CPRE Protect Kent. Planning Practice Note No 1. Ground Mounted Solar PV Developments

CPRE Protect Kent Planning Practice Note No 1 Ground Mounted Solar PV Developments The Kent Branch of the Campaign to Protect Rural England www.protectkent.org.uk

Page 2 of 64

Contents Foreword 5 The Planning Process 7 Environmental Impact Assessment 7 Stage 1: Screening 7 Key Practice Point 10 Stage 2: Scoping 11 Key Practice Point 12 Stage 3: Environment Statement 12 Key Practice Point 12 Pre-application Community Engagement 13 Key Practice Point 13 Submission of Planning Application 14 Key Practice Point 14 Planning Considerations 15 Getting Started: find and review the key documents 15 The Development Plan 15 Key Practice Point 16 Other Material Considerations 17 Key Practice Point 18 CPRE Protect Kent s Key Planning Issues: 18 1. Impact on the Landscape 18 Key Practice Point 21 Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONBs) 21 Key Practice Point 25 Elsewhere in the Countryside: 26 Landscape Character 26 Local Landscape Designations 27 Setting of the AONB 27 Key Practice Point 28 2. Loss of High Quality Agricultural Land 28 Key Practice Point 34 3. Other Considerations 36 Targets for renewable energy 36 Ecology and biodiversity 36 Historic environment 37 Page 3 of 64

Public rights of way 37 Green Belt 37 Flooding 38 Transport and access 38 Aircraft safety 38 Impact on other planning objectives 39 Community benefits 39 Key Practice Point 39 Annexes Annex 1: Schedule 3 from the EIA Regulations 41 Annex 2: Schedule 4 from the EIA Regulations 45 Annex 3: Example letter of comments on the content of a scoping opinion 49 Annex 4: List of local plans in Kent () 55 Annex 5: Letter from Minister of State for Energy and Climate Change to 59 local authorities, 1 November 2013 Page 4 of 64

Foreword Being a renewable source of energy, solar can provide a valuable and sustainable form of energy. It is a form of energy that in principle CPRE Protect Kent supports and it will help to meet the UK s international obligations to achieve 15% of its energy consumption from renewable sources by 2020 1. However, we do not believe that it should be promoted at the expense of our precious countryside. We believe that clear guidance on suitable locations should be given in Local Plans and that developments should be steered towards opportunities involving rooftops, especially in industrial estates, and previously developed land. We will seek to ensure that district Local Plans provide appropriate policy guidance on suitable locations and the matters that need to be considered in formulating and assessing planning applications. It is CPRE Protect Kent s position that we will not support any ground mounted solar photovoltaic (PV) developments that are located on the best and most versatile agricultural land (Grades 1, 2 and 3a) or which adversely impact on the landscape. In particular we will not support the development of ground mounted solar PV farms in our Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONBs) or which adversely affect their setting. As a result of Government financial incentives a significant number of solar PV developments have come forward throughout Kent over the last year or so, and these have almost entirely been in countryside locations. The number of such proposals looks set to increase. The size of proposals is also increasing, and it is not now unusual for proposals to involve 100 acres or more of land. This means that their impact can be significant, and with the large number of proposals cumulative impact is becoming an increasing concern. Although such developments are usually proposed for a temporary period of 25 years, and any planning permission will require that they should be removed after that time, they will comprise a long-term feature in the rural environment while they are in place. Although planning conditions will seek to ensure the reinstatement of land to its former condition, there can be no guarantee that this will actually be the case. Therefore, we believe that proposals should be regarded as if they were permanent developments. This Planning Practice Note seeks to provide help to the CPRE Protect Kent District Committees in their consideration of ground mounted solar PV applications by: helping you to understand the planning process involved in bringing forward and assessing proposals; and providing guidance on the matters that should be considered when assessing planning applications, focusing on the principal concerns to CPRE Protect Kent, i.e. impact on the landscape and loss of high quality agricultural land. A series of key practice points are provided to help you assess proposals and to formulate your response, but please remember that advice is also available from the Branch Office. 1 2009 Renewable Energy Directive: see http://eurlex.europa.eu/lexuriserv/lexuriserv.do?uri=oj:l:2009:140:0016:0062:en:pdf Page 5 of 64

