low carbon inkersall road solar farm planning, design …

Date: June 2020 DWD Ref: 13643

LOW CARBON

INKERSALL ROAD SOLAR FARM

PLANNING, DESIGN AND ACCESS

STATEMENT

6 New Bridge Street London EC4V 6AB T: 020 7489 0213 F: 020 7248 4743 E: [email protected] W: dwdllp.com

Low Carbon – Inkersall Road Solar Farm Planning, Design and Access Statement

June 2020 DWD Ref: 13643

Disclaimer This report has been produced by DWD, the trading name of Dalton Warner Davis LLP, a Limited Liability Partnership. Registered in England No. OC304838. Registered Office: 6 New Bridge Street, London, EC4V 6AB. The report is intended for the sole and exclusive use of the instructing client or party. The report shall not be distributed or made available to any third party or published, reproduced or referred to in any way without the prior knowledge and written consent of DWD. The report does not constitute advice to any third party and should not be relied upon as such. DWD accepts no liability or responsibility for any loss or damage to any third party arising from that party having relied upon the contents of the report in whole or in part.



CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................................1

1.0 INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................................................2

Overview ..................................................................................................................................... 2

2.0 NEED ..............................................................................................................................6

3.0 THE SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA ...............................................................................8

Location, description and use ..................................................................................................... 8 Surrounding area ........................................................................................................................ 9 Settlements .............................................................................................................................. 13 Planning and environmental designations ................................................................................ 13 Site selection............................................................................................................................. 14

4.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ........................................................................................... 17

Development summary ............................................................................................................ 17 Design flexibility ........................................................................................................................ 19 Main Components .................................................................................................................... 21 Construction ............................................................................................................................. 25 Operation.................................................................................................................................. 26 Decommissioning and restoration ............................................................................................ 26

5.0 DESIGN APPROACH ...................................................................................................... 27

Design Approach ....................................................................................................................... 27 Design Evolution ....................................................................................................................... 28 Design Through Consultation.................................................................................................... 29

6.0 DESIGN COMPONENTS ................................................................................................. 32

Use ............................................................................................................................................ 32 Amount ..................................................................................................................................... 32 Layout ....................................................................................................................................... 33 Scale.......................................................................................................................................... 34 Appearance ............................................................................................................................... 34 Access ....................................................................................................................................... 35 Landscaping and Biodiversity .................................................................................................... 38

7.0 PLANNING POLICY CONTEXT ........................................................................................ 41

Statutory Development Plan (local planning policy) ................................................................. 41 Other Material Considerations ................................................................................................. 42

8.0 ASSESSMENT OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ......................................................... 44

Principle of Development ......................................................................................................... 44 Site Selection ............................................................................................................................ 45 Scale, Appearance and Design .................................................................................................. 46 Land-Use ................................................................................................................................... 46 Landscape and Visual ................................................................................................................ 47 Cultural Heritage ....................................................................................................................... 50



Flood Risk .................................................................................................................................. 52 Biodiversity ............................................................................................................................... 53 Traffic and Transport ................................................................................................................ 54 Amenity and Impact on Local Community ................................................................................ 55

9.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................... 57

TABLES Table 1.1: Structure ........................................................................................................................... 5 FIGURES Figure 3.1: Site Location Plan ............................................................................................................. 9 Figure 3.2: Photo showing a view east towards the Site, with the Arkwright Solar Farm and single wind turbine in the foreground ................................................................................................................ 11 Figure 3.3: Photo showing industrial development along the M1 corridor to the east of the Site ....... 11 Figure 3.4: Photo showing a view west across the Site towards the Arkwright Solar Farm ................. 12 Figure 3.5: Photo showing the Site form the north, taken along Inkersall Road ................................. 12 Figure 3.6: Unconstrained land ........................................................................................................ 16 Figure 4.1: Indicative Site Layout ..................................................................................................... 18 Figure 4.2: Zoning Layout Plan ......................................................................................................... 20 Figure 4.3: Example row of panels ................................................................................................... 21 Figure 4.4: Example battery cabin .................................................................................................... 22 Figure 4.5: Example substations....................................................................................................... 23 Figure 4.6: Example camera ............................................................................................................. 24 Figure 4.7: Example fence ................................................................................................................ 25 Figure 5.1: Ecological design changes ............................................................................................... 30 Figure 5.2: Landscape, cultural heritage, coal mining and flood risk design changes .......................... 31 Figure 6.1: Eastern construction access ............................................................................................ 36 Figure 6.2: Western construction access .......................................................................................... 37 Figure 6.4: Indicative Landscape and Biodiversity Scheme ................................................................ 40 APPENDICES

APPENDIX A: LIST OF PLANS



Revision Description Originated Checked Reviewed Authorised Date 2 FINAL JM JBG JM JBG June 20 DWD Job Number: 13643



1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Low Carbon is seeking planning permission from Chesterfield Borough Council for the construction and

operation of a solar photovoltaic farm, with battery storage and other associated development on land

adjacent to Inkersall Road near Staveley, Chesterfield. The proposal is referred to collectively as the

‘Proposed Development’ and the project is known as the ‘Inkersall Road Solar Farm’.

The primary purpose of this Planning, Design and Access Statement is to set out the planning case for the

Proposed Development, including with reference to local and national planning policy. This statement

should be read in conjunction with the other documents that comprise the planning application

submission, including the numerous environmental and technical report that have been produced.

The principle of renewable energy, such as solar power, is supported by local and national planning policy.

It is also notable that Chesterfield Borough Council has declared a climate emergency and the UK

Government has committed to meeting a legally binding target of net-zero carbon emissions by 2050. In

order to meet the 2050 target, significant investment is required in the development of renewable energy

infrastructure throughout the UK.

Low Carbon has carried out a meaningful pre-application consultation exercise in respect of the Proposed

Development, primarily focused on the local community, but also including consultation the Council. Low

Carbon has listened to the views expressed by consultees, including the local community, and has made

changes to the Proposed Development to help address and mitigate concerns. The changes include

additional screen planting and standoffs from sensitive features, including isolated residential properties.

The proposed solar farm complies with relevant planning policy and there are significant benefits

associated with it. The environmental and technical reports that form part of the planning application

submission demonstrate that there would be no unacceptable environmental impacts.

These factors, when combined with the significant need for renewable energy, mean that the planning

balance (and, in particular, when considered in the context of the tests under Section 38(6) Planning and

Compulsory Purchase Act 2004) is weighted significantly in favour of the proposed solar farm.



2

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Overview

This Planning, Design and Access Statement (‘PDAS’) has been prepared in support of an application

for full planning permission submitted to Chesterfield Borough Council (the ‘Council’) under the

provisions of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) on behalf of Inkersall Solar

Farm Limited (the ‘Applicant’), which is an special purpose vehicle (‘SPV’) owned by Low Carbon UK

Solar Investment Company Limited (‘Low Carbon’).

The proposal comprises the construction and operation of a solar photovoltaic (‘PV’) farm, batteries

and associated infrastructure, including inverters, security cameras, fencing, access tracks and

landscaping. The proposal is referred to collectively as the ‘Proposed Development’ and the project

is known as the ‘Inkersall Road Solar Farm’.

The proposed site (the ‘Site’) comprises approximately 65hectares (‘ha’) of lower quality

agricultural land (Grade 4) located to the south west of Staveley near Chesterfield. It is notable that

renewable energy generation is already a component in the local landscape, with a single turbine

alongside two existing operational solar farms.

The UK Government has committed to meeting a legally binding target of net-zero carbon

emissions by 2050 and the Council has declared a climate emergency. This requires major

investment in proven technologies, such as solar and battery storage, which are supported by

planning policy at local and national level. The Proposed Development would help to address this

need by generating clean and renewable energy without the need for subsidies.

Planning permission is being sought to operate for 40 years, at which point it would be

decommissioned and the land returned to its previous state.

The Applicant

Low Carbon, the owner of the Applicant, is a UK company committed to making a positive and

significant impact on the causes of climate change. The company has funded the development of

more than 322 megawatts (‘MW’) of UK solar, generating enough clean energy to power more than

100,000 UK homes and saving in excess of 143,600 tonnes of CO2 each year.



3

Pre-application consultation

The Applicant has carried out a comprehensive and meaningful pre-application consultation

exercise in respect of the Proposed Development, primarily focused on the local community, but

also including consultation with the Council and other key consultees.

The Applicant has listened to the views expressed by consultees and has made several changes and

additions to the Proposed Development as a result, including, amongst other things:

• incorporating standoffs into the site layout from boundary habitats, field margins and

ecological assets to the west of the Site;

• removal of solar panels from the land in the north eastern corner of the Site to provide for a

habitat enhancement area;

• removal of solar panels and other infrastructure from Flood Zones 2 and 3;

• incorporating standoffs into the site layout and additional screen planting, to mitigate impact

on residential properties at Inkersall and the Grade II listed Inkersall Farmhouse; and

• investigating numerous options for highway access to the Site, including carrying out speed

surveys and vehicle tracking exercises.

The approach taken to consultation was informed by the Council’s Statement of Community

Involvement (2007).

Environmental Impact Assessment

The Applicant submitted a request for an Environmental Impact Assessment (‘EIA’) Screening

Opinion from the Council on 6 March 2020. The Council issued its Screening Opinion on 16 March

2020, stating that an EIA is not necessary.

It follows that the planning application is not accompanied by an EIA; however, it should be noted

the submission nonetheless includes several environmental reports produced by technical

specialists.

