Chiplow Wind Farm Planning Documents - E.ON UK/media/PDFs/Generation/wind/onshore/... · E.ON Climate & Renewables UK Developments Ltd Chiplow Wind Farm Planning and Community Involvement

Chiplow Wind FarmPlanning Documents May 2010

E.ON Climate & Renewables UK Developments Ltd

Chiplow Wind Farm

Planning and Community Involvement Statement

May 2010

Entec UK Limited

Copyright and Non-Disclosure Notice

The contents and layout of this report are subject to copyright

owned by Entec (© Entec UK Limited 2010) save to the extent

that copyright has been legally assigned by us to another party or

is used by Entec under licence. To the extent that we own the

copyright in this report, it may not be copied or used without our

prior written agreement for any purpose other than the purpose

indicated in this report.

The methodology (if any) contained in this report is provided to

you in confidence and must not be disclosed or copied to third

parties without the prior written agreement of Entec. Disclosure of

that information may constitute an actionable breach of confidence

or may otherwise prejudice our commercial interests. Any third

party who obtains access to this report by any means will, in any

event, be subject to the Third Party Disclaimer set out below.

Third Party Disclaimer

Any disclosure of this report to a third party is subject to this

disclaimer. The report was prepared by Entec at the instruction of,

and for use by, our client named on the front of the report. It does

not in any way constitute advice to any third party who is able to

access it by any means. Entec excludes to the fullest extent

lawfully permitted all liability whatsoever for any loss or damage

howsoever arising from reliance on the contents of this report. We

do not however exclude our liability (if any) for personal injury or

death resulting from our negligence, for fraud or any other matter

in relation to which we cannot legally exclude liability.

Document Revisions

No. Details Date

i

v:\ea-210\26098 chiplow wind farm\es\final es and application docs\planning statement\planning statement.doc © Entec UK Limited May 2010

Contents

1. Introduction 1

1.1 Introduction 1

1.2 Applicant 1

1.3 Environmental Impact Assessment 2

2. The Proposed Development and the Need for Renewable Energy 3

2.1 The Proposed Development 3

2.2 Site Review 4

2.3 The Pressing Need for Renewable Energy 4

2.4 The Contribution of the Chiplow Wind Farm to Renewable Energy Generation 5

3. Planning and Energy Policy Context and Material Planning Considerations 7

3.1 Introduction 7

3.2 The Development Plan 7

3.3 Renewable Energy Policy Context 24

3.4 National Planning Policy Statements and Guidance Notes 31

3.5 Emerging Local Planning Policy 34

3.6 Overall Conclusions of Material Considerations 35

4. Statement of Community Involvement 37

4.1 Background 37

4.2 Consultations 37

5. Summary and Conclusions 39

5.1 Summary and Conclusions 39

Appendix 1 ES Figures

ii


1


1. Introduction

1.1 Introduction

1.1.1 This planning application has been prepared by Entec UK Ltd on behalf of E.ON

Climate and Renewables UK Developments Ltd (the Applicant); in support of a

development of a wind farm at Chiplow, between the villages of Bagthorpe, Barmer

and Syderstone in North West Norfolk. This Planning Statement provides an

assessment of the proposed development against the Development Plan and other

material considerations. This Statement should be read in conjunction with the

Environmental Statement (ES) and the figures associated with it, and the Chiplow

Wind Farm Design and Access Statement.

1.2 Applicant

1.2.1 E.ON is one of the world’s largest investor-owned power and gas companies

employing around 9,000 people worldwide. E.ON Climate & Renewables UK

Developments Ltd (EC&R) is a global business responsible for the E.ON Groups

global renewable energy generation and climate protection activities.

1.2.2 EC&R are already one of the largest renewables energy companies in the world with

ambitious investment plans to grow key renewables energy technologies in existing

and new markets worldwide. EC&R has an objective to be a leading player in a highly

competitive and rapidly growing renewables sector through organic growth,

acquisitions and systematic research and development. They are investing €8 billion in

renewable energy generation and climate protection projects from 2007 to 2011 and

will play a leading role in the development of the renewables industry worldwide.

1.2.3 EC&R is already active worldwide in onshore and offshore wind, solar, biomass and

biogas technologies and aims to increase its renewable energy generation capacity

from 2.9GW today to around 10GW by 2015.

1.2.4 In the UK, EC&R is one of the leading energy generators with a portfolio of 20

operational onshore and offshore wind farms and one of the largest dedicated biomass

power stations in the UK, the award winning 44MW generation capacity Stephens

Croft power station, near Lockerbie, Scotland. They are in the initial stages of

operation of their third offshore wind farm, the 180MW Robin Rigg wind farm project

in the Solway Firth, and are in the consortium developing London Array, which, once

built, will be the worlds largest offshore wind farm. EC&R have been awarded rights

by The Crown Estate to develop a large offshore wind farm off the Sussex coastline,

under the Round 3 programme. They are also taking the lead in developing a range of

innovative renewable technologies, including bringing marine energy to market.

1.2.5 EC&R have been operating renewables since 1991 and so have a wealth of knowledge

and experience in developing renewable projects. Once a project has a positive

planning determination, EC&R will manage the construction and operation of the

2


wind farm project and will also be responsible for decommissioning the wind farm at

the end of its planning permission term. The EC&R asset operations team ensures at a

high availability of the wind farms is achieved and also ensures the wind turbines are

being well maintained. They have a strong team of engineers looking after their wind

farm sites and a dedicated control room at their UK headquarters in Coventry.

1.2.6 E.ON is one of the only UK wind farm developers currently certified to the

internationally recognised environment management standard, ISO 14001, and, as

such, places a great emphasis on the proper management of the environmental risk

during construction of its wind farms.

1.3 Environmental Impact Assessment

1.3.1 Under the terms of the Town & Country Planning (Environmental Impact

Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 1999 (“the EIA Regulations”) an EIA

has been carried out to identify and assess the proposed development’s likely

significant environmental effects and appraise inherent and proposed mitigation

measures. The ES that accompanies this Planning Statement contains the findings of

this assessment and should be read in conjunction with this statement and the other

application documents.

3


2. The Proposed Development and the Need for Renewable Energy

2.1 The Proposed Development

2.1.1 The Chiplow site lies within lowland arable farmland between the villages of

Bagthorpe, Barmer and Syderstone in the King’s Lynn and West Norfolk District of

North West Norfolk as shown in Figures 1.1 of the ES and reproduced in Appendix 1

of this document. A full description of the proposed development is included in

Chapter 4 of the ES and this section of the Planning Statement provides a brief

summary of the details provided there.

2.1.2 The proposed wind farm would comprise of the installation and operation of five wind

turbines. Each turbine would consist of a tubular steel tower supporting three blades

on a hub at a height of up to 60m, with an overall maximum height to blade tip of

100m. The installed capacity of the project could potentially be a maximum of 15

megawatts (MW) depending upon the final wind turbine selected, though a more

conservative 10MW is expected (based on five 2MW machines) and has therefore

been assumed for the purposes of this Planning Statement (and the Environmental

Impact Assessment). Other related elements of the development include: access track;

an anemometer mast of approximately 60m in height required to provide an ongoing

measurement of wind speed to monitor and control performance; a single storey

control building to mediate the flow of power generated into the local electricity

distribution network. Underground cables on site will connect the turbines to the

control building and an underground connection off-site will provide the connection to

the National Grid.

2.1.3 Figure 1.2 of the ES, which is reproduced in Appendix 1 of this document, shows the

layout of the proposed wind farm. Micro-siting flexibility is inherent in what is

proposed to allow necessary adjustments to be made to turbine positions of typically

up to 50m in any direction (apart from in directions that encroach on defined

constraints identified in the ES). Such micro-siting adjustment, which has been

considered in the assessments presented within the ES, would be in accordance with

the results of post-consent geophysical and other detailed site investigation works and

subject to final sanction by the Borough Council of King’s Lynn and West Norfolk.

2.1.4 The construction period is expected to last for approximately six to nine months. It is

anticipated that construction would start in mid 2011 and continue through to early

2012. Construction would consist of the following phases:

• Improvement of the site access;

• Construction of a temporary construction compound for off-loading materials and

components and to accommodate site offices and welfare facilities;

• Construction of site tracks for access to turbine locations;

4


• Construction of the control building (and electrical substation if required);

• Construction of turbine and met mast foundations;

• Installation of the underground cable to the grid connection point and for on-site

power supply;

• Excavation of on-site cable trenches and the laying of electricity and

communication cables;

• The delivery and erection of turbine towers and installation of nacelles and blades;

• Commissioning of the wind farm; and

• Site reinstatement.

2.1.5 The wind farm will be operational for up to 25 years, after which time it would be

decommissioned unless alternative options are sought such as further planning

consents for extended use. Assuming the development site is decommissioned, the

wind turbines and associated infrastructure would be removed in accordance with

industry good practice and/or in compliance with any planning conditions which had

been attached to the planning permission. Current industry good practice involves the

complete removal of turbines, mast, switchgear and other equipment, the removal of

the concrete foundation plinth and crane hard standings to below ground level and the

re-instatement of these areas to their original condition prior to the wind farm being

built. Notwithstanding the above, a Decommissioning Plan would be submitted to the

appropriate authorities of the time.