Page 6 of 64

The Planning Process Introduction 1. All ground mounted solar PV proposals will be subject to a planning application in the normal fashion. However, as a pre-cursor to the submission of a planning application it will often be the case that a developer will apply to the local planning authority to find out if an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is needed. A developer may also undertake preapplication community engagement. Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) 2. An EIA is required if it is considered by the local planning authority that a proposed development is likely to have a significant effect on the environment. The requirement for an EIA flows from European legislation 2 which is consolidated into the UK planning system by the EIA Regulations 3. Guidance on the application of the EIA Regulations is provided in Circular 02/99 4. 3. If the local planning authority considers that an EIA is necessary, the outcome of the EIA process is the preparation of an Environment Statement. This will then be submitted with the planning application. The EIA process should lead to a better standard of development and in some cases development not happening at all. Where development does go ahead the EIA should help to propose proper mitigation measures. 4. EIA is a three stage process: 5. Stage 1: Screening: A developer of a solar PV farm may apply to the local planning authority for a Screening Opinion. This is to determine whether under the EIA Regulations the proposed development is of a scale and in a location that would require an EIA 5. If a screening opinion is sought, the local planning authority has three weeks from the date the request is received to notify whether or not an EIA is needed. 6. In reaching its opinion the local planning authority will seek the views of the statutory consultees (e.g. Natural England and the Environment Agency), but it is not usually the case that wider views will be sought. However, applications for a screening opinion may appear on the council s on-line application system and it may be possible for others to make comments. If this opportunity is available, then comments should relate to the considerations outlined in the EIA Regulations not planning policies. The purpose of the EIA is not to assess the acceptability of a proposal in planning terms, but to determine whether or not specific information is needed to help the local planning authority assess potential environmental impacts when a planning application is made. 2 European Union Directive 85/337/EEC as amended. 3 The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 2011 see http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2011/1824/pdfs/uksi_20111824_en.pdf 4 See https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/7676/155958.pdf. Note that the Circular relates to the previous (1999) EIA Regulations, but it remains extant. 5 A developer could decide unilaterally to undertake an EIA, so may not apply for a Screening Opinion. Page 7 of 64

7. The EIA Regulations categorise development types as either Schedule 1 developments or Schedule 2 developments. Developments listed in Schedule 1 will always require an EIA, but this does not include solar PV developments. Developments falling in Schedule 2 will require an EIA if it is considered likely to have significant effects on the environment by virtue of its size, nature or location. Under Schedule 2 solar PV developments would usually be seen as falling within category 3a developments, comprising industrial installations for the production of electricity, steam and hot water, and so may require an EIA. This though would only apply to proposals over 0.5 hectares in size (but see paragraph 10 below). 8. To determine if an EIA is needed proposals will be assessed by the local planning authority against the criteria set out in Schedule 3 of the Regulations. These criteria relate to: the characteristics of the development (e.g. its size, use of natural resources, quantities of pollution and waste generated); the location of the development (primarily its environmental sensitivity); and having regard to 1 and 2, the characteristics of the potential impact (e.g. its magnitude and duration). 9. Schedule 3 is attached in full at Annex 1 to this note. Not all the criteria in Schedule 3 will be relevant in all cases. Generally, though, in applying the criteria paragraph 33 of Circular 02/99 (see footnote 4) states that an EIA will be needed in three main types of cases: for major developments which are of more than local importance; for developments which are proposed for particularly sensitive or vulnerable locations; and for developments with unusually complex and potentially hazardous environmental effects. 10. In the case of a solar PV farm the decision on whether or not an EIA is needed will usually turn on the second of these cases i.e. impact on a sensitive or vulnerable location. In paragraph 2(1) of the EIA Regulations (see footnote 3) a sensitive location would comprise sites designated as: A Site of Special Scientific Interest or a designated European Sites (i.e. classified and potential Special Protection Areas, designated and candidate Special Areas of Conservation and Ramsar sites); An Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty; A Scheduled Ancient Monument; and A World Heritage Site. For proposals in these areas the 0.5 hectare site size threshold does not apply, so the need for an EIA will have to be considered for any solar PV farm proposal. Page 8 of 64

11. It does not follow that any proposal affecting these designations will automatically require an EIA, as this will still depend on the assessment undertaken by the local planning authority against the criteria in Schedule 3. In general, though, the local planning authority will need to assess whether or not the proposal would have a significant effect on the special character of the designated area. In the case of proposals in an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) the designated area of particular concern to CPRE Protect Kent - this would primarily be the impact of the proposal on landscape character and visual amenity, which will relate to the size of the proposal and its prominence in the landscape. 12. For proposals adjoining an AONB, the impact of the proposal on the setting of the AONB would also be a consideration. Here the assessment would similarly relate to the impact on landscape character and visual amenity (see paragraph 81). 13. Elsewhere, outside of these statutory designated areas, other designations may also be regarded as a sensitive area. For example Local Biodiversity Action Plans may show that some areas are particularly sensitive. Similarly, Landscape Character Assessments might show that particular local landscapes are sensitive to change 6. 14. Agricultural land quality and the impact on farming are also matters that should be taken into account in undertaking a screening opinion. In Schedule 3 of the EIA Regulations the use of natural resources is one of the matters that should be given regard to as a characteristic of development, whilst existing land use and the relative abundance, quality and regenerative capacity of natural resources in the area are matters to be considered in relation to the location of development. 15. Natural England has produced a map giving an overview of agricultural land quality 7. This gives a general indication of the likely land quality, graded 1-5. However, whilst it is grades 1, 2, and 3a that comprise the best and most versatile agricultural land, the map simply shows grade 3 and does not distinguish between grades 3a and 3b. 16. Cumulative effect is also an important consideration. In judging whether the effects of a development are likely to be significant, local planning authorities should always have regard to the possible cumulative effects with any existing or approved development. There are occasions where the existence of other development may be particularly relevant in determining whether significant effects are likely, or even where more than one application for development should be considered together to determine whether or not EIA is required. 8 6 Most local planning authorities will have a Landscape Character Assessment, which will be provided on their web-site (often as part of the Local Plan/LDF evidence base). If they don t, use the assessment undertaken by Kent County Council see: http://www.kent.gov.uk/environment_and_planning/wildlife_and_landscapes/landscapes/kents_landscape_assessment.aspx. Natural England has also undertaken an assessment of character areas and detailed profiles of the 159 identified natural areas have been produced see: http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/publications/nca/southeast.aspx 7 See http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/file/128043 8 Paragraph 46 of Circular 02/99 Page 9 of 64