Planning application submission

The application submission consists of the following documents:

• Application Form and Certificates;

• Community Infrastructure Levy (‘CIL’) form;



4

• Planning, Design and Access Statement (this document);

• Consultation Report;

• Alternative Site Assessment;

• Plans (the full of list of plans is itemised at Appendix A of this report);

• Flood Risk Assessment;

• Historic Environment Desk-Based Assessment;

• Ecological Assessment;

• Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment;

• Photomontages;

• Transport Report; and

• Coal Mining Risk and Mitigation Report.

The application has been submitted electronically via the Planning Portal and is accompanied by

the necessary fee of £105,659.00 payable to the Council.

The purpose and structure of this document

Purpose

The primary purpose of this PDAS is to demonstrate how the design of the Proposed Development

is a suitable response to the Site and its setting, and to demonstrate that it can be adequately

accessed. Furthermore, how the Applicant has taken account of relevant planning policy and the

extent to which the Proposed Development is compliant with the Statutory Development Plan.

In doing so, this PDAS draws upon and cross-refers, where relevant, to the other documents that

form part of the planning application submission.

The PDAS has been prepared in accordance with Article 9 of the Town and Country Planning

(Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015. Article 9 requires that all

applications for major development, such as the Proposed Development, are accompanied by a

‘design and access statement’ that should:

• explain the design principles and concepts that have been applied to the development;

• demonstrate the steps taken to appraise the context of the development and how the design

of the development takes that context into account;



5

• explain the policy adopted as to access, and how policies relating to access in relevant local

development documents have been taken into account;

• state what, if any, consultation has been undertaken on issues relating to access to the

development and what account has been taken of the outcome of any such consultation; and

• explain how any specific issues which might affect access to the development have been

addressed.

The above details are primarily set out in Sections 5 and 6 of this document.

Structure

The remainder of this document is structured as follows:

Table 1.1: Structure

Section Title Overview Section 2 Need Sets out the significant need that exists for

solar and other renewables. Section 3 The Site and surrounding area

Describes the Site and its key features, the planning history of relevance that relates to it, any local planning designations and allocations that apply, and the Applicant’s site selection process.

Section 4 The Proposed Development Provides an overview of the Proposed Development, including use, amount, layout, appearance and access.

Section 5 Design approach Outlines the approach taken to the design of the Proposed Development.

Section 6 Design components Provides the design and access details of the Proposed Development, including layout, use, amount, scale, appearance, access and landscaping.

Section 7 Planning policy context Sets out the legislative and policy framework for the determination of the planning application.

Section 8 Assessment of the Proposed Development

Provides an assessment of the Proposed Development against relevant policy at national and local level.

Section 9 Summary and conclusions Sets out the conclusions of this PDAS in terms of the overall acceptability of the Proposed Development.



6

2.0 NEED

There is a significant and quantifiable need for the deployment of solar farms and other renewable

energy generation, which is being driven by government at local and national level in the UK.

In June 2019 the Government raised the UK’s ambition on tackling climate change by legislating for

a net-zero greenhouse gas emissions target for the whole economy by 2050. Decarbonising the

power sector is integral to achieving this goal and requires major investment in proven

technologies, such as solar and battery storage, which are supported by planning policy at local and

national level.

At local level, the Council agreed a motion at the full council on 17 July 2019 to declare a climate

change emergency. The motion was declared on the basis that tackling the effects of climate

change is a key priority. The Council subsequently set up a climate change working group, tasked

with developing a fully costed action plan, amongst other things.

The National Infrastructure Commission (‘NIC’), official advisor to the Government on

infrastructure, subsequently produced a report1 (in March 2020) setting out the infrastructure

required in order to meet the 2050 target, including the amount of new renewable energy

development that would need to be deployed.

Importantly, the NIC recommends the generation mix is up to around 90% renewables. At page 18

the report recommends that across all scenarios significant solar, onshore wind, and offshore wind,

with between 129–237 gigawatts (‘GW’) of renewable capacity is in operation by 2050, including:

• 56–121 GW of solar;

• 18 –27 GW of onshore wind; and

• 54 – 86 GW of offshore wind.

The above requires a monumental increase in installed capacity, including around 9x more solar

than is currently installed in the UK, which is presently around 13 GW according to Green Match2.

Taking the above figures and applying them to the number of local authority areas in the UK leads

to some astonishing numbers, as follows:

1 https://www.nic.org.uk/publications/net-zero-opportunities-for-the-power-sector/ 2 https://www.greenmatch.co.uk/blog/2019/09/uk-solar-capacity



7

• there are approximately 382 local authorities across England, Scotland, Wales and Northern

Ireland;

• if current installed solar capacity (13 GW) in subtracted from the NIC’s upper figure for solar

(121 GW), this leaves up to 108 GW of new solar needed;

• this would mean that each local authority in the UK hypothetically needs to provide

approximately 7 solar farms the size of the Inkersall Road Solar Farm to meet the target; and

• the amount of solar farms required within ‘developable’ local authority areas increases

exponentially when National Parks and other local authorities where solar farms arguably might

not be viable are removed from the equation.

The above figures are clearly high-level; however, they go a significant way to demonstrating the

amount of new infrastructure that is required. The need is compelling and undeniable, and the

amount of new infrastructure means that the responsibility is shared throughout the UK. There is

simply too much for it not to be shared nationally, not to mention that climate change is a national

and global issue.

It is wholly reasonable therefore to consider that every local planning authority area where there

is developable land should be delivering a significant amount of capacity, taking in a mixture of

landscapes and terrains.



8

3.0 THE SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA

This section describes the location and key features of the Site and surrounding area, identifies

relevant planning and environmental designations, and explains the Applicant’s site selection

process.

Location, description and use

The Site comprises approximately 65 ha of agricultural land located approximately 3.5 kilometres

(‘km’) to the north-west of Chesterfield and 1.2 km to the south-west of Staveley. The land is Grade

4 (lower quality) and is currently used for grazing.

The Pools Brook Country Park and the Pools Brook corridor define the northern and eastern

boundaries of the Site respectively; whilst a smaller unnamed tributary brook with a narrow,

wooded corridor runs east to west along the southern boundary of the Site. The urban area of

Inkersall Green abuts the western boundary of the Site.

Two minor roads run through the Site – these are Inkersall Green Road, running east to west; and

Inkersall Road, running north to south. No Public Rights of Way (‘PRoW’) pass directly through the

Site. A network of PRoWs is however present to the west and south of the Site, including the Trans-

Pennine Trail along a portion of the western boundary of the Site on a disused railway line.

The location of the Site is shown below in Figure 3.1 on the following page.



9

Figure 3.1: Site Location Plan

Surrounding area

The Site is located within an urban fringe area to the south-west of Staveley and east of Inkersall

Green, with a mix of land uses typical of the urban fringe. The local topography is gently undulating.

Significant modifications influence the local landscape, which arise from the historic use of the area

for coal extraction, including shafts and open cast mining. This has resulted directly in landscape

features such as spoil heaps, as well as contributing historic infrastructure, such as the now disused

railway which is elevated through much of its passage alongside part of the Site.

Renewable energy generation is already a component in the area, including a single wind turbine

on the west facing slope near Duckmanton, which creates a mobile vertical structure in the



10

landscape; alongside two existing solar farms known as the ‘Cherry Tree Solar Farm’ to the south

and the ‘Arkwright Solar Farm’ to the east. .

Industrial and other employment development represents a significant land use in the surrounding

area, with large warehouse and industrial units particularly prevalent to the north-east of the Site

in response to the proximity of the M1 corridor. Between the villages of Duckmanton and

Poolsbrook lies the Erin Void landfill site and significant industrial development has taken place at

Markham Vale.

It is notable that with this level of urban fringe development and industrialisation the area is not

considered to be tranquil or overtly sensitive to development. The photos (Figures 3.2-3.5) on the

following pages show parts of the Site and surrounding area.



11

Figure 3.2: Photo showing a view east towards the Site, with the Arkwright Solar Farm and single wind turbine in the foreground

Figure 3.3: Photo showing industrial development along the M1 corridor to the east of the Site



12

Figure 3.4: Photo showing a view west across the Site towards the Arkwright Solar Farm

Figure 3.5: Photo showing the Site form the north, taken along Inkersall Road



13

Settlements

There are a number of settlements in the surrounding area. Some of these coalesce into one

another at their boundaries to create contiguous belts of residential development. This is

particularly true for the areas on the margins of Chesterfield which includes the settlements of

Calow, Netherthorpe, Staveley, Brimington, Inkersall Green and Middlecroft, which form an arc to

the west and north of the Site.

The western boundary of the Site abuts Inkersall Green and Middlecroft, separated from the

residential development by a partially elevated disused railway line, road and areas of dense

vegetation.

Duckmanton and Long Duckmanton lie approximately 1km to the east and south-east of the Site

respectively and dominate the valley top. Other settlements within the immediate locality of the

Site are more discrete and self-contained, with smaller settlements such as Poolsbrook in excess of

1km to the north-east, and Arkwright Town approximately 1.5km to the south-west. Bolsover lies

around 4km to the south-east.

Planning and environmental designations

A search of the Government’s MAGIC resource (https://magic.defra.gov.uk/MagiCMap.aspx) has

confirmed that the Site is not covered by any national or international designations or assets that

relate to biodiversity, landscape, cultural heritage or other designations, e.g. Special Protection

Areas, Scheduled Monuments or Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

The closest asset or designation comprises the Grade II Listed Inkersall Farmhouse located adjacent

to the Site. It should be noted, however, that there is visual separation from the Proposed

Development provided by the site layout, existing and proposed vegetation, development standoffs

and large agricultural buildings.