2.2 Site Review

2.2.1 A full description of the site review process is detailed in Section 2.3 of the ES with

this section providing a brief summary of this process. The Chiplow site was

originally identified as having potential for a wind farm in early 2006 and subsequent

initial investigations by E.ON considered the feasibility of the site by applying various

site review criteria. The outcome of this initial screening and feasibility investigation

highlighted that: the site itself was not subject to any statutory planning or

environmental designations; and there was likely to be sufficient wind resource

potential to make the site economically viable, while the relative close proximity to a

potential connection into the National Grid further added to the financial feasibility of

the project. Furthermore, public road infrastructure for construction, operation and

maintenance was also good and the site was of reasonable distance (at least 600m)

from the nearest residential dwellings. The potential effect of wind turbines on

military and aviation function was also assessed as being low risk and not likely to

present a constraint.

2.3 The Pressing Need for Renewable Energy

2.3.1 In 2007 the most recent conclusions were published of the Intergovernmental Panel on

Climate Change (IPCC), the UN body comprised of the world’s foremost climate

scientists. These conclusions are the strongest statement the IPCC have made to date

5


with regard to climate change. The IPCC conclude that there is now no longer any

doubt that climate change is real, serious and is being caused to a significant degree by

human activities, particularly the burning of fossil fuels. Even if the causes of climate

change are successfully stabilised, warming and sea level rises as a result of human

activity would continue for centuries into the future.

2.3.2 The evidence is now unequivocal that the effect is being driven largely by

anthropogenic factors. The factors include industrial and agricultural emissions of the

so-called ‘greenhouse gases’ into the atmosphere and other effects such as land use

changes which reduce the ability of the natural environment to recycle these gases.

The summary report, produced by Working Group 1 of the IPCC in 2007, identifies

carbon dioxide as the most important anthropogenic greenhouse gas. In 2001, carbon

dioxide emissions are judged to represent about half of the warming effect of

anthropogenic factors, and this proportion was predicted to increase to 75% by 21001.

2.3.3 According to the IPCC stabilising carbon dioxide concentrations at 450 ppm (that is

85 ppm above today’s levels and 170 ppm above pre-industrial levels) in the long term

would require the reduction of emissions worldwide to below 1990 levels within a few

decades.

2.4 The Contribution of the Chiplow Wind Farm to Renewable Energy Generation

2.4.1 The importance of renewable energy generation as part of the response to climate

change is recognised at a UK Governmental level and wind generation is

acknowledged as the only truly viable form of substantive renewable energy

production for the short to medium term. Furthermore, renewable energy from wind

supports the national economic objective to diversify energy supply and to lessen

dependence upon the importation of fossil fuel. Government consequently considers

that the wider benefits to society and the economy (of renewable energy) are

significant and must be given weight by decision makers in reaching their decisions on

individual applications.

2.4.2 The East Anglia region is responding to a proposed requirement and a regional target

of 1,192 MW of installed renewables capacity by 2010 is set in the Regional Spatial

Strategy, the East of England Plan adopted May 2008. The proposed Chiplow Wind

Farm would comprise of the installation and operation of five turbines, each with an

assumed rating of 2MW. The output from five such turbines at Chiplow could

generate enough electricity to power approximately 5,600 homes2.

2.4.3 It is also widely accepted that electricity produced from wind energy has a positive

benefit compared to traditional forms of electricity generation in terms of reducing

emissions of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. The actual amount

of CO2 that is saved by using wind power has been a matter of debate because of

changes in the energy mix and cleaner fossil fuel technologies being introduced over

1 IPCC, (2001a) The Third Assessment Report of Working Group 1 of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2001

2 based on 30% load factor and average annual domestic usage of 4.7 MWh/year (Digest of UK Energy Statistics, 2004)

6


time. However, in any event it is predicted that Chiplow Wind Farm will help prevent

the release of many thousands of tonnes of CO2. In producing an estimate of the

quantities of CO2 saved, using an assumption that electricity from wind power would

offset that produced from a coal fired power station, this would see a reduction in

emissions of CO2 of around 11,3003 tonnes per year. In addition the operation of the

scheme would reduce the emissions of the gases sulphur dioxide and nitrogen oxides,

which contribute to the production of acid rain.

2.4.4 The outcome of the procurement process may see turbines of slightly larger power

output secured, in which case the benefits described above would increase.

3 grid electricity converting factor of 430kg CO2/MWh (DEFRA)

7


3. Planning and Energy Policy Context and Material Planning Considerations

3.1 Introduction

3.1.1 In shaping the form of the proposed development, the Applicant has taken full account

of the policy context for the development and modified the scheme accordingly in

response to the findings of the EIA which is described in the ES which accompanies

this Planning Statement.

3.1.2 The planning application for the scheme will be determined under the Town and

Country Planning Act 1990. Section 70(2) of the 1990 Act requires local planning

authorities in determining planning applications to have regard to the development

plan, so far as material to the applications, and to any other material considerations.

Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compensation Act 2004 requires planning

decisions to be made in accordance with the Development Plan unless material

considerations indicate otherwise.

3.2 The Development Plan

3.2.1 The Development Plan consists of the Regional Spatial Strategy, the East of England

Plan (2008), the Norfolk Structure Plan (saved policies) 1999, The Kings Lynn and

West Norfolk Local Plan, (saved policies) 1998 and the Kings Lynn and West Norfolk

Statement of Community Involvement, 2007.

3.2.2 Under the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 local plans and structure

plans are to be replaced by Local Development Frameworks (LDF’s). The adopted

policy documents of the existing development plan were automatically saved for a

period of three years when it was expected that the LDF system would have been

implemented. The Kings Lynn and West Norfolk Local Plan LDF is yet to be adopted,

therefore the Secretary of State issued a direction under the provisions of Paragraph 1

(3) of Schedule 8 to the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Order Act 2004 extending

the life of some policies. However,, few of the policies were saved, therefore, where

there are no relevant local policies, regional and national guidance should be referred

to.

The Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS)

3.2.3 The Regional Spatial Strategy, the East of England Plan, was adopted in 2008 and sets

the regional framework for development plans in East Anglia for the period to 2021.

Policy ENG2 is of key relevance to renewable energy generation. This states that the

development of new facilities for renewable power generation should be supported

with the aim that by 2010 10% of the region’s energy, and 17% by 2020, should come

from renewable sources. These targets exclude energy from offshore wind and are

subject to meeting European and International obligations to protect wildlife.

8


3.2.4 The Norfolk Structure Plan (SP)

3.2.5 The Norfolk Structure Plan was published in 1999; however, this will be replaced by

the Regional Spatial Strategy: The East of England Plan and the LDF. Under the

direction made by the Secretary of State in accordance with Schedule 8 of the 2004

Act, no policies relating to renewable energy or relevant to the development were

saved, therefore, reference will instead be made to regional and national guidance.

The Norfolk Minerals Local Plan (MLP)

3.2.6 The Norfolk Minerals Local Plan contains a number of saved policies which will

remain as adopted policy until replaced by the Local Development Framework.

Minerals policies are relevant to the proposed development due to the land which

makes up the site being identified as having the potential for minerals resources to be

present.

The Kings Lynn and West Norfolk Local Plan (LP)

3.2.7 The Kings Lynn and West Norfolk Local Plan was adopted in November 1998. No

saved policies exist for renewable energy and where relevant policies have been

deleted, reference instead will be made to regional and national guidance.

The Kings Lynn and West Norfolk Local Development Framework (LDF)

3.2.8 The Borough Council of King’s Lynn and West Norfolk are currently producing their

LDF which will consist of a series of Development Plan Documents (DPDs) which are

formulated from various evidence base documents.

3.2.9 The Council adopted its Statement of Community Involvement (SCI) on 25th January

2007. The SCI explains how and when members of the public get involved in the

planning process. It sets out how the Council will engage with the public when

preparing the Local Development Framework (LDF) and in the consideration of

planning applications. It also provides guidance to developers on how they should

engage with communities.

Sustainable Development

Relevant Sections: RSS Policy SS1;

3.2.10 Policy SS1 of the RSS states that, amongst other things, Local Development

Documents and other strategies relevant to spatial planning within the region should:

3.2.11 Help meet obligations on carbon emissions; and

3.2.12 Adopt a precautionary approach to climate change by avoiding or minimising

potential contributions to adverse change and incorporating measures which adapt as

far as possible to unavoidable change.

3.2.13 There are no saved policies in the local plan relating to sustainable development.

Development must occur therefore in accordance with the regional guidance and with

Planning Policy Statement 1 (PPS1): Delivering Sustainable Development. PPS 1

9


states that planning should facilitate and promote sustainable and inclusive patterns of

urban and rural development by:

• making suitable land available for development in line with economic, social and

environmental objectives to improve people's quality of life;

• contributing to sustainable economic development;

• protecting and enhancing the natural and historic environment, the quality and

character of the countryside, and existing communities;

• ensuring high quality development through good and inclusive design, and the

efficient use of resources; and,

• ensuring that development supports existing communities and contributes to the

creation of safe, sustainable, liveable and mixed communities with good access to

jobs and key services for all members of the community.