Key Practice Point commenting on an EIA Screening Opinion application If there is the opportunity to comment on a screening opinion application: Be aware of the three week deadline that the Council has to reply there will be no extension. State that the proposal is category 3a development in Schedule 2 of the EIA Regulations 2011 and therefore that it is potentially EIA development (but note the 0.5 hectare site size threshold and that this does not apply if the proposal is in a designated area, e.g. in an AONB). Provide any detailed comments in the context of the matters listed in Schedule 3 of the EIA Regulations (attached at Annex 1 to this note), rather than quoting planning policies. Say whether or not you think an EIA should be undertaken having regard to the following considerations: Is the proposal in a designated area? If so, how do you think it will impact on it in particular in terms of impact on landscape character and visual amenity? State where the site can be seen from, especially from public vantage points. If you think there is an unacceptable visual impact say that an EIA is needed to examine the concerns you raise. If the proposal adjoins an AONB consider whether there is an impact on the setting of the AONB. Again if you think there is an unacceptable visual impact say that an EIA is needed to examine the concerns you raise. Is the site in an area designated for its local landscape importance and what does the Council s landscape character assessment say about the area and its sensitivity to change? Check the Council s web-site to find the assessment - most councils will have one, but not all do; if they don t check the County Council s assessment and the relevant Natural England profile (see footnote 6). How do you think the proposal will impact on the character of the area and its sensitivity to change? If you think there is an unacceptable impact say that an EIA is needed to examine the concerns you raise. What is the agricultural land quality of the site? Check the Natural England map (see footnote 7). If it is Grade 1 or 2, then make general comments about the general scarcity of this land both locally and nationally and its importance for farming and food security. Suggest that an EIA is needed to demonstrate that land of lower quality is not available not just on the farm holding but generally. If it is Grade 3, suggest that it might be Grade 3a (and thus best and most versatile) and that again the availability of land of lower quality should be assessed. Are there other developments (built or permitted) in the general locality? If so, comment on the cumulative effect of development in the locality and explain the need for an EIA to examine any concerns you have. Make any other points you think are relevant in the context of Schedule 3 to justify the need for an EIA, for example potential impacts on ecology and historical assets. Contact the Branch Office for any help and advice you need Page 10 of 64

17. If a planning application is submitted without a request having been made for a screening opinion, the local planning authority has the right to adopt an EIA screening opinion for the proposal, which will determine whether or not the scheme requires an EIA. It should not determine the application until an Environment Statement has been prepared if it considers that an EIA should have been undertaken. This may be a comment you will need to make at the planning application stage. 18. Stage 2: Scoping: If the local planning authority decide that an EIA is not needed, then the developer can proceed with submitting a planning application, though this will still need to be supported by sufficient information to enable it to be properly assessed. 19. However, if the local planning authority decides that an EIA is needed then the developer will need to prepare an Environment Statement (ES) to be submitted with the application. The preparation of the ES will require necessary surveys to be undertaken and information to be collected which, in the case of any ecological surveys, might be season dependent. The preparation of the ES therefore may take some months, and could be quite costly for the developer. 20. An ES must contain the information specified in Part 2, and such of the relevant information in Part 1, of Schedule 4 to the EIA Regulations as is reasonably required to assess the effects of the proposal and which the developer can reasonably be required to compile. Schedule 4 is reproduced in full in Annex 2 to this note. 21. To provide guidance on the extent of the matters listed in Part 1 of Schedule 4 to be included in the ES, the developer can ask the local planning authority for a Scoping Opinion, but is not required to do so. The opinion will specify the extent of the information to be gathered during the EIA and to be reported in the ES. Importantly it will need to help inform an understanding of the potential impacts that are highlighted in the screening opinion. So if, for example, the screening opinion identified impact on visual amenity as an issue the ES would be expected to provide an assessment of this. This would involve assessing the visibility of the site from various vantage points, notably roads, public rights of way and other access land. Similarly, if impact on landscape character is considered to be an issue in the screening opinion a landscape assessment would be necessary. Potential impacts on ecology may demand an ecological survey to be undertaken. Many of these surveys will need to be undertaken by appropriately qualified people, which would also be specified in the scoping opinion. 22. If a scoping opinion is requested the local planning authority has a period of five weeks within which to produce the opinion. The planning authority is legally required to consult with the Environment Agency, Natural England, and English Heritage. They can additionally seek views from other parties if they wish, though this is unusual; you could ask your local planning authority to consult with you whenever a request for a scoping opinion is submitted to them. 23. By way of an example, at Annex 3 to this note is a letter written by the Branch Office in response to a request from Swale Borough Council for comments on the content of a scoping opinion on a proposed solar PV farm located in the Kent Downs AONB. Page 11 of 64