In terms of local designations and allocations, the 2013 Local Plan Proposals Map produced by the

Council confirms that the Site is not covered by any site-specific allocations or designations. It

should also be noted that the areas of the Site that are to be developed are wholly located within

Flood Zone 1 (lowest risk of flooding).

The Site is located in a Development High Risk Area, which affects land in the area as a result of

historic coal mining activity; although, further investigations as part of the planning application

have determined that the majority of the Site itself is low risk (please refer to Section 8 of this

document for more detail).It is notable that a Coal Mining Risk Assessment has been produced for

https://magic.defra.gov.uk/MagiCMap.aspx



14

the Proposed Development and any risks have been adequately considered and addressed for the

purposes of the planning application. Further detail is provided in Section 8 of this document.

Please refer to Section 4 of this report for a more detailed description of the Proposed

Development, and Section 8 for an assessment of the Proposed Development against relevant

planning policy.

Site selection

The identification of the Site is the result of a careful site selection exercise undertaken by the

Applicant. This applied a number of important criteria, including technical feasibility,

environmental and planning constraints, and land availability. The criteria were determined with

reference to relevant planning policy.

The site selection process was broadly split into the following sequence of activities:

• definition of a search area;

• analysis of previously development land;

• analysis of lower grade agricultural land;

• establishment of a long-list;

• long-list filtering to create a short-list of sites; and

• assessment of the short-list.

The Alternative Site Assessment report that forms part of the planning application submission

demonstrates the process that the Applicant applied to identify the Site. The overall aim of the

assessment is to demonstrate that the Applicant gave due consideration to the benefits and

constraints associated with the Site when selecting it for development.

It is notable that ‘unconstrained’ land in the area is very limited, as demonstrated by Figure 3.6 at

the end of this section; an extract from the aforementioned Alternative Site Assessment. The

yellow areas are unconstrained. The Search Area features a lot of heavily constrained land to its

north, with more unconstrained land to its south.

The site search identified a long-list of over 100 sites. The filtering exercise reduced the long-list

down to a short-list of 5 sites. The main reason sites were filtered out is size (too small).

The assessment considers all sites on the short-list and ultimately concludes that whilst the sites

comply with certain criteria and are comparable to the Site in some respects, none are considered



15

to comprise a more feasible alternative. The reasons for this include doubts over availability for

the Proposed Development, being located within a proposed ‘Strategic Gap’ and crossings by

multiple PRoWs.



16

Figure 3.6: Unconstrained land



17

4.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

This section provides a description of the Proposed Development, including its main components,

construction and operation.

Development summary

The Proposed Development comprises the construction and operation of a solar PV farm, with

battery storage and other associated infrastructure. The Proposed Development includes the

following main components:

• rows of solar PV panels;

• approximately 20 batteries within containers (or similar);

• approximately 20 inverters within containers (or similar);

• substations (‘customer’ and ‘DNO’);

• internal access tracks;

• perimeter fencing; and

• CCTV cameras.

It is estimated that the solar panels would generate enough electricity to power approximately

13,000 homes. The battery storage system would charge at times of low demand and export power

back onto the electricity grid at times of high demand or when solar irradiation is low.

The Proposed Development benefits from an agreed point of connection (‘POC’) to an existing

electricity substation located approximately 2.3 km to the north west of the main solar farm site.

The Indicative Site Layout Plan (Reference: LCS007-PL-01) that forms part of the planning

application submission illustrates an example layout. The plan is reproduced in Figure 4.1 on the

following page.



18

Figure 4.1: Indicative Site Layout



19

Design flexibility

Construction work on the Proposed Development, assuming planning permission is granted, would

not commence until a final investment decision has been made by the Applicant and a contractor

appointed. Following the award of the contract(s), the appointed contractor would carry out a

number of detailed studies to inform the technology selection for the Proposed Development and

to optimise its layout and design before starting work at the Site.

It follows that it has not been possible for the Applicant to fix all of the design details of the

Proposed Development at this stage. The Applicant has therefore sought to incorporate sufficient

design flexibility, which is recognised practice for energy projects. This relates to the dimensions

and layout of structures forming part of the Proposed Development, including the precise layout of

the Site and the height of the solar panels.

In order to ensure a robust assessment of the likely significant environmental effects of the

Proposed Development, the assessments that form part of the planning application have therefore

been undertaken adopting the principles of the ‘Rochdale Envelope’.

The approach involved assessing the maximum (and where relevant, minimum) parameters for the

elements where flexibility is required. For example, the solar panels have been assessed for the

purposes of landscape and the visual impact as being a maximum of 2.7m high, which is the worst-

case. It is actually more likely that the panels would be a maximum height of around 2.5m.

The approach also involved defining development zones, rather than having a defined layout. This

would allow the future contractor to optimise the layout of the solar farm following any grant of

planning permission. The zones are shown in the Zoning Layout Plan (Reference: LCS007-PL-02)

that forms part of the planning application submission. The plan is reproduced in Figure 4.2 on the

next page.

The zones define where certain infrastructure should be located within the Site, but there is

flexibility in terms of the layout within each zone. The infrastructure that is proposed within each

zone is as follows:

• Development Zone 1-12 – solar panels, batteries, inverters and associated infrastructure; and

• Development Zone 13 – substations.



20

Figure 4.2: Zoning Layout Plan



21

Main Components

Solar Panels

The solar panels would be laid out in rows running from east to west across the Site. There would

be a gap of approximately 3-4 m between each row. The panels would be mounted on a frame, to

be installed using spiked foundations of approximately 1-2m deep.

The panels are typically mounted in four horizontal rows, with one row fixed directly above the

other, and angled at the optimum position for absorbing year-round solar irradiation. At the lowest

edge the arrays would be approximately 0.9m from the ground and up to approximately 2.7m at

the highest edge.

An example of a row of solar panels is shown in Figure 4.3 below. Indicative dimensions of the

panels and frame are shown on the Solar Panel Cross-Section (Reference: LCS007-SD-10) that forms

part of the planning application submission.

Figure 4.3: Example row of panels

Batteries

The batteries would be contained within shipping containers or a similar cabin type structure. Each

cabin would measure up to approximately 14m long, 3m wide and 3m high. Each cabin would be

placed on a hardcore base, with a stepped access at one end.

Each battery would be located adjacent to heating, ventilation and cooling (‘HVAC’) units and a

battery power conversation system, which performs a similar role to the inverters (see the

‘Inverters’ sub-section for more detail).



22

The batteries would charge when demand is low and then supply electricity to the local electricity

network when the demand requires the electricity. This means that the Proposed Development

can supply electricity to the local distribution network at all times of the day.

An example cabin is shown in Figure 4.4 below. Indicative elevations and dimensions of the battery

cabins and associated infrastructure are shown in the Battery Cabin Elevations and Dimensions Plan

(Reference: LCS007-SD-30), the Power Conversion System Elevations and Dimensions Plan

(Reference: LCS007-SD-29) and HVAC Unit Elevations and Dimensions Plan (Reference: LCS007-SD-

31) that form part of the planning application submission.

Figure 4.4: Example battery cabin

Inverters

The inverters would be contained within shipping containers or similar cabin type structures. Each

cabin would measure approximately 12m long, 2.5m wide and 3m high. Each cabin would be placed

on a hardcore base and would be similar in appearance to the battery cabin, as shown in Figure 4.4.

The inverters would convert the direct current (‘DC’) generated by the solar panels into alternating

current (‘AC’). Transformers, contained within the inverter cabins, convert the low voltage output

from the inverters to high voltage suitable for feeding into the local electricity distribution network.

Indicative elevations and dimensions of the inverter cabins and associated infrastructure are shown

in the Inverter Elevations and Dimensions Plan (Reference: LCS007-SD-08).



23

Substations

A customer substation would be constructed close to the entrance to the main solar farm site,

which would measure up to approximately 3m high, 12m long and 3m wide. A ‘district network

operator’ (‘DNO’) substation would be constructed to the north of the main solar farm site, which

would measure approximately 12.5m long, 2.5m wide and 4m high.

The substations would be placed on a hardcore base. They would receive electricity from the

inverters and batteries before transferring it to the local electricity distribution network via a

connection to an existing substation approximately 2.3km to the north-west of the main solar farm

site. The substations, batteries, inverters and solar panels would be connected by underground

electrical cables.

Example substations are shown in Figure 4.5 below. Indicative elevations and dimensions of the

substations are shown in the DNO Substation Elevation Plan (Reference: LCS007-SD-01) and the

Customer Substation Elevation Plan (Reference: LCS007-SD-02). Example of the underground

electricity cable configurations are shown in the Cable Trench Cross-Section Plan (Reference:

LCS007-SD-05)

Figure 4.5: Example substations

Security

The Proposed Development would need to be secure. It is envisaged that deer fencing (mesh with

wooden posts or similar) to a height of approximately 2m would be installed along the outer edges

of the Site in order to restrict access.



24

This would be sited inside the outermost hedges/trees/vegetation, ensuring that the fence is

visually obscured, and access is available for hedge trimming and maintenance. Gates would be

installed at the main site access point for maintenance access. These would be the same design,

material and colour as the fencing.

The perimeter of the Site would be protected by a system of CCTV cameras and/or infra-red

cameras, which would provide full 24-hour surveillance around the entire perimeter. An intelligent

sensor management system would manage the cameras. The cameras would be on poles of up to

approximately 4m high, spaced at approximately 50m intervals along the security fence. There

would be no lighting within the Site at night.

The proposed fencing and cameras are shown in Figures 4.6 and 4.7, and on the Deer Fence

Elevations and Dimensions Plan (Reference: LCS007-SD-07) and CCTV Elevations and Dimensions

Plan (Reference: LCS007-SD-03) that forms part of the planning application submission.