3.2.14 The proposed development contributes inherently to sustainable development through

reduced reliance on fossil fuels and prevention of greenhouse gas emissions and

reduced air pollution. The development also helps to meet both national and regional

targets for renewable energy supply. Furthermore, the development does not create

any significant adverse residual effects with regard to the landscape, hydrology,

hydrogeology or land quality, ecology and ornithology, cultural heritage, traffic and

transport. The Development would also provide the local landowner with a guaranteed

income which would support the continued viability of an existing rural business,

something that is strongly encouraged within Planning Policy Statement 7:

Sustainable Development in Rural Areas.

3.2.15 The proposed development therefore accords with the principles of sustainable

development as set out in the Development Plan, through the sustainability policy of

the RSS and national guidance.

Renewable Energy Generation

Relevant Policies: RSS Objectives, RSS Policy ENG2, PPS 22

3.2.16 One of the objectives of the RSS is to reduce the region’s impact on, and exposure to,

the effects of climate change by:

• Maximising the energy efficiency of development and promoting the use of

renewable and low carbon energy sources

3.2.17 Policy ENG2: Renewable Energy Targets states that the development of new facilities

for renewable power generation should be supported, with the aim of meeting the East

of England regional targets:

• By 2010, at least 10% of the region’s energy should come from renewable sources

• By 2020, at least 17% of the region’s energy should come from renewable sources.

3.2.18 These targets are equivalent to 1,192MW (or 820MW excluding offshore wind) by

2010, and 4,250MW (1620 MW excluding offshore wind) by 2020 and are subject to

10


meeting European and International obligations to protect wildlife, including

migratory birds.

3.2.19 There are no saved policies relating to renewable energy from the Norfolk Structure

Plan or the Kings Lynn and West Norfolk Local Plan. Development will therefore be

assessed against planning policy at the national level and with reference to emerging

regional policy.

3.2.20 Planning Policy Statement 22 – Renewable Energy aims to put the UK on a path to cut

its carbon dioxide emissions by some 60% by 2050, with real progress by 2020, and to

maintain reliable and competitive energy supplies. The objective is for the

development of renewable energy, alongside improvements in energy efficiency and

the development of combined heat and power, to make a vital contribution to these

aims. The Government has already set a target to generate 10% of UK electricity from

renewable energy sources by 2010. The Energy White Paper of 2007 sets out the

Government's aspiration to double that figure to 20% by 2020, and suggests that still

more renewable energy will be needed beyond that date.

3.2.21 Chiplow Wind Farm could generate enough electricity to power approximately 5,600

homes and would see a reduction in emissions of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide

by around 11,300 tonnes per year. The proposed wind farm is expected to have an

installed capacity of 10MW which would contribute toward regional and sub-regional

renewable energy targets.

3.2.22 The proposed development would not adversely effect sensitive sites, is close to a

suitable grid connection and it is considered to be appropriate in the landscape. The

proposed development would accord with Policy ENG2 of the RSS and PPS22.

Landscape and Visual Assessment

Relevant Policies: RSS ENV2, LP 4/6

3.2.23 Policy ENV2: Landscape Conservation within the East of England Plan refers to

“affording the highest level of protection to the East of England’s nationally

designated landscapes: The Norfolk and Suffolk Broads, the Chilterns, Norfolk Coast,

Dedham Vale, and Suffolk Coast and Heath Areas of Outstanding of Natural Beauty

and the North Norfolk and Suffolk Heritage Coasts”. The policy states that planning

authorities and agencies should:

• Develop area-wide strategies, based on landscape character assessments

• Develop criteria based policies to ensure that all development respects and

enhances local landscape character

• Secure mitigation measures where, in exceptional circumstances, damage to local

landscape character is unavoidable.

3.2.24 ‘Saved’ policy 4/6 of the Local Plan refers to locally important landscapes and states

“In the Area of Important Landscape Quality shown on the Proposal Map

development which damages the distinctive character or appearance of the landscape

will not be permitted”. The site lies within an area designated Important Landscape

Quality – Confined Landscape.

11


Landscape Assessment

3.2.25 The site selection and subsequent layout design were undertaken against criteria set

out in the Breckland and King’s Lynn and West Norfolk Wind Turbine Development

Landscape Character Assessment Evaluation and Guidance that was published in

2003. This study concludes that the two landscape character types that the application

site is located within (Rolling Open Farmland and Plateau Farmland) both possess

sufficient landscape capacity to accommodate linear or clustered wind farm

developments consisting of 2 -12 turbines.

3.2.26 The Landscape Assessment within the ES accorded the application site medium

landscape sensitivity due to the fact it contains few features and has no characteristics

that make it distinctive within the context of the two host landscape character types

(referred to above) and two landscape character areas that it straddles (Bagthorpe LCA

and Bircham LCA). The ES concludes that Bagthorpe and Bircham LCAs will sustain

small-scale direct effects during the operational period; however, these are unlikely to

affect any of their key characteristics. Consequently the ES concludes that none of the

landscape character areas or types would sustain significant landscape effects.

3.2.27 Similarly no significant landscape effects have been concluded in the ES for any of the

national landscape designations, the national trail (Peddars Way) and cycle route or

the three historic parks and gardens within the detailed study area. This is due to the

low predicted magnitudes of landscape change that would arise as a consequence of

the small number of turbines and the separation distance between the application site

and the closest sections or areas of these designations. Also for all the national

designations only a small proportion of their overall route or area would be potentially

affected.

Visual Assessment

3.2.28 The attitudes expressed towards wind farms are subjective and could be influenced by

a variety of factors. Consequently it is likely that the different individual receptors will

consider the visual changes that they would be likely to experience as a consequence

of the construction and operation of a wind farm in ways ranging from positive to

negative. Receptor attitudes, and therefore the type of effect sustained, may also

change over time.

3.2.29 The Landscape and Visual Assessment within the ES follows an approach of adopting

a worst case scenario with regard to variables such as magnitude of landscape or

visual change and the type of effect that receptors will potentially experience, except

where the change is likely or certain to be negligible, usually due to their degree of

spatial separation or a weak effects pathway.

3.2.30 The visual assessment for the construction period concludes that residential visual

receptors in four properties and recreational visual receptors using sections of three

PRoWs would sustain significant visual effects during some parts of the construction

period. These would be primarily as a consequence of their relative proximity to and

open views of the crane activities, augmented for most of this small group of receptors

by their views of some components of the ground level construction activities.

However it is assessed that no receptors would have views of all the ground level

construction activities.

12


3.2.31 The ES undertook an assessment of visual effects during operation. This included a

consideration of potential effects upon the views of a wide range of potential visual

receptors. With regard to residential visual receptors living in nearby properties this

assessment includes views from within their property and garden. Also for residential

visual receptors additional consideration was given to potential effects upon their

residential visual amenity. This relates to the potential for the presence of the turbines

to be so dominant due to their number, proximity or scale that they could have the

potential to make a property an unpleasant and unsatisfactory place to live. The ES

stresses that visual effects may not necessarily be adverse as the value, judgement and

opinions of turbines are subjective, but in line with the approach undertaken

throughout the Landscape and Visual Assessment, a worst case scenario where there is

any ambiguity has been applied.

3.2.32 It should also be noted that private interests are not a material planning consideration

and that the view from a private property is a private interest, not a public one. The

resulting adequacy of living conditions within dwellings and their gardens is the

planning consideration, not the view itself. Therefore, being able to see the turbines

does not constitute unacceptable harm in a planning context.

3.2.33 The residents of four properties/small groups of properties (12 individual properties in

total) out of the 23 isolated residential properties/small groups of properties identified

within 3km of the centre of the application site are assessed as likely to experience

significant visual effects (these assessments are summarised in Table 7.10 of the

Landscape and Visual Chapter of the ES (Chapter 7)). This is largely due to residents

in properties being classed as high sensitivity. The ES has also assessed the visual

effects on principal settlements and concluded that some residents in two settlements,

namely those in properties in the Mill Lane, Ashside and Tattersett Road parts of

Syderstone and the hamlet of Barmer, would be likely to experience significant visual

effects. However, both of these settlements are only considered to have a medium

magnitude of change, and it is the combination of this, coupled with the assigned high

sensitivity of residential properties, which creates the conclusion of a significant

effect. However, the residential visual amenity assessment for the twenty three

individual or small groups of isolated residential receptors concluded that there would

be no potential for significant effects i.e. no properties would have the potential to

become an unattractive and therefore unsatisfactory place in which to live as a

consequence of the visual presence of the turbines. This conclusion is based upon

reviews of the attributes of these properties, their gardens and their setting and takes

into account considerations such as the width of the turbines’ array and whether or not

there would be any substantive intervening landscape elements that would emphasise

the visual separation between the property and the turbines.

3.2.34 Visual effects from linear routes have been assessed in the ES and no significant

effects have been identified on receptors using principal roads and long distance trails

and national cycle routes. Significant visual effects have been identified on the users

of three local PRoWs, namely PRoW C, D and J and Syderstone Open Access Area

(as referenced on Figure 7.5 in the ES). The sensitivity of these receptors is classed as

medium and it is the high magnitude of change which generates an overall significant

effect.