Key Practice Point commenting on the content of an EIA Scoping Opinion If you have the opportunity to comment on the content of an EIA Scoping Opinion: Be aware of the five week deadline that the Council has to reply there will be no extension. Ask for a copy of the Screening Opinion issued, as this will identify the key areas of concern that require the EIA to be undertaken. Provide any detailed comments in the context of the matters listed in Part 1 of Schedule 4 of the EIA Regulations (attached at Annex 2 to this note) and the concerns highlighted in the Screening Opinion. Be as specific as you can about the matters that need to be assessed if you have concerns about potential impact on a particular habitat, listed building, view or any other matter say exactly what and where it is and what needs to be assessed. Be as specific as you can about the type of assessments that needs to be undertaken, and by whom. Contact the Branch Office for any help and advice you need. 24. Stage 3: Preparing and submitting the Environment Statement (ES): The responsibility (and cost) of preparing the ES will rest with the applicant. Either under their own initiative or in response to the screening and scoping opinions provided by the local planning authority, the developer will undertake the EIA and present the findings in the ES. The ES should be based on the best available sources of objective information and should be bias free. It should allow the local authority and the whole community to properly understand the impact of the proposed development. 25. The ES will be submitted with the planning application and will provide an important part of the supporting information to the application. It is the responsibility of the local planning authority to ensure that the ES is adequate and they can request additional information if they consider it is deficient in any regard. It is just as important to review and comment on the ES as it is the planning application itself, and any deficiencies should be drawn to the attention of the local planning authority as soon as possible so that they can seek additional information. Key Practice Point Environmental Statement Always review the ES and if you consider that it is deficient in any regard let the local planning authority know as soon as possible so that they have the opportunity to resolve any problems with the developer. Page 12 of 64

Pre-application Community Engagement 26. The Localism Act 2011 provides for mandatory pre-application consultation with local communities on large scale development proposals, but at the time of writing this note the necessary secondary legislation to implement this part of the Act has not been put in place. It is likely that when it is, most ground mounted solar PV proposals will fall under this requirement by virtue of their size it is anticipated that non-residential developments involving more than 2 hectares of land will be subject to the requirement. In the meantime, paragraphs 188 195 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) encourage preapplication engagement and extol the benefits of it and developers should be aware of this 9. However, until pre-application consultation with local communities is formalised it will be purely voluntary by the applicant. It is, though, becoming increasingly good practice for them to do so indeed one of the Solar Trade Association s 10 commitments is to engage with the community in advance of submitting a planning application 10. Also, solar PV developers are beginning to offer community benefits, though unlike for on-shore wind turbines there is currently no formal protocol for this. 27. Pre-application engagement provides the opportunity to learn about the proposal in advance of a planning application being submitted, and to express concerns about it (or support for it) to the applicant. If nothing else it will give more time to develop your case and to identify other concerned people that you can potentially work with. The opportunity for a CPRE led campaign and membership recruitment should not be forgotten. 28. If it is genuine engagement, and there is often some cynicism that it is simply a tick box exercise, pre-application consultation should result in changes to the proposal to address concerns so there are potential improvements that can be secured by engaging with the applicant at this early stage. It also provides the opportunity to raise the issue of community benefits and to push the applicant in this direction. Key Practice Point pre-application community consultation Take advantage of any pre-application community consultation to: find out as much as you can about the proposal; give your initial comments and views in particular highlight any serious impacts that you think the proposal will have; think about what improvements could be made to the proposal (even if you think you are likely to oppose it); think about what community benefits could be secured; talk to local people to understand their concerns and look for campaigning and recruitment opportunities liaise with the Branch Office as you consider necessary. After any consultation event make a written response. 9 See https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/6077/2116950.pdf 10 See http://www.solar-trade.org.uk/media/sta%2010%20commitments%20v%2010.pdf Page 13 of 64