Figure 4.6: Example camera



25

Figure 4.7: Example fence

Construction

The construction phase of the Proposed Development is expected to last for approximately 16

weeks. During this period, initial site setup works including access maintenance and improvements

would be undertaken where considered to be beneficial to the use of the access, followed by

construction of the internal access route(s), ground works, the installation of the solar panels and

other infrastructure.

Facilities would be provided on site for construction workers, including provision of a site office and

welfare facilities (including toilets, changing and drying facilities, and a canteen). Fencing would be

installed around the perimeter of the site, as discussed, and temporary parking would be provided

for the construction workers.

During the 16-week construction period, it is proposed that construction working hours would be

as follows:

• 07:00 – 18:00 Monday to Friday; and

• 08:00 – 13:00 Saturday.

Should work be required to be undertaken outside of these times, this would be agreed in writing

in advance with the Council.

At the end of each day, mobile plant would be returned to a secure overnight plant storage, where

drip trays can be utilised under the various types of plant, if required.



26

Operation

Once operational, occasional maintenance of the solar panels and other infrastructure would be

required. The solar panels would also need to be periodically cleaned, most likely using simply soap

and water, to ensure the efficient running of the system.

It is expected that under normal circumstances no more than 4 cars/vans would visit the Site each

week (generally spread to less than 1 per day).

The Site would be retained in agricultural use for the life of the Proposed Development. The

majority of the Site would be planted with a combination of pasture and wildflower meadow, which

would enable grazing (sheep). This would include land between and underneath panels.

Decommissioning and restoration

At the end of the Proposed Development’s lifespan (i.e. circa 40 years), the solar panels and other

infrastructure would be removed and the Site restored. The small quantity of foundations, hard

surfacing and heavy infrastructure mean that, in combination with retaining the majority of the site

as grassland, the land would be easier to restore than other more intrusive development, e.g. large

buildings requiring significant foundations.

The restoration process is intended to ensure that the land is restored to the same quality as

previously and it is envisaged this would be secured through a suitable condition attached to any

planning permission.



27

5.0 DESIGN APPROACH

This section sets out the approach to the design of the Proposed Development and how it has

evolved throughout the pre-application process.

Design Principles

The main design principles are set out below:

• Design Principle 1: to position the main components to minimise environmental impact;

• Design Principle 2: to seek opportunities for the management and enhancement of biodiversity;

• Design Principle 3: to provide a functional design that makes the best use of the location and

provides for efficient generation of electricity;

• Design Principle 4: to seek to assimilate the Proposed Development into the local landscape as

far as possible;

• Design Principle 5: to ensure safe and efficient access to the public highway; and

• Design Principle 6: to ensure the approach to design is inclusive.

These principles are referenced where applicable in the remainder of this section.

Design approach

The approach taken to the design of the Proposed Development has been informed by the context

within which it would be situated, in addition to the opportunities and constraints presented by the

Site.

The immediate and wider context within which the Site sits is formed partly by agricultural land;

however, there is also the presence of significant built development in the surrounding area. The

latter includes numerous settlements, two operational solar farms and a wind turbine, and

development along the M1 corridor.

Given the Site’s partially agricultural context, the Proposed Development has been designed to be

sympathetic to its surroundings (in accordance with Design Principles 1, 2 and 4), whilst being

practical in terms of technical and engineering considerations (in accordance with Design Principles

3 and 5).

Key elements of the design approach have included the following:



28

• preserving all existing trees and hedgerows, and maintaining suitable stand-offs from sensitive,

ecological features within the Site, e.g. field margin hedgerows and badger setts (in accordance

with Design Principle 2);

• orientating the solar panels south to benefit from maximum solar irradiation (in accordance

with Design Principle 3);

• providing additional screen planting to reduce potential visual impact, including where there

are gaps or no hedgerows exist (in accordance with Design Principle 4);

• providing significant habitat improvements within the Site, including improving the existing

pastureland, the provision of species-rich grassland along field margins, and the provision of

new hedgerow and trees (in accordance with Design Principle 2); and

• providing standoffs from sensitive assets and features, such as the Grade II listed Inkersall

Farmhouse (in accordance with Design Principles 1 and 4);

The infrastructure relating to the Proposed Development is functional in appearance and has been

situated to avoid any environmentally sensitive areas and mitigation has been included to reduce

any other impacts. The approach that has been taken to the design of the Proposed Development

is considered appropriate given its context and purpose; to generate and export electricity to the

local distribution network.

Design Evolution

The design process for the Proposed Development has been an iterative one. As part of the design

process a number of options have been considered for the design and layout of the Proposed

Development, as set out in the ‘Design Approach’ sub-section above. The approach and options

considered are not repeated here.

The main changes to the Proposed Development, in terms of its design, include the following:

• incorporating standoffs into the site layout from boundary habitats, field margins and

ecological assets to the west of the Site;

• removal of solar panels from the land in the north eastern corner of the Site to provide for a

habitat enhancement area;

• removal of solar panels and other infrastructure from Flood Zones 2 and 3;

• incorporating standoffs into the site layout and additional screen planting, to mitigate impact

on residential properties at Inkersall and the Grade II listed Inkersall Farmhouse; and



29

• investigating numerous options for highway access to the Site, including carrying out speed

surveys and vehicle tracking exercises.

The process of implementing some of these changes is shown in Figure 5.1 later in this section.

Design through consultation

The Applicant carried out a comprehensive pre-application consultation exercise in respect of the

Proposed Development (in accordance with Design Principle 6). This included email

correspondence with the Council; emails to key consultees and local stakeholders (e.g. parish

council, ward councillors and the Derbyshire Wildlife Trust); letter, leaflet and feedback form sent

to residential properties and businesses in the surrounding area; a social media campaign and

consultation website; and an interactive consultation platform known as CommonPlace.

The exercise would usually have included a number of face to face meetings and a public exhibition

at a venue close to the Site. However, this was not possible owing to the circumstances brought

about by COVID-19. The CommonPlace platform was utilised to fill the gap left by the inability to

carry out a public exhibition, as it allows consultees to review a significant amount of information

about the Proposed Development, make comments on specific aspects, complete a feedback form

and ask questions. In addition, a freephone telephone line was set up and manned by the Applicant,

to allows for interested parties to call, ask questions and leave comments.

The objective of the consultation was to introduce the Proposed Development, including elements

of the design approach and proposed management measures. Examples of the consultation

materials produced, including leaflets and extract from the CommonPlace platform, are appended

to the Consultation Report that forms part of the planning application submission.

The points raised by consultees have been considered and the Applicant subsequently made a

number of changes and additions to the Proposed Development, as summarised in Section 1 of this

document.



30

Figure 5.1: Ecological design changes



31

Figure 5.2: Landscape, cultural heritage, coal mining and flood risk design changes



32

6.0 DESIGN COMPONENTS

This section describes the key design components of the Proposed Development. This includes in

relation to use, the quantum of development, layout, the scale of the main structures, appearance,

access and the approach taken to landscaping.

Use

The Site comprises agricultural land within an urban fringe setting. The various fields that make up

the Site are currently in utilised for grazing. It is proposed that the use of the Site would be for the

operation of a renewable energy installation, comprising a solar farm with battery storage and

other associated infrastructure.

Importantly, however, it is proposed that the Site would retain the current agricultural use in

conjunction with the generation of renewable electricity through grazing once the Proposed

Development is operational. It is proposed to maintain the grazing use for the lifetime of the

Proposed Development, after which time it is envisaged that all infrastructure associated with the

Proposed Development would be removed and the land returned to its previous state.

Given the Site’s partially rural context, the Proposed Development has been designed to be

sympathetic to its surroundings, whilst being practical in terms of technical and engineering

considerations. It is therefore considered that, on balance, the proposed use is compatible with

the Site and surrounding area, particularly given that a precedent is already set for renewable

energy in the locality and there are a number of other humanising influences, such as the M1

corridor.

Amount

The Proposed Development would consist primarily of solar panels mounted on a treated metal

(aluminium or similar) framework. The Proposed Development includes the following main

equipment:

• rows of solar PV panels;

• batteries;

• inverters;

• substations (‘customer’ and ‘DNO’);

• internal access tracks;

• perimeter fence; and



33

• CCTV cameras.

This is considered the minimal level of development necessary to ensure that the site performs

effectively with regard to its main purpose of generating and storing electricity.

It is envisaged that only around 30% of the Site would be developed, i.e. through the placement of

solar panels and other infrastructure, with the remainder retained as grassland (including between

and underneath rows of panels), hedgerows and trees. It is also notable that grass would grow

underneath the solar panels.

Layout

The solar panels and other infrastructure would be set within the existing field pattern, with field

margins (hedgerows and ditches) and boundary vegetation retained. The fencing around the Site

would be situated inside the boundary vegetation, ensuring that access is available for hedge

trimming and maintenance and the fencing is not outwardly visible.

The solar panels would be positioned in south facing rows across the Site, with the inverters and

batteries set within the rows of panels to reduce visual impact. The DNO substation and customer

substation would be situated close to the main solar farm site entrance for easy access during

operation.

The initial design was assessed by planning and environmental specialists in terms of, amongst

other matters, landscape and visual, cultural heritage, ecology, hydrology and traffic

considerations. Each specialist visited the Site and identified the presence or absence of potential

environmental constraints and opportunities. Plans were produced to show potential

environmental constraints both within the Site and adjacent, including in respect of landscape and

visual impact. Some of these plans are reproduced in Figures 5.1 and 5.2 in the previous section of

this document.