3.2.35 Within the cumulative study area, the ES identified ten operational wind farms or

individual wind turbines and a further six consented and proposed wind farms,

13


although the closest of these are at Swaffham which is approximately 22km to the

south. Thirteen of the wind farms included are, or would be if consented/constructed,

over 30km from the proposed Chiplow Wind Farm. The ES concluded that there

would be minimal potential for cumulative landscape and visual effects to arise and no

potential for a ‘wind farm landscape’ to result. Where the turbines at Chiplow could

potentially be viewed in the same field of views as those at other wind farms, one or

the other turbine groups would always be much further away preventing any potential

visual confusion and more often than not, the more distant turbines would not actually

be visible due to screening or adverse atmospheric conditions.

3.2.36 The landscape assessment concludes that the design and location of the proposed

Chiplow Wind Farm would be acceptable in landscape terms and would generate no

significant adverse effects upon landscape elements, landscape patterns, landscape

character or any landscape designations, either individually or cumulatively other than

within the application site itself and those parts of its immediate environs that are not

covered by woodland plantations. Furthermore, the visual assessment concludes that

only a small number of properties and PRoWs would experience significant visual

effects. None of the residential properties identified would experience significant

effects on their residential visual amenity and therefore would not become unattractive

and unsatisfactory places to live. It is therefore concluded that the proposed

development therefore complies with RSS policy ENV2 and Local Plan policy 4/6.

Public Amenity

Relevant Policies: RSS Section 8, PPS 22

3.2.37 The ES includes chapters on Noise (Chapter 6), Infrastructure, Telecommunication,

Television, Aviation, Public Safety (Chapter 14), and Shadow Flicker (Chapter 13).

The issues covered by these chapters have the potential to affect the amenity of the

people who use the area, including local residents.

Noise

3.2.38 The East of England Plan contains principles for the management of the East of

England's natural, built and historic environment. One such principle is to “secure

effective protection of the environment by considering the nature and location of

proposed development as part of a broadly based concern for, and awareness of,

biodiversity and other environmental assets, and of issues such as light and noise

pollution”

3.2.39 There are no saved policies in the local plan relating to noise and therefore national

planning guidance are referred to. In this case PPS 22: Renewable Energy and ETSU-

R-97 guidance provides the most up to date and relevant guidance. PPS 22 states that

“Local planning authorities should ensure that renewable energy developments have

been located and designed in such a way to minimise increases in ambient noise

levels. Plans may include criteria that set out the minimum separation distances

between different types of renewable energy projects and existing developments. The

1997 report by ETSU for the Department of Trade and Industry should be used to

assess and rate noise from wind energy development.”

14


3.2.40 The PPS22 Companion Guide aims to encourage the appropriate development of

further renewable energy schemes, throughout England. It states that “the noise

emitted from a turbine will generally be well contained by the turbine house and not

be heard more than a few metres away. If necessary, limits can be set on noise

emissions if the site is close to residential properties, by way of a planning condition.”

3.2.41 The Companion Guide acknowledges that wind-generated background noises increase

with wind speed, and this occurs at a faster rate than the increase in noise from a wind

turbine as wind speed increases. It states that the difference between the noise of the

wind farm and the background noise is therefore liable to be greatest at low wind

speeds. It goes on to say that the ETSU-R-97 report ‘describes a framework for the

measurement of wind farm noise and gives indicative noise levels calculated to offer a

reasonable degree of protection to wind farm neighbours, without placing

unreasonable restrictions on wind farm development or adding unduly to the costs and

administrative burdens on wind farm developers or planning authorities. This

methodology overcomes some of the disadvantages of BS 4142 when assessing the

noise effects of windfarms, and should be used by planning authorities when assessing

and rating noise from wind energy developments’.

3.2.42 The ETSU-R-97 report recommends that noise limits should be set relative to the

background noise at the nearest noise-sensitive properties and the limits should reflect

the variation in both turbine source noise and background noise with wind speed.

Therefore, it suggests separate limits are given for day time and night time which

should be increased to 5dB (A) above background noise at a particular wind speed

subject to the minimum noise limits described above.

3.2.43 The ES demonstrates that in respect of noise, the proposed development would be

constructed and operated well within the limits established in relevant guidance

(ETSU-R-97 as endorsed in PPS22) such that any discernible noise would not have

any significant effect on the amenity of local residents. It is therefore considered that

the proposal would not lead to the emission of noise pollution, and would not be

detrimental to the amenity of the public.

Telecommunications, Infrastructure, Aviation and Public Safety and Shadow Flicker

Relevant Policies: PPS22

3.2.44 There are no existing policies within the development plan relating to

Telecommunications, Infrastructure, Aviation and Public Safety and Shadow Flicker.

National Policy guidance is therefore referred to, in this case PPS 22: Renewable

Energy. PPS 22 requires planning applications for the construction of wind farms to

provide analysis to quantify the effects relating to Telecommunications, Infrastructure,

Aviation and Public Safety and Shadow Flicker.

3.2.45 PPS 22 states that Regional Spatial Strategies should not include specific policies

relating to the impact of wind turbines on airport operation, radar and aircraft, and

neither they nor local development documents should include policies in relation to

separation distances from powerlines, roads, and railways. It is the responsibility of

developers to address any potential impacts, taking account of Civil Aviation

Authority, Ministry of Defence and Department for Transport guidance in relation to

15


radar and aviation, and the legislative requirements on separation distances, before

planning applications are submitted.

3.2.46 The National Air Traffic Services (NATS) raised the potential for the development to

have an adverse impact on the Cromer Radar. E.ON therefore commissioned a study

by Pager Power, as outlined in paragraph 14.6.3 of the ES, which concluded that the

potential for significant objection is low and therefore it is considered there are no

significant effects associated with en-route air traffic services from NATS En Route

Plc (NERL).

3.2.47 Initial consultation with the MOD in 2006 raised concerns regarding a tip height of

126.5m, leading to a reduction in turbine height to 100m. The MOD was subsequently

re-consulted in 2006 in relation to the reduced height to blade tip though did not

respond. As the completion of the ES was delayed to allow further winter bird

surveys to be undertaken during winter 2008/09, a re-consultation exercise was carried

out with those organisations contacted in 2006. MOD subsequently responded with an

objection in November 2009.

3.2.48 The November 2009 objection referred to the impact of the turbines on Air Traffic

Control (ATC) and Precision Approach Radar (PAR) at RAF Marham, located

approximately 25km to the south south west of the proposed wind farm site.

However, following initial consultation with MOD by EC&R’s appointed radar

consultants, Osprey Consulting Services Ltd, further correspondence was received in

March 2010 confirming that the PAR at RAF Marham was no longer a concern for the

proposed Chiplow Wind Farm. While this correspondence stated that the ATC

concern remained extant, potential impacts on ATC can be mitigated and MOD

confirmed that they will consider mitigation proposals.

3.2.49 Osprey Consulting Services Ltd, have been informed by MOD that T1 only is in line

of sight of this radar and that there is no issue with the other four turbines (T2-T5).

Mitigation to overcome this issue could for example involve the reduction in height of

T1 by approximately 10m or its relatively small relocation, either of which would

result in this turbine no longer being in line of sight to the ATC radar. Neither of

these potential mitigation measures would result in a significant change to the

conclusions of the EIA.

3.2.50 Consultation with the MOD on the mitigation required to allow them to remove their

objection has been on-going since March 2010. However, they have advised that a

reduction in their personnel numbers is delaying their response to consultation which,

even under normal circumstances, experience indicates can be a lengthy process.

Nonetheless, as there are solutions available to resolve the ATC issue, an issue not

uncommon for wind farm sites, it is expected that a successful resolution will be

agreed with MOD in due course to ensure that significant impacts do not arise.

3.2.51 The phenomenon known as shadow flicker, caused by blades rotating and casting a

shadow on a stationary object, can occur due to certain combinations of geographical

position and time of day and year. The Companion Guide to PPS22 states “although

problems caused by shadow flicker are rare, for sites where existing development may

be subject to this problem, applicants for planning permission for wind turbine

installations should provide an analysis to quantify the effect.”

16


3.2.52 The ES concludes shadow flicker may theoretically affect three properties. Under

worse case conditions4, shadow flicker events at Bagthorpe Hall could occur on a

maximum of 37 days per year for up to 29 minutes in any day; at Finchdean on a

maximum of 79 days per year for up to 28 minutes in any day and at Natterjack on a

maximum of 81 days per year for up to 28 minutes in any day. However, the actual

occurrence of shadow flicker will be reduced by a number of factors including cloud

cover, shading of the affected windows by buildings and vegetation, periods when the

turbines are not turning and orientation of the hub and rotors. These calculated values

therefore represent a theoretical worst-case scenario and it is unlikely the situation

would occur this way in practice. The ES concludes that given the relatively short

duration of flicker events and their limited frequency, as well as the ability to shut

down turbines at times when these events are predicted to occur, significant effects

would not occur.