Submission of Planning Application 29. If, following the EIA process and any pre-application community engagement, the applicant decides to continue with the proposal a planning application will be made to the local planning authority in the normal way. If an EIA is needed then the application will be accompanied by the necessary Environment Statement (ES). If an EIA is not required the developer will still need to provide appropriate information to enable the local planning authority to properly consider the application. This will usually include information describing the development and a range of environmental and other planning information. 30. Most ground mounted solar PV applications are likely to be classed as major development and so the local planning authority will have 13 weeks to make its decision from the date the application is validated. This is extended to 16 weeks if the application is accompanied by an ES. As a major development the local planning authority is required to advertise the application in a local newspaper and display a site notice and/or write to the owners/occupiers of adjoining properties. Details of the application must also be provided on the council s web-site. The local planning authority may specifically seek views from CPRE Protect Kent as a consultee. 31. In the publicity a deadline for comments will be set, which will be a minimum of 21 days (though some local planning authorities may give a little longer). If this is insufficient time to formulate a response contact the case officer as soon as possible to seek an extension never assume that late submissions will be accepted. Key Practice Point review the application As soon as you become aware of an application: note the deadline for response - if you anticipate difficulty in responding by the date set contact the case officer straight away and seek an extension; study the application and supporting material, especially any Environmental Statement if one is provided. If you consider that necessary information is missing or seems to be wrong contact the case officer straight away; and identify the issues that are of concern (if any) liaise with local people and other groups as you consider appropriate. Contact the Branch Office for any help and advice you need, including on campaigning and publicity. Page 14 of 64

Planning Considerations Introduction 32. As for all applications, those for ground mounted solar PV proposals will be determined by the local planning authority against the prevailing Local Development Plan and taking into account other material planning considerations. Planning law requires decisions to be made in accordance with the plan unless other material considerations indicate that a different decision should be made 11. Getting Started: Find and Review the Key Documents 33. Having reviewed the planning application and its supporting information you will have identified the potential issues of concern. You may, of course, not have any concerns, in which case you may decide to make no comment or, if you feel able, express support for the proposal. However, if you consider that an objection should be made you should do so by explaining how it fails to accord with the policies in the Development Plan and/or how other material considerations have not been taken into account. There are a number of key documents you should have regard to. 34. The Development Plan: Planning decisions should be made in accordance with the Development Plan, so assessing the plan should be your starting point. For considering solar PV proposals the Development Plan in all areas will comprise: the district council s adopted Local Plan; and any adopted Neighbourhood Plan prepared by a parish or town council or by a neighbourhood forum. 35. Local Plan: Each district council (and Medway Council) will have an adopted Local Plan. This will comprise any plans prepared under the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 (i.e. any Core Strategy plan or other Development Plan Documents 12 ) and/or older Local Plans prepared under previous planning legislation. In the case of these older plans it will only be the saved policies that will remain relevant 13. Details of the saved policies and any newer Local Plan documents will be available on your district council s web-site. 36. At the time of writing this note the documents comprising the Local Plan for each district and for Medway are listed in Annex 4 to this note, and copies will be available on the local authority s web site. 37. Most local authorities are likely to be in the process of preparing a new Local Plan, or reviewing parts of the existing Plan. It is possible that if draft plans have been prepared they 11 In accordance with Section 38(6) of the 2004 Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 12 These may be termed Local Development Framework plans 13 Under the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 local planning authorities could apply to the Secretary of State for specific policies in existing plans to be saved and thus remain valid pending the preparation of new style Local Development Framework plans under the Act. Page 15 of 64

will contain relevant policies, and as emerging plans such policies will comprise a material consideration for the local planning authority. 38. In making your objections you should relate them to the relevant policies in the Local Plan, so you will need to review the plan to identify the appropriate policies that will support your objection. In most parts of Kent local planning authorities have still to develop local plan policies that provide specific guidance on how proposed solar PV developments will be assessed, so the NPPF and the other national guidance referred to below is likely to carry as much weight as the Local Plan. However, the Local Plan will contain a number of relevant general development management policies, for example in relation to the protection of landscape and wildlife. You should review the plan, and any emerging plan to identify the relevant policies. 39. The Local Plan also comprises a Policies Map (previously called a Proposals Map) which will show where land is designated for landscape or nature conservation purposes. Other environmental designations are also shown, such as areas at risk of flooding. Sites proposed for development will also be shown it is a legitimate objection to make if a solar farm proposal involves a site proposed for another use in the Local Plan. 40. Neighbourhood Plans: At the time of writing this note there are no adopted Neighbourhood Plans in Kent. However, there are a number of parish and town councils that are in the process of preparing plans. It is possible that if draft plans have been prepared they will contain relevant policies, and as emerging plans such policies will comprise a material consideration for the local planning authority. You should check to see if there is an emerging Neighbourhood Plan for the parish in which the application falls, and check to see if there are any draft policies that might be relevant. Key Practice Point review the Local Plan and any Neighbourhood Plan find and review the Local Plan document(s) that will be relevant for considering the application and the Policies Map, including any emerging plan. Identify any designations that apply to the site and the relevant Local Plan policies. check the Parish/Town Council web-site to find out if there is a draft Neighbourhood Plan. If there is, review it to identify any policies that might be relevant. Contact the Branch Office for any help and advice you need on finding and interpreting any of the documents and policies. Page 16 of 64

