarks is not known.” Our recommendations at that time were that a programme of archaeological evaluation could be carried out as a condition of any planning permission. However, had we been reconsulted within 12 months prior to the current planning application we would have advised that the results of an archaeological evaluation should be submitted with the planning application in accordance with Planning Policy Statement 5: Planning for the Historic Environment Policy HE6.1 so that an informed planning decision can be made. The Historic Environment Report submitted with the application seeks to address the potential impact of the proposed wind turbine on the setting of designated heritage assets in the surrounding landscape. We have reviewed this document alongside and photomontages and have noted the comments made by English Heritage. PPS5 Policy HE9.1 states that, “There should be a presumption in favour of the conservation of designated heritage assets and the more significant the designated heritage asset, the greater the presumption in favour of its conservation should be. …. Significance can be harmed or lost through alteration or destruction of the heritage asset or development within its setting. Loss affecting any designated heritage asset should require clear and convincing justification. Substantial harm to or loss of a grade II listed building, park or garden should be exceptional. Substantial harm to or loss of designated heritage assets of the highest significance, including scheduled monuments, … grade I and II* listed buildings and grade I and II* registered parks and gardens… should be wholly exceptional.”
The Historic Environment Report submitted with the application appears to have been complied by the applicant rather than a recognised archaeological or heritage consultancy (this in contrast to the other specialist reports submitted which are by named consultancies). The relevant credentials of the Historic Environment Report’s individual author and organisation are not stated and consequently it does not demonstrate that they have an appropriate level of expertise to make well‐
informed and objective assessments of the impact of the proposed wind turbine on the historic environment in accordance with Policies HE6.1 and HE6.2 of PPS5. Policy HE6.1 of PPS5 states that as part of the minimum requirements for the description of the significance of the heritage assets affected and the contribution of their setting to that significance, “the heritage assets themselves should have been assessed using appropriate expertise where necessary given the application’s impact”. The conclusions of the Historic Environment Report are based partly on the photomontages and wireframes also submitted with the application. In order that the potential impact of the proposed development can be clearly established we would like to see a greater number of visualisations showing both the designated heritage assets and the proposed turbine. Many of the photomontages show the view from the heritage assets themselves (e.g. from the churchyard of a listed church) where the view of the proposed turbine is masked by planting on the property boundary. In assessing any impact on the historic environment the view of the heritage asset in the landscape is just as significant as the view from the asset itself and we request that additional visualisations are submitted to show further views where the proposed turbine will be seen alongside designated heritage assets. This includes wider landscape views where the proposed turbine will sit in close visual proximity to the visible designated heritage assets. We have identified two locations in the wider landscape from which we would specifically like to see such visualisations;
z TG 1208 3910 looking approximately southeast from the lane outside Manor House, Lower Bodham. From this viewpoint it appears that the turbine will sit in close visual proximity to the tower of All Saints Church, Bodham.
z TG 1587 3606 looking approximately northwest from the lane west of Wells Farm Cottage. From this viewpoint it appears that the turbine will sit in close visual proximity to the tower of St Peter’s Church, North Barningham.
We do not feel that the Historic Environment Report that has been submitted with the application adequately demonstrates that its authors have, “appropriate expertise” to provide “a description of the significance of the heritage assets affected and the contribution of their setting to that significance” as required by PPS5 Policy HE6.1. We therefore ask that the applicant submits a Heritage Statement that demonstrably fulfils the requirements of Policies HE6.1 and HE6.2 along with additional visualisations (as outlined above) so that the impact of the proposed development on the historic environment can be fully assessed in accordance with Policies HE6, HE9 and HE10 of Planning Policy Statement 5: Planning for the Historic Environment. If you have any questions or would like to discuss our recommendations please contact the Case Officer: Ken Hamilton on 01362 869275 or ken.hamilton@norfolk.gov.uk
Yours sincerely
James Albone
_______________________________
James Albone AIfA
Planning Archaeologist
Historic Environment Service
10.4
10/08/2012
Page 2 of 2
Environment Transport and Development
Norfolk County Council
Union House
Gressenhall, Dereham
Norfolk NR20 4DR
Tel: 01362 869279
Email: james.albone@norfolk.gov.uk
The information contained in this email is intended only for the person or organization to which it is addressed.
Emails sent from and received by Members and employees of Norfolk County Council may be monitored.
If you have received
They may also be disclosed to other
Unless this email relates to Norfolk County Council business it will be regarded by the Council as personal and will not be authorized b
10.5
10/08/2012