3.2.53 However, to ensure residential amenity is protected, EC&R offer to have a planning

condition imposed that provides for monitoring of shadow flicker to be undertaken for

a period of up to 12 months in the event that the Council’s Environmental Health

Officer (EHO) receives complaints from the occupants of the residential properties

identified as having the potential to be affected. Such a monitoring programme would

enable the types of rooms that may be affected to be established: as windows may be

for toilets, halls or rooms that are not used during the relevant periods. If during the

monitoring period it is established that shadow flicker has an unreasonable adverse

affect on the amenity any of these three dwellings, then mitigation measures will be

put in place. If screening is not effective, then the wind turbines would be

programmed to cease operation during the times that shadow flicker may be predicted

to occur.

3.2.54 With regard to telecommunications, there are three scanning telemetry links that cross

the site/or run near to the site in a north-west to south-east direction, which belong to

Anglian Water (AW). AW has been unable to provide the coordinates for these

telemetry links due to security restrictions. Without the provision of this information

it is not possible to confirm precisely how the development would affect the links.

However, in the case that the wind turbines would result in interference with the links,

discussions with AW have identified that a number of fully effective mitigation

measures exist, though the most appropriate for each link has yet to be confirmed. In

order to secure the interests of AW and to enable the co-existence of the telemetry

links and the wind turbines, the Applicant proposes either a planning condition or a

Section 106 obligation to secure an assessment of the potential effects. The condition

or Agreement would require the Applicant to meet the cost of investigating and

effectively rectifying any problems should they arise and to implement solutions in a

timely manner. As there are several technological solutions available in the event that

the AW telemetry links are affected by the wind farm, no residual effect remains.

3.2.55 With regards to public safety A Companion Guide to PPS22 reports that the minimum

desirable distance between wind turbines and occupied buildings calculated on the

basis of expected noise levels and visual impact will often be greater than that

necessary to meet safety requirements. The height of the turbine to the tip of the blade

4 Such conditions, i.e. bright sunshine, turbine rotors aligned directly to the property and rotating, are unlikely to constantly persist

in practice.

17


plus 10% is often used as a safe separation distance. The turbines are all located over

110m from any roads and the shortest distance between any wind turbine and a PRoW

is approximately 200m (this is the distance between turbine 1 and the footpath located

to the west of the site boundary).

3.2.56 During the construction phase all potentially hazardous areas such as excavations and

electrical installation works would be fenced off and all unattended machinery would

be stored in the site compound. Appropriate signage would also be provided to

indicate any hazards, areas to avoid or areas that are barred from entry.

3.2.57 Wind turbines have a proven track record for safety and turbine control and

monitoring systems operate with several levels of redundancy to protect the plant from

damage. In the case of faults arising, including over-speed of the blades, overpower

production, or loss of grid connection, turbines shut down automatically through

braking mechanisms. In addition, turbines are fitted with vibration sensors so that if,

in the unlikely event a blade is damaged, the turbine will automatically and

immediately shut down.

3.2.58 As with any tall structure, wind turbines can be susceptible to lightning strike and

appropriate measures are included in the turbine design to conduct lightning strike

down to earth and minimise the risk of damage to turbines. Occasionally however,

lightning can strike and damage a wind turbine blade. Modern wind turbine blades are

manufactured from a glass-fibre or wood-epoxy composite in a mould, such that the

reinforcement runs predominantly along the length of the blade. This means that

blades will usually stay attached to the turbine if damaged by lightning. In all cases,

the turbine will automatically shut down if damaged by lightning.

3.2.59 In cold weather, ice can build up on blade surfaces when operating. The turbine can

continue to operate with a very thin accumulation of snow or ice, but will shut down

automatically as soon as there is a sufficient build up to cause aerodynamic or physical

imbalance of the rotor assembly. Once the ice has thawed and the turbine re-starts in

circumstances such as this, there is a slight possibility that fragments of ice or snow

will be released from the rotor and will drop within close vicinity of the turbine.

However, the risk to public safety is considered extremely low due to the initial slow

rotational speed of the rotor and because such fragments are sufficiently small and

lightweight to allow the rotor assembly to be back in balance before restarting.

Furthermore, the shortest distance between any wind turbine and a PRoW is

approximately 200m (this is the distance between turbine 1 and the footpath located to

the west of the site boundary).

3.2.60 The ES has considered there to be no significant effects relating to public safety.

3.2.61 The proposed development has considered existing infrastructure,

telecommunications, civil aviation and public safety and has concluded that subject to

appropriate mitigation, no significant effects would occur as a result of the proposed

development. The proposed development therefore complies with PPS22.

18


Hydrology & Hydrogeology

Relevant Policies: RSS Section 10, PPS 25

3.2.62 The East of England Plan states that “Where some flood risk is unavoidable it must be

considered at all stages of the planning process, to minimise potential damage to

property and loss of life whilst avoiding harm to sites of European or international

importance for wildlife”.

3.2.63 There are no policies at the local level relating to Hydrology & Hydrogeology. The

national guidance is therefore referred to, in this case PPS 25: Development and Flood

Risk. PPS 25 seeks to ensure that flood risk is taken into account at all stages in the

planning process to avoid inappropriate development in areas at risk of flooding, and

to direct development away from areas at highest risk.. A Flood Risk Assessment has

been undertaken for the proposed Chiplow Wind Farm in Accordance with PPS25.

3.2.64 The proposed site lies on arable farmland and is underlain by a major aquifer

associated with the highly permeable local Cretaceous Chalk geology. The site has

been used for agricultural purposes historically with small woodland plantations

located nearby amongst scattered farmsteads. The Ordnance Survey (OS) map of the

area indicates that the site is bordered by a small drainage ditch on the western

perimeter and that there is a small clay pit pond to the north of the site associated with

the surface drift deposits.

3.2.65 The development will not increase the risk of flooding and mitigation measures for

this site have been developed to protect surface and groundwater quality and surface

water quantity. Measures include the use of SUDS techniques in the drainage design

for the site, including the encouragement of infiltration rather than run-off through

discharge to vegetated areas or infiltration trenches as appropriate and the lining of

access tracks with vegetated areas for drainage. Construction method statements will

include measures for pollution prevention and control of spillages and leaks, in line

with EA and CIRIA guidance.

3.2.66 The ES has fully considered the predicted effects on Hydrology & Hydrogeology and

taking account of the proposed mitigation, there are predicted to be no significant

effects. This Flood Risk Assessment has identified no fluvial, tidal, groundwater,

sewer or infrastructure flood risk to the development site.

3.2.67 The Proposed Development therefore complies with Development Plan policies and is

in accordance with PPS 25: Development and Flood Risk.

Ecology and Ornithology

Relevant Policies: RSS Policy ENV3, PPS 9

3.2.68 Policy ENV3: Biodiversity and Earth Heritage within RSS states that “planning

authorities and other agencies should ensure that internationally and nationally

designated sites are given the strongest level of protection and that development does

not have an adverse effects on the integrity of sites of European or international

importance for nature conservation”. The policy also states that it should be ensured

that “the region’s wider biodiversity, earth heritage and natural resources are protected

and enriched” and that this should be achieved through various methods including

19


“ensuring new development minimises damage to biodiversity and earth heritage

resources by avoiding harm to local wildlife sites and wherever possible achieving net

environmental gains in development site through the retention of existing assets,

enhancement measures and new habitat creation”.

3.2.69 There are no policies within the local plan, relating to Ecology and Ornithology. The

national guidance is therefore referred to, in this case Planning Policy Statement 9:

Biodiversity and Geological Conservation.

3.2.70 PPS9 contains a number of objectives, of which the following are relevant in this case;

to ensure biological diversity is conserved and enhanced, to sustain and improve the

quality and extent of natural habitats and the naturally occurring species which they

support and to contribute to rural renewal. PPS9 also stresses that wildlife interests

depend on the wise use and management of all the land resources and that nature

conservation interests should be taken into account wherever relevant to the decision-

making process.

3.2.71 The site comprises intensively farmed arable fields, with further extensive areas of

arable land in the surrounding landscape. There are frequent blocks of plantation

woodland scattered across the land outside of the site and field margins frequently

contain hedgerows. There are no statutory or non-statutory designated wildlife sites

that overlap with the proposed development site. The closest statutory wildlife site is

Syderstone Common Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), located 630m east of

the site, and the closest non-statutory site is Syderstone Common North County

Wildlife Site, located 590m east of the site.

3.2.72 Gathering of existing data, consultation with local experts and the undertaking of a full

set of field surveys agreed with Natural England, have provided comprehensive

information regarding wildlife sites, habitats and species within the proposed

development site and surrounding area. Additional winter bird surveys were

undertaken during autumn 2008 and winter 2008/09 in response to the potential

impact of the proposed wind farm on wintering geese being raised during the lead up

to the planning appeal in June 2008 for the on site metrological mast. Taking into

account current interim guidance from Natural England relating to assessments of the

potential impacts of wind farms on bats, additional bat surveys were also undertaken

in 2009 to supplement earlier surveys.