41. Other Material Considerations: There are a number of other documents that will be important material considerations: 42. The NPPF: The most important material consideration is the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) 14. The NPPF is a particularly important consideration because it postdates most of the adopted local plans in Kent 15. Paragraphs 213-215 of the NPPF explain that if 12 months after the publication of the NPPF (i.e. by 27 March 2013) local plans have not been up-dated to take account of the policies in the NPPF, weight should only be given to relevant policies in them according to their degree of consistency with the NPPF. This means that the NPPF may actually be more important in making planning decisions than the local plan, so particular regard will need to be given to it. 43. Planning Practice Guidance: To provide guidance on how the NPPF should be applied in regard to renewable and low carbon energy proposals, the Government has issued planning practice guidance 16. This includes specific guidance on solar PV farms (at paragraphs 24 28) as well as more general guidance. In addition, the Government is currently in the process of reviewing all existing planning guidance and propose to make this available as an on-line resource 17. Elements of this guidance, in addition to that specifically relating to renewable energy, may be helpful. 44. Other National Guidance: There are three other documents specifically relating to solar farm developments that will also be important material considerations, and reference to them should be made as appropriate: The UK Solar PV Strategy Part 1: Roadmap to a Brighter Future published by the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) 18. This sets out the guiding principles for deployment of solar in the UK. Following the publication of this document the Minister of State for Energy and Climate Change wrote to all local planning authorities on 1 November 2013 setting out his priorities for the siting of solar energy, emphasising that the focus for growth should be firmly on domestic and commercial roof space and on previously used land. This helpful letter is reproduced in full at Annex 5. Solar Farms: 10 Commitments published by the Solar Trade Association (STA) 19. This sets out the best practice guidance that will be followed by the members of the STA; and 14 See https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/6077/2116950.pdf 15 At the time of writing this note only the Shepway Core Strategy Local Plan has been adopted since the NPPF came into effect, and is therefore the only plan in Kent that is fully compliant with the NPPF. 16 Planning Practice Guidance for renewable and low carbon energy see https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/225689/planning_practice_guidance_for_ren ewable_and_low_carbon_energy.pdf 17 The revised planning guidance is currently available in draft form at http://planningguidance.planningportal.gov.uk/ 18 See: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/249277/uk_solar_pv_strategy_part_1_road map_to_a_brighter_future_08.10.pdf 19 See: http://www.solar-trade.org.uk/media/sta%2010%20commitments%20v%2010.pdf Page 17 of 64

Planning guidance for the development of large scale ground mounted solar PV systems published by the National Solar Centre 20. This guidance, supported by the key players in the industry and by DECC, provides best practice planning guidance in respect of how large ground mounted arrays are developed setting out planning conditions and requirements. Key Practice Point review other key documents review the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) see footnote 14 for link. review the Government s Planning Practice Guidance for renewable and low carbon energy see footnote 16 for link. review other relevant planning practice guidance see footnote 17 for link review the other relevant national guidance see footnotes 18, 19 and 20 for links. Contact the Branch Office for any help and advice you need on finding and interpreting any of the documents. CPRE Protect Kent s Key Planning Issues 45. CPRE Protect Kent supports in principle renewable energy, but only in appropriate locations. Our preference is that solar energy opportunities should be focused at rooftops, especially in industrial estates, and on previously developed land. These are also the favoured locations of the Minister of State for Energy and Climate Change see letter in Annex 5. However, we are likely to continue to be confronted with ground mounted solar PV applications in the countryside at locations that tend to be determined by a) a willing landowner and b) proximity to the power line network. 46. We have two primary concerns with ground mounted solar PV farms in the countryside: their impact on the landscape; and the loss of high quality agricultural land. For both of these concerns the following pages provide guidance on how they should be considered. In so doing, you should have specific regard to the cumulative effect of development in the locality, as this will potentially compound our concerns. 1: Impact on the Landscape 47. Paragraph 17 of the NPPF explains that planning decisions should recognise the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside and the need to contribute to conserving and enhancing the natural environment. These are core planning principles, and the protection 20 See: http://www.bre.co.uk/filelibrary/pdf/other_pdfs/kn5524_planning_guidance_reduced.pdf Page 18 of 64