The constraints and opportunities analysis then informed various meetings attended by

environmental specialists and design engineers. Although there are factors that limit the extent to

which the layout and design of the solar farm can be adjusted, these design iterations have ensured

that the Proposed Development has as little impact on the local environment as possible.

Furthermore, the protection of existing landscape features and valuable habitat, including

hedgerows and trees, has been a central consideration in the preparation of the layout.

The approach involved defining development zones, to ensure that, amongst other matters, the

field pattern is adhered to and appropriate stand-offs from sensitive features are maintained. The



34

zones are shown in the Zoning Layout Plan (Reference: LCS007-PL-02) that forms part of the

planning application submission. The plan is reproduced in Figure 4.2 earlier in this report. The

zones define where certain infrastructure should be located within the Site, but there is flexibility

in terms of the layout within each zone.

The Indicative Site Layout Plan (Reference: LCS007-PL-01) that forms part of the planning

application submission illustrates an example layout.

Scale

The scale of development at the Site has been determined by the equipment necessary to generate

and store electricity sufficiently.

All of the structures at the Site would be single storey. Even when viewed from nearby vantage

points, and considering the landscape context, it is considered that the scale of development would

not be overbearing due to its low visual profile. This would be further improved when proposed

screen planting matures, which, in addition to existing screening around the Site, would contribute

to assimilating the Site into the local landscape over time.

The solar panels would be limited to a maximum height of 2.7m and these make up the vast

majority of the development. The highest structures associated with the Proposed Development

would be up to 4m high in the form of CCTV security cameras, plus the customer and DNO

substations at a similar maximum height. The majority of the associated infrastructure would be

no higher than 3m; the height of a mature hedgerow.

The solar panels and vast majority of the associated infrastructure would therefore sit equal to or

below the existing and proposed hedges that surround the Site, which would be managed to a

height of at least 3m. It is therefore considered that the scale of the Proposed Development is

appropriate to the location.

Appearance

The most visible components of the Proposed Development would be the solar panels, inverters,

battery cabins and substations.

The solar panels would be mounted on a metal frame and constructed from non-reflective glass. It

is notable that the solar panels are designed to absorb sunlight, therefore there would be no

significant issues associated with glint and glare. It is also notable that the metal frame is treated

to avoid any significant issues associated with glint and glare. The metal frame is necessary because

it is durable and is sufficiently strong to hold the panels in position; a functional design requirement.



35

It is envisaged that the cabins and other small buildings would be appropriately coloured or clad to

minimise any visual impact and comply as far as practicable with the local vernacular. The

structures would however be functional in appearance, reflecting their purposes, which is for the

generation and storage of electricity.

Cabling between rows of panels, inverters and the grid connection point would be underground at

a prescribed depth, meaning that there would be no requirement for over ground cabling and/or

additional pylons, and therefore there would be no visual impact associated with this approach

(following initial construction).

Access

During construction (the most intense phase from a highways perspective), it is proposed that

eastern section of the Site would be accessed from Inkersall Road along its western boundary; and

the western section of the Site would be accesses from Inkersall Green Road along its northern

boundary. The proposed highways accesses for construction are shown in Figures 6.1 and 6.2 on

the following pages.

The accesses have been tested for suitability through the application of vehicle tracking and speed

surveys. They have subsequently been deemed acceptable and fit for purpose. Please refer to the

Transport Report that forms part of the planning application for more detail.

During operation (when vehicle movement are very low), highway access for maintenance would

revert to the existing field accesses to the south along Inkersall Road. These are shown on the

Indicative Site Layout Plan (Reference: LCS007-PL-01). The DNO substation only would continue to

be accessed using the Western Access.

Site access tracks would be utilised to facilitate movement within the Site for construction and

maintenance. It is envisaged that topsoil layers would be excavated to expose a suitable base on

which to build each track. The tracks would then be built up by laying a permeable, crushed stone

surface, rolled in layers. It is envisaged that the tracks would utilise existing access points between

field and crossing points over ditches as far as practicable.

For more detail, please refer to the Eastern Access Plan Eastern Parcel Proposed Construction Site

Access Plan (Reference: 410558-MMD-XX-BA04-DR-C-0001), the Western Parcel Proposed

Construction Site Access Plan (Reference: 410558-MMD-XX-BA04-DR-C-0003) and the Access Track

Cross-Section Plan (Reference: LCS007-PL-06) that form part of the planning application

submission.



36

Figure 6.1: Eastern construction access



37

Figure 6.2: Western construction access



38

Landscaping and biodiversity

A Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (‘LVIA’) has been produced (by a qualified landscape

architect) and forms part of the planning application submission. The assessment considers the

effects of the Proposed Development on both the landscape (landscape impact) and on

representative viewpoints from around the Site (visual impact), including from PRoWs.

The Proposed Development has been designed to respect the character of the landscape and uses

the strong field pattern to integrate the scheme as far as practicable. Existing landscape features

would be retained, protected and strengthened; including the retention of all existing field margins

(hedgerows and ditches) and standoffs from boundary habitats. All trees on the Site would be

retained and additional planting provided, where necessary, to fill gaps in the existing boundary

planting.

The specific landscaping and biodiversity proposals for the Site include the following:

• the inclusion of additional non-development areas within the planning application boundary,

to allow for habitat enhancement areas and standoffs from sensitive features to be secured by

any planning permission and managed as part of the Proposed Development;

• no panels placed the north western field closest to Inkersall Green nor in the fields west the

Inkersall Farmhouse, to maintain the landscape setting of the Grade II listed asset;

• existing hedge lines retained and allowed to grow to 3m in height, effectively screening the

Proposed Development from the road and breaking up the visual impression of panel blocks

when viewed from any wider viewpoints;

• standoffs set from the residential properties forming part of the Inkersall Hamlet;

• any gaps within existing hedge lines infilled to maintain visual continuity and the boundary

hedge along Inkersall Green Road thickened;

• additional new hedge planting set along the open panel edge to the south of and parallel to

Inkersall Green Road, around the boundary with West Croft House, by the properties on the

east side of the road at Inkersall and along the open edge by Pools Brook Country Park;

• trees included along northern and western boundaries;

• all planting comprising of native indigenous species common within the local area, such as

hawthorn, blackthorn, dogwood, hazel, field maple, privet, small leaved lime, rowan, crab apple

and bird cherry;



39

• an ecological enhancement area in the north eastern section of the Site, where no panels or

other infrastructure would be placed;

• standoffs from sensitive ecological features, including along the western boundary of the Site

and from active badger setts; and

• provision of wildflower meadow along field margins and elsewhere.

The landscaping and planting proposals associated with the Proposed Development would bring

about significant ecological benefit when compared to the present situation at the Site, including

upgrading lower value agricultural land to higher value habitats.

The Proposed Development includes the following quantifiable habitat creation:

• creation of approximately 15 ha of species rich wildflower grassland, focussed in areas where

they will provide the highest gains for biodiversity, such as buffering the corridors alongside

existing hedgerows, and adjacent to new hedgerow planting;

• creation/maintenance of approximately 1.2 km of new native hedgerow planting and to

provide new habitat for a range of local fauna, such as nesting birds and small mammals, as

well as enhancing the ecological connectivity of the site and the local landscape within which

the site lies;

• provision of approximately 47 new trees; and

• retention of approximately 50 ha of grazing pasture.

For more detail, please refer to the LVIA and Ecological Assessment submitted as part of the

planning application. The Indicative Landscaping and Biodiversity Scheme is reproduced in Figure

6.4.



40

Figure 6.4: Indicative Landscape and Biodiversity Scheme



41

7.0 PLANNING POLICY CONTEXT

This section provides a brief overview of the relevant planning policy and guidance at local and

national level. The design of the Proposed Development has been influenced by these policies and

the proposals are assessed against them in Section 8 of this report.

The planning application will be determined in accordance with section 70(2) of the Town and

Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended), which states that in dealing with applications, local

planning authorities shall have regard to the provisions of the statutory development plan and to

other material considerations.

Local planning policy

The Statutory Development Plan for the area comprises the 2013 Local Plan: Core Strategy 2031

(adopted July 2013) (the ‘Core Strategy’) and the Saved Policies of the Replacement Chesterfield

Borough Local Plan (adopted June 2006) (the ‘Replacement Local Plan’).

The following Core Strategy policies are considered to be of most relevance:

• CS2 – Principles for Location of Development;

• CS3 – Presumption in favour of sustainable development;

• CS5 – Renewable Energy;

• CS6 – Sustainable Design and Construction;

• CS7 – Managing the Water Cycle;

• CS8 – Environmental Quality;

• CS9 – Green Infrastructure and Biodiversity;

• CS18 – Design;

• CS19 – Historic Environment; and

• CS20 – Influencing the Demand for Travel.

The following Replacement Local Plan policies are considered to be of most relevance:

• EVR2 – Development in the Open Countryside and Other Open Land;

• EVR9 – Tree and Woodland Planting; and

• EVR7 – Protection of Species.



42

Other material considerations

Emerging planning policy

On 28 June 2019 the Council submitted the Chesterfield Borough Council Local Plan 2018 – 2033

(the ‘Emerging Local Plan’) to the Secretary of State for independent examination. Once adopted

this will replace the Core Strategy and saved policies of the Replacement Local Plan.

Given that the Local Plan is close to adoption, the following policies are considered to be of

relevance:

• LP2 – Principles for Location of Development;

• LP3 – Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development;

• LP13 – Renewable Energy;

• LP14 – Managing the Water Cycle;

• LP15 – A Healthy Environment;

• LP16 – Green Infrastructure;

• LP17 – Biodiversity, Geodiversity and the Ecological Network;

• LP21 – Design;

• LP22 – Historic Environment; and

• LP23 – Influencing the Demand for Travel.