3.2.73 Various mitigation measures have been incorporated into the scheme including the

incorporation of buffer zones around potentially sensitive features and the replacement

of sections of hedgerow that require removal for access tracks. The assessment of

residual effects indicates that the proposed development would not have significant

effects on ecological receptors.

3.2.74 In respect of birds, the main species of high nature conservation value that were

recorded during surveys were pink-footed geese. This is a qualifying species of the

North Norfolk Coast Special Protection Area (SPA) and Ramsar site and The Wash

SPA and Ramsar site which are located approximately 12km to the north and 15km to

the west of the proposed wind farm site respectively. While no pink-footed geese

were recorded foraging on the site (or within 1km of it), they were recorded flying

over the site during winter, sometimes at the height that turbine blades would be.

Collision risk analysis was therefore carried out and it was concluded that the

20


proposed wind farm would not have a significant effect on the population of pink-

footed geese, or any other species of bird.

3.2.75 Under regulation 48(1) of the Conservation (Natural Habitats &c.) Regulations 1994

(as amended, [the ‘Habitats Regulations’]), any development likely to have a

significant effect on a Natura 2000 site, either on its own or in combination with other

projects, that is not connected with or necessary to its management for nature

conservation, must be the subject of an appropriate assessment (AA) carried out by the

relevant competent authority (in this case Borough Council of King’s Lynn and West

Norfolk). The aim of an AA is to establish the implications of the plan or project for

the conservation objectives of the protected site and to ensure that the plan or project

will not adversely affect the integrity of that site. While the ecological impact

assessment presented in the ES concludes that the proposed Chiplow Wind Farm is

unlikely to have a significant impact on any of the features of the Natura 2000 sites in

question, it is for the competent authority (Borough Council of King’s Lynn and West

Norfolk) to decide whether an AA is required. Therefore, erring on the side of

caution, Section 8.10 of the ES presents information necessary to enable the Council

to consider whether an AA is required and, if so, to undertake that assessment.

3.2.76 Given that the conclusion of the ES is that there will be no significant effects, the

proposed development is therefore considered to comply with Development Plan RSS

policy ENV3 and PPS 9.

Cultural Heritage

Relevant Policies: RSS Policy ENV6, LP 4/14

3.2.77 Policy ENV6: The Historic Environment refers to the protection, conservation and,

where appropriate, enhancement of the historic environment of the region, its

archaeology, historic buildings, places and landscapes, including historic parks and

gardens and those features and sites (and their settings) especially significant in the

East of England.

3.2.78 In the Local Plan, Policy 4/14 states that development proposals in the vicinity of

Conservation Areas should have due regard to their impact on the settings of and

views into and out of such areas. Such impacts will be considered in assessing any

consequential effect for the preservation or enhancement of the character or

appearance of the Conservation Area.

3.2.79 The assessment in the ES identified that there are no designated Cultural Heritage

features within the site and none within the 500m study area. There may be potential

effects on unrecorded remains, although the potential for adverse effects is reduced by

the relatively small area of ground disturbance required for the proposed development.

Archaeological monitoring is therefore proposed to be undertaken according to a

Written Scheme of Investigation which would be conditioned as part of the planning

permission. The ES concludes that there is no reason to anticipate the presence of any

features of more than local importance and therefore any effect, taking account of the

proposed mitigation, would not be significant. Furthermore, no significant effects on

designated cultural heritage features, including Scheduled Monuments, Listed

Buildings, Registered Historic Parks and Gardens and Registered Historic Battlefields,

have been identified in the ES.

21


3.2.80 The ES concludes that there will be no significant effects upon the cultural heritage of

the study area resulting from the proposed development. The proposed development

therefore complies with the Development Plan policies RSS ENV6 Local Plan Policy

4/14.

Traffic and Transport

Relevant Policies: PPG 13

3.2.81 There are no local policies relating to traffic and transport5. Advice on transportation

impacts relating to the proposed development are detailed in guidance and policies

contained within Planning Policy Guidance 13: Transport (PPG13). With reference to

access PPG 13 states that safety considerations will be paramount. Good visibility will

be of particular importance, and to improve safety, it is preferable for adjacent

developments to share a common access point.

3.2.82 It is proposed that the transportation of the turbine components to the development site

will be via the A47 at King's Lynn, then continue northeast on the A149, then taking

the A148 towards Fakenham and then left onto the B1454 towards Syderstone. A left

turn is then required onto an unclassified road towards Bircham Tofts from which

access to the site is taken. Figure 4.2 of the ES shows the assumed routes for

construction vehicles. Aggregate and concrete may be brought to the development

site from west/east on the A148, then onto the B1454 before turning left onto the

unclassified road towards the site.

3.2.83 The ES chapter on traffic and transport concludes that the main transport effects of the

proposed development will be associated with the movements of commercial Heavy

Goods Vehicles (HGV) to the site during the construction phase of the development.

The vehicle movements during the operation of the wind farm will be small and

principally involve only one or two private vehicle/van movements with the

occasional need for HGVs; the traffic impacts during the operational stage would

therefore not be significant.

3.2.84 During the construction phase it is predicted that the maximum traffic impact,

excluding concrete deliveries, will occur in the first month of the construction

programme with an average of 28 movements each working day, i.e. 14 in and 14 out

which equates to an average of three deliveries into and out of the site per hour over a

12 hour period (Mon – Fri 07.00 to 19.00). Technical constraints may require the

concrete for an individual turbine to be delivered and poured in one day to prevent

joints in the mass structure. This creates a short but disproportionate impact and was

therefore been considered separately from the impact of the other traffic movements.

The pouring of concrete for each base in one day would result in five days during the

several month construction programme when 64 deliveries of concrete a day will

occur (i.e. 128 two-way vehicle movements per turbine on each of the five days and

640 two-way vehicle movements in total). On average, this equates to 11 vehicle

5 Section 7 of the East of England Plan is the Regional Transport Strategy. The policies within this section of the RSS refer to the

more strategic transport level in terms of demand management and modal splits. Given that the proposed type of development is not

a significant traffic generator these policies are not relevant to the proposed development.

22


movements into and out of the site per hour over a 12 hour period, Monday to Friday,

between the hours of 07:00-19:00.

3.2.85 The ES had identified that the local highway network has ample capacity and an

additional three HGVs per hour during non-concrete delivery days would not affect

this. Delays may occur during when concrete deliveries are taking place; however,

concrete is only expected over five days out of the 6 month construction programme

and any delays can be adequately managed through a Traffic Management Plan which

is expected to be conditioned as part of any planning permission.

3.2.86 The traffic assessment has identified that there are no significant traffic and transport

effects predicted from the construction of the proposed Chiplow wind farm. Careful

development of the site access and mitigation, which includes appropriate timing of

deliveries and the escorting of abnormal loads, overcomes any potential effects from

the HGV movements associated with the construction phase.

3.2.87 No significant effects are likely and therefore local amenity and highway safety for

vehicles and pedestrians would not be adversely affected. The proposed development

therefore complies with PPG13.

Socio-Economics

Relevant Sections: RSS Objectives; PPS 1, PPS22

3.2.88 One objective of the RSS is to realise the economic potential of the region and its

people through ensuring that the region’s economy continues to grow and encourages

greater investment.

3.2.89 The potential effects of the proposed Chiplow Wind Farm on the local economy,

employment and the community have been assessed as part of the EIA. The socio-

economic baseline conditions in the area have been identified following examination

of relevant information sources. The main findings from the baseline review are

summarised below:

• The population of the two wards accounts for approximately 0.3% of the

population of King’s Lynn and West Norfolk District (Census 2001);

• Unemployment is relatively low in the two wards, measuring 3.6% in 2001 for the

wards compared to 4.4% for the district and 5.8% nationally;

• Skills levels in the area and district are significantly lower than national averages,

with a higher proportion of the population employed in lower skilled professions;

• The area is located in an area of attractive farming countryside and therefore may

experience tourists driving, cycling or walking through the area.

3.2.90 In socio economic terms, the areas that have been considered as having potential

positive effects relate to the local and wider economy and the labour market, current

and future residents and regular visitors to the area. No significant adverse effects on

existing businesses, either in the immediate vicinity or more widely in the tourism

industry are envisaged during either construction or operation of the proposed wind

farm. Where possible, local labour will be used during the construction, operational

23


and decommissioning phases inclusive of the sourcing of local contractors whilst

future mitigation regarding tourism and visitors may come through measures such as

educational facilities. Additionally, the proposed development is unlikely to have any

significant effect on tourists and recreational users.

3.2.91 The wind farm will be fully funded and managed by EC&R. Local communities near

to the wind farm will benefit from an annual income from the project, educational

materials and energy efficiency advice and measures. The developer is also

committed to providing an annual community fund of around £20,000 per year for the

lifetime of the wind farm. The fund would be for the benefit of the local community

and may, for example, be used for community leisure facilities, local restoration

projects, books for schools or social enterprise projects etc.

3.2.92 An important part of the project development is the building of links with local

schools to improve awareness and understanding of environmental issues and

renewable energy among children. E.ON’s Energy Experience is a major new

programme for teachers to help them teach young people about energy. EC&R will

ensure that local schools can make the most out of this curriculum based and energy

focused educational programme by offering classroom packs and training to schools.