of our landscapes from harmful development is an important part in ensuring that these core planning principles are achieved. These, are useful principles to quote and to provide context for more detailed comments. 48. As acknowledged in the National Solar Centre (NSC) planning guidance (see footnote 20), impact on the landscape of large Scale Solar PV farms is likely to be the most significant issue. It explains that developers may be attracted to southerly sloping sites, where solar gain is greatest, but that such sites are likely to be more visible within the wider landscape. It advises that land selected should aim to avoid affecting the visual aspect of landscapes, maintain the natural beauty and should be predominantly flat, well screened by hedges, tree lines, etc. and not cause undue impact to nearby domestic properties or roads 21. This locational guidance is repeated in the notes to the STA s 10 commitments (see footnote 19). Paragraph 15 of the Government s Planning Practice Guidance, highlights that local topography is an important factor in assessing whether solar farms could have a damaging effect on landscape and, in contrast to the NSC and STA advice, considers that the impact can be as great in predominately flat landscapes as in hilly or mountainous areas. 49. To date it has generally been the case that in making decisions on ground mounted solar PV proposals significant weight has been given to the wider environmental benefits of providing renewable energy at the expense of impact on landscape. Proposals have only tended to be refused on landscape grounds if the impact is deemed to be significant and cannot be mitigated. However, the newer guidance (as highlighted in paragraph 48 above) is clear that impact on the landscape is a primary consideration. In particular the Government s Planning Practice Guidance has clarified the Government s intention and support for renewable energy by explaining that the need for renewable energy does not automatically override environmental protections or the planning concerns of local people (see paragraphs 5, 8 and 15). This is quite a significant, and helpful, change in emphasis. 50. In addition, in October 2013 the Secretary of State announced that he would be recovering a selection of onshore renewable energy schemes, chiefly wind and solar farms, to see whether the new planning practice guidance is meeting the Government s intentions. In a written statement to the House of Commons he said: My Department published new planning practice guidance in the summer to help ensure the planning concerns raised by local communities are given proper weight in planning decisions on onshore renewable energy. The National Planning Policy Framework includes strong protections for the natural and historic environment. Yet, some local communities have genuine concerns that when it comes to developments such as wind turbines and solar farms insufficient weight is being given to local environmental considerations like landscape, heritage and local amenity. The new guidance makes it clear that the need for renewable energy does not automatically override environmental protections and the views of local communities should be listened to. The new planning practice guidance has been published to assist local councils and planning inspectors in their consideration of local plans and individual planning 21 See pages 5 and 14 Page 19 of 64

applications. Of course, planning is a quasi-judicial process, and every application needs to be considered on its individual merits, with due process, in light of the relevant material considerations. I want to give particular scrutiny to planning appeals involving renewable energy developments so that I can consider the extent to which the new practice guidance is meeting the Government s intentions. To this end, I am hereby revising the appeals recovery criteria and will consider for recovery appeals for renewable energy developments. 51. Under this recovery process, the Secretary of State s recent decision on a solar farm proposal in Suffolk provides a useful example of how he sees the new planning practice guidance being applied 22. In this case, a proposal for a 24MW solar farm was refused by the local planning authority, but following a subsequent planning appeal inquiry a planning inspector recommended approval. It was the inspector s view that the harm to the character and appearance of the area would not amount to significant adverse effect and that the significant benefits of the proposal outweighed the limited harm to the character and appearance of the countryside. 52. The Secretary of State, however, disagreed with the Inspector and dismissed the appeal. Whilst agreeing with the Inspector that the wider environmental benefits should be afforded significant weight, after taking account of the guidance he recognised that new renewable and low carbon energy infrastructure should only be provided in locations where the local environmental impact is acceptable. In this case, whilst he agreed with the Inspector that the harm to the character and appearance of the area was limited and would not amount to significant adverse effects, he nevertheless concluded that the effects would be adverse. He also considered that the impact upon the character and appearance of the area was a concern to the local community. Overall he considered that the increase in the amount of renewable energy generated by the appeal scheme did not outweigh the additional harm caused to the character and appearance of the area. Given the concerns of local residents, he considered the harm to be unacceptable. 53. Whilst each case must be considered on its own merits, and the circumstances relating to individual proposals will be different, this is a useful decision by the Secretary of State because it demonstrates that the harmful effects of development on the landscape, and the concerns of local people, cannot simply be overridden by claims of greater environmental gains and the need to meet the national renewable energy target. It shows that the new planning practice guidance if properly applied has teeth, and that a more balanced and considered assessment must be undertaken. This case may be a useful one to refer to in making comments on planning applications, to illustrate how the requirements of paragraphs 5, 8 and 15 of the guidance should be applied when harm is identified and local concerns about harm are raised. 22 See https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/250969/recovered_appeal_- _land_at_and_adjacent_to_ellough_airfield Benacre_Road Ellough Suffolk ref_2193543 16_October_2013_.pdf for the Secretary of State s decision and the Inspector s Report Page 20 of 64