National planning policy

The National Planning Policy Framework (‘NPPF’) was adopted in March 2012 and last updated in

February 2019. It sets out the Government’s planning policies for England and how these are to be

applied. The policies contained within the NPPF are expanded upon and supported by National

Planning Practice Guidance (‘NPPG’), which was first published in March 2014 and has been

periodically updated since.

NPPG considered most relevant to the Proposed Development includes:

• Climate Change 15 March 2019;

• Historic Environment;

• Natural Environment;

• Open Space, sports and recreation facilities, public rights of way and local green space;



43

• Renewable and low carbon energy; and

• Strategic environmental assessment and sustainability appraisal.

The National Policy Statements (‘NPSs’) make up the planning policy framework for examining and

determining Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects (‘NSIPs’). As the Proposed Development

is not a NSIP, the NPSs are not directly relevant; however, they do form material considerations in

the determination of the planning application.

The following NPSs are relevant:

• Overarching NPS for Energy (‘EN-1’);

• NPS for Renewable Energy Infrastructure (‘EN-3’); and

• NPS for Electricity Networks Infrastructure (‘EN-5’).

Other

In addition, whilst not planning policy documents, the following also form material considerations:

• Department of Energy and Climate Change – Solar PV Strategy Part One: Roadmap to a Brighter

Future (2013);

• Department of Energy and Climate Change – UK Solar PV Strategy Part Two: Delivering a

Brighter Future (2014); and

• National Infrastructure Commission – Net Zero Opportunities for the Power Sector (2020).

There are also numerous documents produced by National Grid and others that are relevant in

terms of the need that exists for the Proposed Development and proposals of its kind.



44

8.0 ASSESSMENT OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

This section of the statement provides an assessment of the application proposals, in order to

demonstrate how the Proposed Development has been influenced by, and is compliant with,

relevant planning policy. The key assessment topics are as follows:

• Principle of development;

• Site selection;

• Scale, appearance and design;

• Land-use and development in the countryside;

• Landscape and visual;

• Cultural heritage;

• Flood risk;

• Biodiversity;

• Traffic and transport; and

• Coal mining and land stability; and

• Amenity and impact on local community.

Principle of development

Policy summary

In principle, the NPPF sets out its support for renewable energy development in Chapter 14

(Meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and coastal change). Paragraph 148 states that

“The planning system should support the transition to a low carbon future. It should help to …

support renewable and low carbon energy and associated infrastructure.”

Policy CS5 (Renewable Energy) of the Core Strategy states “the council will support proposals for

renewable energy generation particularly where they have wider social, economic and

environmental benefits” provided a number of criteria are met. Furthermore, Policy CS6

(Sustainable Design and Construction) states that “all development should, as far as possible,

contribute towards reduction of CO2 emissions and generation of renewable energy.”

Policy LP21 (Design) of the Emerging Local Plan states that “all development should, as far as

possible, contribute towards reduction of CO2 emissions and generation of renewable energy.”



45

Assessment

The principle of the Proposed Development is heavily supported by both local and national policy,

provided there are no unacceptable impacts and certain criteria are met. There is also a significant

and demonstrable need for the Proposed Development as set out in Section 2 of this document.

The remainder of this section demonstrates that there are no unacceptable impacts associated with

the Proposed Development and that the planning balance weighs heavily in favour of it.

Site selection

Policy summary

Policy LP2 (Principles for Location of Development) of the Emerging Local Plan states that proposals

must not be on best and most versatile agricultural land.

Policy LP15 (A Healthy Environment) of the Emerging Local Plan states that the development of

best and most versatile agricultural land will only be permitted where it can be demonstrated that

the need for development outweighs need to protect the land in the long term, in the case of

temporary development that the land would be reinstated to its pre-working quality and there are

no suitable alternative sites on previously developed or lower quality land.

Policy CS5 (Renewable Energy) of the Core Strategy supports renewable energy provided that

proposals (in summary) minimise adverse impact on:

• cultural heritage;

• natural landscape and townscape character;

• nature conservation; and

• general amenity.

It should be noted that the Council has not allocated any specific sites for renewable energy

development.

Assessment

The Alternative Site Assessment report that forms part of the planning application submission

demonstrates the process that the Applicant went through to identify the Site, including the

consideration of previously developed land and lower grade agricultural land. The overall aim of

the assessment is to demonstrate that the Applicant has given due consideration to the benefits

and constraints associated with the Site when selecting it for development.



46

The assessment concludes that there are no alternative sites that are more suitable than the Site,

when considered relative to the applied criteria, including avoiding designated sites, using lower

grade agricultural land (Grade 4 – not Best and Most Versatile), and avoiding areas subject to a

higher risk of flooding. Please refer to ‘Site Selection’ in Section 3 of this report for further detail.

It is therefore considered that the Proposed Development complies with relevant planning policy

relating to site selection.

Scale, appearance and design

Policy summary

Policy CS18 (Design) of the Core Strategy states that development is expected to “respect the

character, form and setting of the site and surrounding area by virtue of its function, appearance

and architectural style, landscaping, scale, massing, detailing, height and materials.”

Policy LP21 of the Emerging Local Plan echoes the above.

Assessment

The ‘Design approach’ and ‘Design components’ associated with the Proposed Development are

covered in more detail in Sections 5 and 6 of this report, respectively.

The Proposed Development has been designed so as to practically fulfil its purpose of generating

and storing electricity. However, it has also been designed as far as possible to avoid adverse

impacts by ensuring sensitive siting and layout which is compatible within its location, together

with improving the quality of the area by introducing landscape and biodiversity enhancements.

Also, where necessary, specific mitigation measures which have been proposed to reduce

anticipated impacts to an acceptable level. For these reasons, the Proposed Development is

acceptable in terms of scale, appearance and design in accordance.

Land-use and development in the countryside

Policy summary

Policy EVR2 (Development in the open countryside and other open land) of the Replacement Local

Plan includes that within areas of open countryside planning permission will only be granted for

new development which is necessary for the needs of agriculture and forestry or is related to

recreation, tourism or other types of farm or rural diversification. This is on the proviso that the

proposal in question meet certain criteria, including in relation to landscape and visual

considerations, scale and design, and general amenity.



47

Policy LP2 (Principles for Location of Development) of the Emerging Local Plan states that proposals

must not be on best and most versatile agricultural land.

Policy LP15 (A Healthy Environment) of the Emerging Local Plan states that the development of

best and most versatile agricultural land will only be permitted where it can be demonstrated that

the need for development outweighs need to protect the land in the long term, in the case of

temporary development that the land would be reinstated to its pre-working quality and there are

no suitable alternative sites on previously developed or lower quality land.

Assessment

The Proposed Development is located within the open countryside; however, importantly, it falls

into the category of ‘rural/farm diversification’ as required by Policy VER2 and is considered to be

of a type that is generally only suitable in the open countryside. The latter is true on the basis that

sites large enough to accommodate the proposed MW output and that make a significant

contribution to meeting the challenging 2050 target are extremely difficult to find in settlements

and/or on previously development land, as is demonstrated by the Alternative Site Assessment.

In terms of the criteria that rural/farm diversification proposals should be considered against, the

other sub-sections within this section, including ‘Scale, appearance and design’ for example,

demonstrate that the Proposed Development meets these criteria and is therefore acceptable in

the open countryside.

It is also notable that the Proposed Development is located on land that is classed as Grade 4 (poor

quality) agricultural land. The Alternative Site Assessment demonstrates that there are no more

suitable sites located on lower grade land in the area and the development of the Site would mean

that the area’s high-quality agricultural land is preserved. Importantly, finally, it should also be

noted that the existing agricultural land use at the Site would be retained. This is because the land

would continue to be grazed once the solar farm is operation, meaning that the land would have

to dual benefit of being agriculturally productive whilst providing for the generation of renewable

energy.

It follows that the Proposed Development is considered to be acceptable in terms of land-use and

complies with Policy EVR2, Policy LP2 and Policy LP15, including the relevant criteria set out therein.

Landscape and visual

Policy summary

Policy CS18 of the Core Strategy states that development is expected to “preserve or enhance the

landscape character and biodiversity assets of the borough.”



48

Policy EVR 2 (Development in the Open Countryside and Other Open Land) of the Replacement

Local Plan states that within areas of open countryside and other open land planning permission

will only be granted for new development which is related to agriculture, forestry, recreation,

tourism or other types of farm and rural diversification. This is provided that the location is

sustainable, the proposal would not detract from the area, the scale, siting, design, materials and

landscape treatment are such that the visual effect of the proposal is minimised.

Policy LP16 (Green Infrastructure) of the Emerging Local Plan states that development proposals

should where appropriate protect and enhance landscape character and increase tree cover in

suitable locations in the borough to enhance landscape character, amenity and air quality. Policy

LP21 (Design) of the Emerging Local Plan states that states that development will be expected to

“preserve or enhance the landscape character and biodiversity assets of the borough.”

Assessment

The planning application is accompanied by a LVIA, photomontages and an Indicative Landscaping

and Biodiversity Scheme; and the design of the Proposed Development has been subject to

significant input from a landscape architect, as set out in Section 5 of this document. The

assessment carried out have concluded that the local landscape has the capacity to incorporate the

Proposed Development without unacceptable impacts. This is on the basis, amongst other things,

that the Site is located within an urban fringe area with a mix of land uses.