3.2.93 The above community benefits can contribute to a variety of local and community

projects, instigating a range of economic, social or environmental benefits. While

there are no relevant saved policies within the local plan, this fully accords with A

Companion Guide to PPS22 which states at paragraph 4.21 that maximising the local

benefits of renewable energy schemes will be an important consideration for local

planning authorities. It goes on to state at paragraph 4.29 that community-led

initiatives can generate considerable benefits for local people, as well as providing

‘green’ energy. PPS 22 recognises that an opportunity to engage in the development

of a renewable energy generation scheme can offer local people the chance to develop

new skills and confidence.

3.2.94 Following the assessment of the proposed development against the identified issues, it

has been concluded that there is potential for an overall direct positive impact on the

local economy through potential employment opportunities and increased revenues for

local business at all stages of the development. It is anticipated that there will also be

positive indirect impacts from the scheme. However these are not considered to be

significant given the scale of the development and the low magnitude of changes or

effects on the local economy.

3.2.95 The Proposed Development therefore complies with the key objectives and themes of

the RSS and national guidance contained within PPS1 and PPS22.

Minerals

Relevant Policies: MLP MIN17 and MIN18

3.2.96 Policy MIN17 identifies ‘Investigative Areas’. These areas identify that a potential

mineral resource is available, but not whether these resources are viable for extraction.

The policy states that further investigation of the resources are required in these areas.

This policy gives no assumption that the resource is viable of extraction or that

planning permission would be approved for such works. Policy MIN18 aims to protect

24


known resources, such as those in the investigative areas, from being sterilised by

other developments. It does however state that temporary development of less than

five years will be permitted on the site of potential minerals resources as these would

not sterilise the resource. Although the proposed development is expected to be

operational for up to 25 years, it is still considered to be a temporary development and

therefore the principle here is the same. The minerals resources would not be

sterilised as they would still be available for extraction, if they are viable, after

decommissioning of the wind farm. It is therefore considered that the proposed

development accords with the principle of planning policy contained within the

Minerals Local Plan.

Conclusion of the Proposed Development within the Context of the Development Plan

3.2.97 The proposed development is considered to be of a sustainable nature which would

help to meet national, regional and sub-regional targets for renewable energy supply

and to be in an appropriate location for such a scale of development. It is not

considered to create any significant adverse effects with regard to the landscape,

visual effects, public amenity, hydrology & hydrogeology, ecology and ornithology,

cultural heritage, traffic and transport or socio-economics.

3.2.98 The proposed development complies with the aims, principles and policies of the

Regional Spatial Strategy, the Norfolk Structure Plan, the King’s Lynn and West

Norfolk Local Plan and Statement of Community Involvement, which collectively

constitute the Development Plan.

3.3 Renewable Energy Policy Context

3.3.1 The previous section has demonstrated that the proposed development is in conformity

with the Development Plan. However, renewable energy policy is also a material

consideration and provides further confirmation that the application should be

approved.

European and National Renewable Energy Policy

3.3.2 The direction of UK policy on renewable energy is guided by its commitments to

international and European climate change instruments. The UK government is a

signatory to the convention of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee on

Climate Change that was signed at the UN Conference on Environmental

Development, The Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in June 1992 which commits

developed countries to formulating policies and measures:

3.3.3 “with the aim of returning individually or jointly to their 1990 levels of anthropogenic

emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases not controlled by the

Montreal Protocol”.

3.3.4 Commitments at the Earth Summit were not legally binding on the signatories.

However, at the Third Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Climate Change

in Kyoto in December 1997 a protocol was adopted which set binding targets on

industrialised nations to reduce their emissions of six greenhouse gases to 5.2% below

1990 levels over the period 2008-2012. The Member States of the EU jointly agreed to

exceed this commitment by requiring a reduction in greenhouse gas levels of 8% over

25


1990 levels by this period. The contribution to this target differs for each Member

state.

3.3.5 The UK accepted a legally binding target of a 12.5% reduction in these greenhouse

gases over 1990 levels within the time period. Following these binding agreements

the EU Environmental Council agreed a list of priority measures to help Member

States achieve their individual contributions to the overall target. Promotion of

renewable energy was highlighted as one of the principal means to achieving the

targets. Subsequently these targets have been increased through the EU Renewable

Energy Directive.

3.3.6 The Copenhagen Climate Change Conference 2009 was held in December 2009.

However, although the non-binding Copenhagen Accord recognised that temperature

rise needed to be kept below 2oC was signed, it contained no emission targets.

EU Renewable Energy Directive

3.3.7 In spring 2007 the EU heads of Government agreed to a binding target of 20% of the

EU’s energy consumption to come from renewable sources by 2020. This target was

agreed by European Parliament in December 2008. Each member state has therefore

agreed to a binding target ranging from 10% to 49%, of which the UK’s target is 15%.

The UK’s target represents one of the biggest step changes for any member state, from

2005 levels, as the UK has such low renewable energy generation to date compared

with other countries. These binding targets have now been included within the EU

Directive 2009/28/EC and the deadline for implementation is the 5th December 2010.

Under this Directive, the UK also has to submit a National Action Plan to the

European Commission by the end of June 2010, detailing how it will meet its

obligations. A series of interim targets have also been set to ensure progress towards

the 2020 target, the first of which is to achieve 4% of energy from renewables in

2011/12.

The Renewables Obligation Order

3.3.8 The Renewables Obligation Order 2006 (RO) produced by the Department for

Business Enterprise & Regulatory Reform (BERR) placed an obligation on electricity

suppliers to provide an increasing proportion of their electricity from renewable

sources. This new policy was introduced in 2000 with the principle aim of stimulating

the UK renewable energy industry.

3.3.9 Targets under the RO are set on a yearly basis, penalising suppliers failing to meet

their individual targets, whilst rewarding the holders of Renewable Obligation

Certificates (ROCs) with a dividend of a penalty revenue.

3.3.10 BERR has since considered the EU 2020 target within the then proposed EU

Renewable Energy Directive, and the Renewables Obligations Order 2009 came into

force in April 2009. This order has introduced a new system of banded ROCs as it was

feared that newer technologies were not getting enough support. The current

obligation for 2009-2010 is 9.7 ROCs per 100 MWh, this will rise to 15.4 ROCs per

100 MWh by 2015/16.

26


3.3.11 At the end of 2008 generation from renewable sources, eligible under the obligation,

stood at 5.5% of all electricity generated in the UK6.

Meeting the Energy Challenge: A White Paper on Energy

3.3.12 In May 2007, the Department of Trade and Industry published Meeting the Energy

Challenge: A White Paper on Energy which builds upon the principles within The

Energy Challenge: Energy Review Report 2006. The white paper stresses the

importance of working with other countries to tackle climate change and the need to

ensure we have secure energy supplies. It sets out the Government’s international and

domestic energy strategy to deliver the four energy policy goals:

• To put ourselves on a path to cutting the UK’s carbon dioxide emissions – the main

contributors to global warming – by some 60% by about 2050, with real progress

by 2020;

• To maintain the reliability of energy supplies;

• To promote competitive markets in the UK and beyond, helping to raise the rate of

sustainable economic growth and to improve our productivity; and

• To ensure that every home is adequately and affordably heated.

3.3.13 The white paper states that it is estimated that the UK will need around 30-35GW of

new electricity generation capacity over the next two decades and around two thirds of

the capacity by 2020. The key elements of the strategy are to:

• Establish an international framework to tackle climate change;

• Provide legally binding carbon targets for the whole UK economy, progressively

reducing emissions;

• Make further progress in achieving fully competitive and transparent international

markets;

• Encourage more energy saving through better information, incentives and

regulation;

• Provide more support for low carbon technologies;

• Ensure the right conditions for investment;

• Providing cleaner larger scale electricity generation is a high priority within the

white paper.

3.3.14 The white paper also states that renewables are key to the UK’s strategy to tackle

climate change and deploy cleaner sources of energy. There is a target that aims to see

renewables grow as a proportion of electricity supplies to 10% by 2010, with an

aspiration for this level to double by 2020 through the Renewables Obligation. The

white paper confirms the intention to strengthen the RO, increasing the Obligation to

up to 20% as and when increasing amounts of renewables are deployed.

6 Department of Energy and Climate Change (2008) Energy Trends

27


3.3.15 It also reiterates the ongoing need, not only the tackle climate change, but also to

ensure that our energy supply remains secure. It states that it is fundamental to

securing our energy supplies to ensure that we are not dependent on any one supplier,

country or technology. By increasing the level of energy we generate domestically,

the UK will be less dependent on imports of fuel from abroad. Investment in more

renewable energy in the UK (including wind power) can contribute to a more diverse

mix of technology thus helping to secure our energy supplies.

3.3.16 The white paper reports that the latest figures at that time (2006) show that the share

of renewables in the UK’s total energy mix is around 2%7 and around 6%

8 for the EU

as a whole. Projections for 2020, under the current regime, would contribute 5%9 of

the UK’s total energy mix and would be unlikely to exceed 10%10

of the EU’s total

energy mix.