Key Practice Point general comments to make on the application In your response to planning applications, as opening points: express concern that the proposal involves land in the countryside when the Government considers that the focus for growth should be firmly on domestic and commercial roof space and on previously used land refer to the letter from the Minister of State for Energy and Climate Change to local authorities of 1 November 2013 (reproduced in Annex 5); refer to the core planning issues in paragraph 17 of the NPPF that planning decisions should recognise the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside and the need to contribute to conserving and enhancing the natural environment; and highlight paragraphs 5, 8 and 15 of the Government s Planning Practice Guidance for Renewable and Low Carbon Energy that explain that the need for renewable energy does not automatically override environmental protections or the planning concerns of local people. Stress the need for the Council to recognise the importance of local concerns about impact on the character of the area and use the Suffolk decision as an example of how the Secretary of State expects the guidance to be implemented, and that harm has not got to be considered to be significantly adverse for proposals to be refused. In addition, if the site is on sloping land explain that locational guidance signed up to by the industry (i.e. as provided by the National Solar Centre and the Solar Trade Association) advises that sites should comprise flat land that is well screened in order to minimise visual impact. Therefore, the site selected is contrary to accepted practice. Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONBs) 54. In Kent we have two designated AONBs - the Kent Downs AONB and the High Weald AONB. These areas are of national importance and are designated under the National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act 1949. The purpose of the designation is to conserve and enhance natural beauty, and under the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 public bodies have a duty of regard to the purpose of the AONB in making their decisions, including making planning decisions. 55. It is proposals in an AONB that CPRE Protect Kent is particularly concerned about, and we believe that it would be very difficult to locate a ground mounted solar PV farm in an AONB without undermining the purpose of the designation. Unless, after considering all the evidence, you consider that the proposal is acceptable and compliant with national and local policy you should object to any proposal in an AONB. The following paragraphs provide guidance on the matters you should have regard to in formulating your objection to proposals inside an AONB. Page 21 of 64

56. The solar industry does not see AONBs as no go areas, though the Solar Trade Association gives a commitment to being sensitive to nationally and locally protected landscapes 23. However, an applicant will need to demonstrate how their proposal complies with local and national policies that seek to protect the AONB from development, and that it does not undermine the purpose of the designation. You will need to critically review their evidence and arguments in this regard. 57. You will be able to identify from the Local Plan Policies (Proposals) Map if the proposed site is located in an AONB. It will usually be the case that the Local Plan will have a Policy that relates to development in the AONB, though some plans will defer to national policy. Generally speaking, the Local Plan will seek to resist new major development in the AONB, and will see other planning objectives as secondary to the primary purpose of the AONB, i.e. to conserve and enhance natural beauty. You should quote any Local Plan policy that seeks to restrict development in the AONB and explain why you consider the proposal is contrary to it. You should challenge any arguments made by the applicant to the contrary. 58. It is likely that the Local Plan will refer to the AONB Management Plan. Local authorities with land in an AONB are legally obliged to produce an AONB Management Plan, and the Plan is formally adopted by the relevant local authorities as their policy in relation to management of the AONB. The Plan is prepared by the AONB Partnership, comprising an advisory committee of local authority representatives and other interest groups. There are management plans in place for both the Kent Downs and High Weald AONBs and they will help you to understand the issues and purpose of the respective AONBs 24, and they will provide useful information to support your objection. The applicant should have given regard to the Management Plan, and you should express concern if they have not. 59. The Kent Downs AONB partnership has also produced a position statement on renewable energy, including solar, and how proposals in the AONB should be assessed. This is supported by a companion report prepared by consultants that examines the key constraints and opportunities for renewable energy within the Kent Downs AONB 25. These will be useful documents to quote for proposals in the Kent Downs AONB. 60. Whilst the Local Plan and the AONB Management Plan are likely to provide grounds for local level objections to a proposal, it will be important to demonstrate that the proposal also fails to accord with national policy and guidance. The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF see footnote 14 for link) provides clear guidance on how development proposals in an AONB should be considered. Paragraph 115 states that great weight should be given to conserving landscape and scenic beauty in the AONBs and that they have the highest status of protection in relation to landscape and scenic beauty. As a consequence of this, paragraph 14 (footnote 9) of the NPPF specifically excludes AONBs (and other designated areas) from the presumption in favour of sustainable development. 23 See commitment 2 in: http://www.solar-trade.org.uk/media/sta%2010%20commitments%20v%2010.pdf 24 See http://www.kentdowns.org.uk/guidance-management-and-advice/management-plan for the Kent Downs AONB Management Plan and http://www.highweald.org/management-plan.html for the High Weald AONB Management Plan 25 Both the position statement and the companion guide can be viewed at http://www.kentdowns.org.uk/guidancemanagement-and-advice/renewable-energy1 Page 22 of 64