Register of advice

The list below is a record of advice the Planning Inspectorate has provided in respect of the Planning Act 2008 process.

There is a statutory duty under section 51 of the Planning Act 2008 to record the advice that is given in relation to an application or a potential application and to make this publicly available. Advice we have provided is recorded below together with the name of the person or organisation who asked for the advice and the project it relates to. The privacy of any other personal information will be protected in accordance with our Information Charter which you should view before sending information to the Planning Inspectorate.

Note that after a project page has been created for a particular application, any advice provided that relates to it will also be published under the ‘s51 advice’ tab on the relevant project page.

Advice given between between 1 October 2009 and 14 April 2015 has been archived. View the archived advice.

Enquiry received via email

Temple Oaks Renewable Energy Park View all advice for this project

14 August 2023
Ridge Clean Energy - anon.

Enquiry

Requirement for new Scoping Request I attach a plan that shows the cable route (blue line) included in the Scoping Request submitted in July 2022. This plan also now shows the current proposed route (red corridor). Please let us know whether a new Scoping Request is required. Trial Trenching Archaeology Departments now regularly require in addition to the qualified desk-top assessments and geo-physical surveys, intrusive trial trenching pre-determination. Geophysical surveys are used that fully cover the redline area and inform any potential areas of interest that could be mitigated for. The trial trenching is normally carried out by large 360 degree track excavators due to the level of excavation needed. It seems on average, a requirement of at least 1 trench per hectare measuring 20m in length X 2m width and 1 meter + in depth. Both the movement between trenches, the trench itself and area for the spoil (subdivided between top-soil & base layer) causes damage to the land including planted crops and disturbs any ‘potential’ subsurface archaeology present on the site. Given that there are known mitigation measures (eg. archaeological watching brief or use of concrete footings rather than driven, narrow piles to fix the solar panels on the site), is it necessary to conduct trial trenching as a pre-determination measure, rather than applying a planning condition to conduct these intrusive works post determination, but prior to construction (thereby ensuring that the disturbance only occurs if the site secures a planning permission)?

Advice given

Regarding the requirement for a new scoping request, we suggest that this is a matter for the project to decide. Noting that requesting a scoping opinion is a voluntary rather than a mandatory requirement, what benefit do you think would be conferred by having a new scoping opinion for the environmental statement? Would the changes to the cable route result in a materially different project to the proposal which received a scoping opinion, to the extent that the scope of the environmental statement also needs to change? Concerning your trial trenching query, we recommend that this is a matter to be discussed with your archaeological consultants and the relevant local authorities to reach agreement if possible on the extent of any intrusive investigations and trial trenching prior to the submission of the DCO application. We advise that the environmental statement should include a rationale for the approach taken to deliver a robust assessment.