11/00713/F - Borough Council of King's Lynn & West Norfolk

einforcement and/or through appropriate compensatory measures, designed to result in an
overall neutral effect.
In addition in respect of indirect cumulative impact (Jack's Lane and Chiplow), there is a
likelihood of medium term reversible impact (above and beyond the impact from Jacks Lane
alone) of lower major magnitude upon the setting of one visible heritage asset (Grade I listed
church); the asset itself is of national importance, whilst the setting detriment would be of at
least regional significance. Were this cumulative impact arise it would not be capable of
mitigation.
Supplementary information was submitted following initial concerns raised by English
Heritage (EH); this looked more specifically at:
� The Houghton Asset Group (Houghton Hall, The Square Houghton Park, The
Watertower and Houghton Hall South Lodges)
� Bloodgate Hill Fort
� Barmer Church
� North Creake Abbey
� Stanhoe 'Market ' Cross
� Bircham Newton Church
The degree of impact will be dependant on distance from the turbines and the status of the
asset is a fundamental consideration. The turbines, due to their height, are visually dominant
and this is most likely to be apparent when viewed in relatively close proximity to the asset.
English Heritage have provided consultation responses in respect of this application and
whilst some of the initial concerns raised have been addressed, strong concerns still remain
in relation to Barmer Church, Houghton Park and Bloodgate Hill Fort.
In relation to Barmer Church, a statement of significance has been produced but this does
not actually state what is significant about the church or the contribution its setting makes to
that significance. The assessment does not make reference to qualities of the landscape
setting of the site or what that might contribute to the significance of the building or an
appreciation of it. EH also consider that the Church has always been in a rural setting and
despite changes to the landscape since its foundation this remains the case. The
assessment submitted by the applicant states that ‘glimpses of the church within its
woodland clump setting are just sufficient to draw the observer inwards to the intimate
surroundings of the churchyard’. This sentence suggests the quiet, peaceful atmosphere in
the churchyard which so befits this ancient place of worship and aids an appreciation of its
significance as such. On a less intimate scale the wider setting of the site also does this, but
this is not stated, nor the impact of introducing the turbines into that setting considered.
The new illustrations provided by the applicant show how the turbines will intrude into views
of the site when approaching from the west and when inside the churchyard. While this
wider landscape has many modern characteristics, such as the size of fields and relative
lack of hedges, it is still peaceful, rural and a compliment to the church. The stillness and
greenness of this wider landscape reflects the character of the churchyard and so aids an
appreciation of the church’s significance when outside the churchyard. The turbines are
large, mechanical and dynamic - very much at odds with the landscape and will impinge on
an appreciation of the site, especially when approaching it. English Heritage would therefore
conclude that they will harm the wider setting of the church. The Chiplow turbines will be
less prominent, but will combine with the Jack’s Lane development to introduce a sense of
intrusive motion into the setting of the site.
10/01419/FM Development Control Board
25 July 2011
60