It is acknowledged that the local topography is gently undulating; however, equally, is should be

noted that undulating topography is a characteristic of the locality and region (according to the

Landscape Character Assessments referenced in the LVIA). It follows therefore that (i) if the

Government’s ambitious targets relating to climate change are to be realised and (ii) there is an

associated responsibility to deliver solar farms and other renewable energy assets across the UK –

development of sites with some undulating topography is unavoidable. Indeed, a precedent is

already set for this in the area by the solar farms and wind turbine that have already been

permitted.

It should also be noted that significant modifications influence the local landscape, arising from the

historic use of the area for coal extraction, including shaft and open cast mining, plus the Erin landfill

site. This has resulted directly in landscape features such as spoil heaps, as well as contributing

historic infrastructure, such as the now disused railway which is elevated through much of its

passage alongside the Site.



49

As noted above, renewable power generation is already a component in the locality, including a

single wind turbine on the west facing slope near Duckmanton, which creates a mobile vertical

structure in the landscape; alongside the two existing solar farms.

Industrial and other employment also represents a significant land use in the surrounding area,

with large warehouse and industrial units particularly prevalent to the north east of the Site in

response to the proximity of the M1 corridor. Between the villages of Duckmanton and Poolsbrook

lies the Erin Void landfill site and significant industrial development has taken place at Markham

Vale.

It is notable that with this level of urban edge development and industrialisation the area is not

considered to be tranquil or overtly sensitive to development. In light of this, the LVIA concludes

that, in the context of the significantly modified landscape, the impact on it is not significant (Slight

or Moderate at most), with many elements receiving no impact at all. This includes the cumulative

impact with other renewable energy development in the surrounding area.

In terms of visual impact, the significant modifications to the landscape are applicable, however it

is also acknowledged that there are sensitive receptors in proximity to the Site and the setting is

partially rural. The LVIA identifies a range of potential visual receptors within and around the Site.

These include residential properties; roads; PRoWs; and recreational sites such as the Pools Brook

Country Park and a private fishing lake. The LVIA notes that the majority of potential visual

receptors would experience negligible or no impacts, with a number of potential receptors

identified by the desktop study being scoped out following a site visit.

Where higher degrees of effect are noted, mitigation measures have been proposed in order to

address these, including those set out in Section 6 of this document. Following the implementation

of mitigation, the LVIA concludes that the majority of visual impacts would be Minor or Negligible.

Specifically, from a total of 39 viewpoints, only two would be Moderate and two would be Minor-

Moderate. Importantly, none would be major. The Moderate impacts include West Croft House

immediately to the south of the Site and the residential properties adjacent to Inkersall Farm,

where a combination of additional planting and development standoffs are proposed as mitigation.

It is considered that, on balance, the Proposed Development complies with the aforementioned

planning policies relating to landscape and visual impact. This is on the basis that the vast majority

of impacts are not significant, and the significant mitigation proposals have further reduced the

anticipated degree of impact.



50

Cultural Heritage

Policy summary

Policy CS19 (Historic Environment) of the Core Strategy states that:

“the Council will protect historic environment and heritage assets throughout the borough and seek

to enhance them wherever possible. All new development must preserve or enhance the local

character and distinctiveness of the area in which it would be situated.”

It goes on to state that the Council will do this through the protection of designated heritage assets

and the identification and, where appropriate, protection of important archaeological sites and

historic environment features.

Policy LP22 (Historic Environment) of the Emerging Local Plan echoes the above.

Paragraphs 193 to 197 of the NPPF introduce the concept that heritage assets can be harmed or

lost through alteration, destruction or development within their setting. This harm ranges from

‘less than substantial’ through to ‘substantial’. With regard to designated assets, paragraph 193

states that great weight should be placed on its conservation, irrespective of whether any potential

harm is considered to be substantial or less than substantial. The paragraph goes further to say

that the more important the asset, the greater the weight should be on its conservation. In

paragraph 194, a distinction is made in respect of those assets of the highest significance (e.g.

Scheduled Monuments, Grade I and Grade II* listed buildings) where substantial harm to or loss

should be wholly exceptional.

In instances where development would cause substantial harm to or total loss of significance of a

designated asset, consent should be refused unless it can be demonstrated that it is necessary to

achieve substantial public benefits that outweigh that harm or loss (paragraph 195 of the NPPF). In

instances where development would cause less than substantial harm to the significance of a

designated asset, the harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal to provide

a balanced judgement (paragraph 196).

With regard to non-designated assets, paragraph 197 states that the effect of the development on

the significance of the asset should be taken into account in determining the application. A

balanced judgement will be required having regard to the scale of any harm or loss and the

significance of the heritage asset.



51

Assessment

The Historic Environment Desk-Based Assessment that forms part of the planning application

submission covers the matter of cultural heritage, including (i) above-ground built heritage and (ii)

archaeology. The study area for the assessment includes the Site itself and an area that extends to

750 m from the Site boundary. The assessment identifies potential heritage constraints within and

around the Site and provides relevant and proportional mitigation strategies to reduce impacts,

where necessary.

With regard to above ground heritage, the assessment identifies that there are no Scheduled

Monuments, Registered Parks or Gardens, Conservation Areas, World Heritage Sites or Registered

Battle Fields within the Site boundary or within the wider study area. There is, however, one Grade

II Listed Building – the 19th Century Inkersall Farmhouse – located adjacent to the Site. The latter

is classed as a designated asset, although it is not of the highest significance. There are no known

un-designated assets within or immediately adjacent to the Site.

The assessment includes that the Proposed Development would introduce some change to the

setting of Inkersall Farmhouse; however, the context of this setting has been much changed since

the 19th century by opencast mining works and the establishment of wind turbines and solar farms,

amongst other things. Notwithstanding this, the Proposed Development could further erode the

rural setting of the asset to an extent. It is therefore considered that the significance of the asset,

along with the appreciation and understanding of it, could be affected as part of the Proposed

Development.

The design of the Proposed Development, including the location of solar panels and proposed

landscaping, does minimise the potential impact. This includes an area of separation between the

asset and the Proposed Development, which form an inherent part of the mitigation scheme. In

the context of relevant planning policy and the proposed mitigation by design, the assessment

concludes that the Proposed Development would constitute ‘less than substantial harm’ to the

significance of the designated asset and the overall impact is considered low. However, this degree

of harm must be measured against the public benefits of the Proposed Development.

In terms of archaeology, the Site is not within a designated area and analysis of 20th century coal

mine abandonment plans have revealed that large areas of the Site have previously been subject

to opencast extraction during the 1960s and early 1970s. As such, these workings will have

destroyed or severely truncated any potential archaeological remains located within their footprint.

The assessment concludes that, within the areas not impacted by the 20th century opencast



52

extraction works, there is potential for unknown archaeological assets to be encountered. The

potential within the Site in general though is considered to be very low.

The assessment recommends that a programme of geophysical (magnetometer) survey should be

undertaken to assess the potential presence of below-ground remains within areas not previously

mined. Following interpretation of these results, and consultation with the Council Archaeologist,

intrusive evaluation works (such as trenching) may be required. It is proposed that this is secured

by a suitable pre-commencement planning condition.

It is considered, with regards to above-ground built heritage and archaeology, that there are no

unacceptable impacts; and any potentially adverse impacts should be weighed against the

significant public benefits (relating to climate change) and other benefits (biodiversity gains)

associated with the Proposed Development – as required by planning policy. On balance, it is

concluded that the benefits significantly outweigh any harm and that the Proposed Development

therefore complies with relevant planning policy.

Flood Risk

Policy summary

Policy CS7 (Managing the Water Cycle) of Core Strategy states that development proposals will be

“directed to locations with least impact on flooding or water resources” and “be assessed for their

contribution to the overall flood risk, taking into account climate change.” It goes on to state that

“Sustainable Drainage Systems should be incorporated into all development, unless it can be

demonstrated that this is not appropriate in a specific location.” Furthermore, Policy CS6

(Sustainable Design and Construction) of the Core Strategy states that new development should

seek to “be sited and design to withstand the long-term impacts of climate change.”

Policy LP14 (Managing the Water Cycle) of the Emerging Local Plan states that development

proposals “directed to locations with least impact on flooding or water resources” and “be assessed

for their contribution to the overall flood risk, taking into account climate change.” It goes on to

state that “Sustainable Drainage Systems should be incorporated into all development, unless it can

be demonstrated that this is not appropriate in a specific location.”

Assessment

A Flood Risk Assessment forms parts of the planning application submission, on the basis that the

Site is larger than 1 ha. Through the evolution of the scheme, no development is located within

Flood Zone 2 and 3; all solar panels and associated infrastructure is wholly located within Flood

Zone 1 (the zone with the lowest risk of flooding).



53

The FRA concludes that the Site is generally considered to be at low risk from surface water flooding

as there is a limited catchment outside of the Site boundaries that could generate surface water

that could enter the Site and that areas shown to be at risk from surface water flooding are localised

and close to existing drainage channels.

Runoff rates for surface water are unlikely to increase as a result of the Proposed Development

(due to existing impermeable conditions, small area of the Site in hardstanding and the existing

drainage system); hence, impact on the surrounding area is not expected. The drainage strategy is

the FRA recommends that swales/filter drains should be located around the proposed buildings,

such as the inverters, batteries and substations. Runoff would be directed into the swales from the

hardstanding areas into existing drains. The retention of grass between and underneath the solar

panels should maintain the original greenfield runoff rates within the Site.

The proposed drainage measures are set out in the drainage strategy that form part of the FRA and

are considered more than sufficient for the Proposed Development. It follows that the Proposed

Development complies with relevant planning policy.

Biodiversity

Policy summary

Policy CS9 (Green Infrastructure and Biodiversity) of the Core Strategy states that development

proposals are required to enhance the borough’s biodiversity and where possible link habitats,

protect existing ancient and non-ancient woodland and increase tree cover in sustainable locations

in the borough. It goes on to state that “the Council will require the submission with the planning

application of ecological surveys and assessments of the biodiversity and geological value of sites

as set out in a list of local requirements.”

Policy LP17 (Biodiversity, Geodiversity and the Ecological Network) states that the Council expects

development proposals to protect, enhance and contribute to the management of the borough’s

ecological network of habitats, species and sites of international, national and local importance,

avoid and/or minimise adverse impacts on biodiversity and geodiversity and provide a net

measurable gain in biodiversity. Goes on to discuss specific types of habitat

Assessment

The impact of the Proposed Development on biodiversity is considered in the Ecological

Assessment submitted as part of the planning application. This includes a Phase 1 Habitat Survey,

which identified the need for Great Crested Newt eDNA surveys (for off-site ponds) and badger

surveys.



54

The assessment notes that the Site does not cover any designated ecological sites and the Proposed

Development would almost exclusively affect agricultural land only, which is relatively low value.

There are some sensitive habitats along field boundaries and margins, all of which would be

preserved and from which suitable standoffs maintained. The process of designing the site layout

to accommodate this is set out in Section 5 of this report, including suitable standoffs from

identified badger setts and off-site GCN ponds as recommended by the Project Ecologist.

The assessment ultimately concludes that there would not no significant impacts on biodiversity

and there would in fact be a number of benefits as a result of the new habitat that is proposed. It

follows that the Proposed Development complies with relevant planning policy.

Traffic and transport

Policy summary

Policy CS20 (Influencing the Demand for Travel) of the Core Strategy focusses on reducing

congestion, improving environmental quality and encouraging more active and healthy lifestyles by

seeking to maximise walking, cycling and the use of public transport. It goes on to state that the

impacts of any remaining traffic growth shall be mitigated through physical improvements to the

highways network where necessary to ensure development has an acceptable impact on the

highway network.

Furthermore, any necessary mitigation measures should be set out in development proposals,

including within Transport Statements, Transport Assessments and Travel Plans where these are

required, and secured through conditions and/or legal agreements.

Assessment

The assessment and consideration of the transport arrangements for the Proposed Development

is set out in the Transport Report that forms part of the planning application submission.

Due to the nature of the Proposed Development, during the operational phase it would only

generate a limited number of trips associated with servicing and maintaining the equipment.

Approximately 4 vehicles (car or transit van type vehicles) would be expected to visit the site each

week, generally spread out across multiple days. In the event that a new or replacement item for

equipment is required, it is estimated that 1 HGV trip may occur per annum. No abnormal loads

are anticipated.

The number of construction vehicle trips during the construction phase is also expected to be

relatively limited, with approximately 6 HGV deliveries expected typically across each working day,

over a 16-week period. The number of construction vehicle trips is expected to be quite limited



55

and there should not generally be a build-up of trips at any particular point in the programme, or

construction traffic related congestion.

Following in-depth consideration of highway access option for the Site, it has been concluded that

the proposed accesses from Inkersall Road and Inkersall Green Road for construction are the most

favourable. The operational accesses would revert to existing field accesses to the south along

Inkersall Road.

The Transport Report includes a framework Construction Traffic Management Plan (‘CTMP’) and it

is proposed that a detailed plan could be secured by planning condition. The CTMP would be

sufficient to adequately manage the limited transport impacts associated with the Proposed

Development and it is therefore considered that the Proposed Development complies with relevant

planning policy.

Coal mining and land stability

Policy summary

Policy CS8 (Environmental Quality) of the Core Strategy stats that proposals for development on

land that is, or is suspected as being, unstable will only be permitted if the land is capable of

remediation and fit for the proposed use.

Assessment

The planning application includes a Coal Mining Risk and Mitigation Report that is informed by a

Coal Mining Risk Assessment obtained from the Coal Authority in March 2020. The report reveals

that some parts of the Site have previously been subject to opencast coal extraction during the

1960s and early 1970s, and further areas may include abandoned mine entries.

The majority of the site, however, other than the south western corner, is classed as low risk. Gaps

in the solar panels are also proposed where there are two former mine entries within the Site. It

should also be noted that the nature of the Proposed Development, including that the solar panels

do not have a significant bearing load upon the ground, means that the risks are limited when

compared to some other forms of development.

As was required by the Council for comparable forms of development in the surrounding area

(including the Arkwright Solar Farm to the west), it is proposed that an informative regarding the

coal mining legacy is added to any Decision Notice for the Proposed Development.

It follows that the risk relating to coal mining has been adequately considered and the Proposed

Development is compliant with relevant planning policy.



56

Amenity and impact on local community

Policy Summary

Policy CS2 of the Core Strategy states that “all developments will be required to have an acceptable

impact on the amenity of users or adjoining occupiers, taking into account things such as noise,

odour, air quality, traffic, appearance, overlooking, shading or other environmental, social or

economic impacts.”

Policy CS18 (Design) of the Core Strategy goes on to state that development will be expected to

“have an acceptable impact on the amenity of users and neighbours.” Policy CS8 (Environmental

Quality) of the Core Strategy states that “the quality of the environment will be recognised at all

levels of the planning and development process with the aim of protecting and enhancing

environment quality.”

Policy LP25 (A Healthy Environment) of the Emerging local Plan states that “all developments will

be required to have an acceptable impact on the amenity of users or adjoining occupiers, taking into

account things such as noise, odour, air quality, traffic, appearance, overlooking, shading or other

environmental, social or economic impacts.” Policy LP21 (Design) of the Emerging Local Plan states

that development will be expected to “preserve or enhance the landscape character and biodiversity

assets of the borough.”

Assessment

The nature of the Proposed Development is such that it is not likely to cause any form of pollution

during its operational stage. This is because there are no significant noise sources, traffic would be

very low and it would not be lit at night. The Proposed Development includes no plans to divert or

close any PRoWs, because none cross the Site.

It is also notable that the Applicant has carried out a comprehensive and meaningful pre-application

consultation exercise in respect of the Proposed Development, primarily focused on the local

community. The Applicant has listened to the views expressed by the local community and has

made a number of changes and additions to the Proposed Development as a result, which are listed

in Section 5.

In light of the above, the Proposed Development is considered to be acceptable in terms of its

impact upon residential amenity and accords with relevant planning policy.



57

9.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The Proposed Development comprises the construction and operation of a solar PV farm, with

battery storage and other associated infrastructure.

The principle of renewable energy, such as solar power, is supported by local and national planning

policy. Furthermore, the Council has declared a climate emergency and the UK Government has

committed to meeting a legally binding target of net-zero carbon emissions by 2050. There is

therefore a significant and demonstrable need for the Proposed Development, as set out in Section

2 of this document.

The Applicant has carried out a meaningful pre-application consultation exercise in respect of the

Proposed Development, primarily focused on the local community, but also including consultation

with the Council and other stakeholders. The Applicant has listened to the views expressed by

consultees and has made changes to the Proposed Development to help address and mitigate

concerns.

It has been demonstrated that the Proposed Development complies with planning policy and there

are significant benefits associated with it. The environmental and technical reports that form part

of the planning application submission demonstrate that there would be no unacceptable

environmental impacts, and there are a number of added benefits, including habitat creation and

biodiversity gains.

These factors, when combined with the significant need for renewable energy, mean that the

planning balance (and, in particular, when considered in the context of the tests under Section 38(6)

Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004) is weighted significantly in favour of the Proposed

Development.

The Applicant therefore respectfully requests that planning permission is granted for the Proposed

Development.



58

APPENDIX A: LIST OF PLANS

No. Reference Title 1 LCS007-PL-03 Site Location Plan 2 LCS007-PL-02 Zoning Layout Plan 3 LCS007-PL-01 Indicative Site Layout Plan 4 Figure 06 Landscape and Biodiversity Scheme 5 LCS007-SD-10 Solar Panel Plan 6 LCS007-SD-01 DNO Substation Elevations and Dimensions Plan

7 LCS007-SD-02 Customer Substation Elevations and Dimensions Plan

8 LCS007-SD-03 CCTV Elevations and Dimensions Plan 9 LCS007-SD-04 DNO Access Track Typical Cross-Section

10 LCS007-SD-05 Cable Trench Cross-Section 11 LCS007-SD-06 Access Track Cross-Section 12 LCS007-SD-07 Deer Fence Elevations and Dimensions Plan 13 LCS007-SD-08 Inverter Elevations and Dimensions Plan 14 LCS007-SD-09 Inverter Roof Plan 15 LCS007-SD-10 Solar Panel Cross-Section

17 LCS007-SD-29 Power Conversion System Elevations and Dimensions Plan

18 LCS007-SD-30 Battery Cabin Elevations and Dimensions Plan 19 LCS007-SD-31 HVAC Unit Elevations and Dimensions Plan 20 LCS007-SD-32 DNO Substation Roof Plan 21 LCS007-SD-33 Customer Substation Roof Plan 22 LCS007-SD-34 Battery Cabin Roof Plan 23 LCS007-SD-35 Power Conversion System Roof Plan 24 LCS007-SD-36 HVAC Unit Roof Plan

25 410558-MMD-XX-BA04-DR-C-0001 Eastern Parcel Proposed Construction Site Access Plan

26 410558-MMD-XX-BA04-DR-C-0003 Western Parcel Proposed Construction Site Access Plan

low carbon inkersall road solar farm planning, design …

Documents