3.3.17 Improving the effectiveness of the planning system through the planning white paper,

Planning for a Sustainable Future, is also referred to as key element of improving the

effective functioning of energy markets and infrastructure investment.

UK Renewable Energy Strategy

3.3.18 The UK Renewable Energy Strategy was published in July 2009 and is aimed at

reaching the goal of 15% of energy from renewables by 2020. The strategy will

involve producing enough energy from renewable sources by 2020 to supply the

equivalent of nearly all 26 million homes in the UK with their current electricity needs

and 4 million homes with their current heating needs.

3.3.19 The lead scenario of the strategy could see: more than 30% of our electricity generated

from renewables; 12% of our heat generated from renewables, and; 10% of transport

energy from renewables. It is expected that the majority of this growth would come

from wind power, through the deployment of more onshore and offshore wind

turbines11

. The strategy states that to deliver this renewables revolution, we will need

to provide greater financial support, swifter delivery and a stronger push on new

technologies and resources.

3.3.20 In terms of swifter delivery, the strategy states ‘to achieve the rapid transformation

that we will need over the next decade, the planning system, supply chains, connection

to the grid and bioenergy supply will have to step up their pace dramatically’. The

strategy refers specifically to ‘Better Planning for Delivery’ and states ‘Our planning

system must enable renewable deployment in appropriate places, at the right time, and

in a way that gives business the confidence to invest. Thus we must speed up the

system and make it more predictable, while ensuring that we continue to protect our

environment and natural heritage and respond to the legitimate concerns of local

communities’. In order to do this, the strategy identifies a number of improvements

such as:

7 Digest of the United Kingdom Energy Statistics (DUKES) 2006 8 Eurostat

http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page?_pageid=0,1136239,0_45571447&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL 9 UK Energy and CO2 Emissions Projections, May 2007 10 Renewable energies in the 21st century: building a more sustainable future 11 Pg 42, UK Renewable Energy Strategy, July 2009

28


• Setting up an independent Infrastructure Planning Commission12

;

• Working with all the English regions to help ensure they have robust evidence-

based strategies for delivering their renewable energy potential;

• Helping the planning community as they develop and implement local and regional

energy planning and handle renewable and low-carbon energy applications;

• Doing more to resolve spatial conflicts and develop generic solutions to mitigate

the impacts of renewable technologies, notably air quality, environmental,

navigational and aviation radar impacts.

3.3.21 Chart 2.4 within the document details the mix of renewable energy technologies

expected to meet the targets of the lead scenario. It is expected that onshore wind will

increase from 3GW in 2008 to 14GW in 2020 which equates to around 4,000 new

3MW onshore turbines in addition to the approximately 2,000 turbines already

installed. The Renewable Energy Strategy will be dynamic and Member States are

required to report to the Commission on progress towards targets every two years

(first report due by December 2011).

The Energy Act 2008

3.3.22 The Energy Bill became the Energy Act when it was given Royal Assent in November

2008. The Act, alongside the Planning Act and Climate Change Act will ensure that

legislation underpins the delivery of our energy and climate change strategies. The

main relevant part of the Act was the strengthening of the Renewables Obligation in

order to encourage increased use of renewables in the UK.

The Climate Change Act 2008

3.3.23 The Climate Change Bill became the Climate Change Act when it was also given

Royal Assent in November 2008. The two key aims being, to improve carbon

management and help a transition towards a low carbon economy in the UK, and to

demonstrate strong UK leadership internationally by signalling that we are committed

to taking our share in reducing global emissions.

3.3.24 The key relevant provision of the Act is the legally binding targets of a reduction of

green house emissions of 80% by 2050, and reductions of CO2 emissions of 26% by

2020 against a 1990 baseline; however it was announced that this has now been

increased to a 34% reduction of 1990 levels by 2018-2022.

3.3.25 The Act required the introduction of legally binding Carbon Budgets, of which the

first three were announced on 22 April 2009 and were set at a 22% reduction on 1990

levels within 2008-2012, 28% reduction within 2013-2017 and 34% reduction within

2018-2022.

12 The IPC came into operation on October 1st 2009.

29


The Planning Act 2008

3.3.26 The Planning Act was also given Royal Assent in November 2008 which will have an

impact on renewable energy developments. Under the Planning Act, a new body has

been created, the Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC) which will determine

nationally significant projects; this includes on-shore wind farms with a capacity of

50MW or more.

3.3.27 The Planning Act has also given legal force to the production of National Policy

Statements (NPS) which will detail national infrastructure priorities for the country in

several policy areas, including an Overarching Energy NPS, which will inform a

Renewable Energy NPS and five other energy NPSs.

Regional Renewable Energy Policy

Norfolk Climate Change Strategy

3.3.28 The State of the Environment Report provides a summary of available information

about Norfolk's environment in 2003. This reports a target of 17% for electricity

generation from renewable sources in Norfolk by 201013

.

3.3.29 Tomorrow’s Norfolk, Today’s Challenge: A Climate Change Strategy for Norfolk

puts forward a strategy for the region to combat climate change. The Strategy has

adopted two high level goals to mitigate and adapt to the impacts of climate change.

3.3.30 Norfolk’s Local Area Agreement for 2008-2011 is an 11% reduction in CO2 emissions

across Norfolk by 2011. The Strategy recognises the importance of switching to

renewable and low carbon forms of energy and acknowledges that this represents a

major economic opportunity for Norfolk. It refers to the geography of the region in

offering rich natural resources, in particular, wind, sunshine, coastline and a large rural

landscape.

3.3.31 The Strategy refers to developing an understanding of supply and demand in the

renewables and low carbon energy market in Norfolk including the scope for,

feasibility of, and expansion of different forms of technology. It also states that in

order to exploit this major opportunity they will work with key partners in the energy

and business sector.

3.3.32 National Policy Statements

3.3.33 The Department of Energy and Climate Change and the Department for Transport

published the first 7 draft National Policy Statements (NPS) for consultation in

November 2009. These NPSs will be used by the IPC when considering an

application. Where there is a conflict between the Development Plan for an area and a

National Policy Statement, the National Policy Statement will be followed. National

Policy Statements will also become material considerations for local planning

authorities when considering planning applications for development under the Town

and County Planning Act 1990.

13 http://www.norfolk.gov.uk/consumption/groups/public/documents/article/ncc040801.pdf

30


The draft Overarching National Policy Statement for Energy (EN-1)

3.3.34 This statement sets out how the suite of energy NPSs will work and also establishes

the need for new energy infrastructure by looking at the need for a new energy supply

and a diverse mix of energy generation, and the need for specific types of energy

infrastructure.

3.3.35 The draft NPS EN-1 stresses that it is critical that the UK continues to have secure and

reliable supplies of electricity as we make the transition to a low carbon economy. In

order to achieve this, a greater proportion of low carbon generation and a diverse mix

of technologies and fuels are required alongside reliable supplies of gas and oil during

the transition process.

3.3.36 The statement suggests that we will need about 43GW net of new capacity by 2020

and about 60 GW by 2025, much of which has yet to be consented. It also states that

around 30% of electricity generation will be from renewable sources by 2020, coming

primarily from onshore and offshore wind generation. In terms of need it is concluded

that there is significant need for new major energy infrastructure which will have to be

met by projects coming through quickly.

3.3.37 The statement goes on to refer to generic considerations that should be given to

developments; these mimic those found in regional and local development plans and

are covered within an EIA.

The draft National Policy Statement for Renewable Energy Infrastructure (EN-3)

3.3.38 Section 2.7 of this statement refers to onshore wind; within this section are ‘technical

considerations for the IPC when determining onshore wind farms. Within this section

it refers to:

• Access Tracks: Applicants should include the full extent of the access tracks

necessary and an assessment of their effects;

• Project Lifetimes: Applications should set out details of what will be

decommissioned and removed from the site at the end of the operational period;

consent should be time-limited from the date the wind farms start to generate

electricity; the time-limited, non-permanent nature of wind farms is likely to be an

important consideration for the IPC when assessing impacts such as landscape and

visual effects and potential effects on the settings of historic assets;

• Flexibility in the project details: flexibility will be needed in relation to the

dimensions of the turbines; where specific details of the design of the site are

uncertain at the time of the application, this should be made clear by the applicant

with the reasons for the uncertainty given; where elements of the design of the

scheme are unknown, the maximum-case scenario should be assessed;

• Micrositing: A tolerance of between 30m and 50m of elements of the required

infrastructure is typical; however there are some instances where mircositing

tolerance requested by the applicant is too great and it may be necessary to restrict

either the overall tolerance or the tolerance of specific elements.

3.3.39 The statement then sets out the impact assessment principles under a series of

headings:

31


• Biodiveristy and Geological Conservation: Where necessary, the assessments

should assess collision risks, of which it may be appropriate to assess risk for

certain types of species of birds; it should include any effects on biodiversity

resulting from the disturbance of important habitats; the IPC should seek to

validate the results of the EIA;

• Historic Environment: Visualisations may be required to demonstrate the effects

of a proposed onshore wind farm on the setting of historic features; the time-

limited and non-permanent nature of wind farms should be a relevant consideration

for the IPC when assessing indirect effects on the historic environment; the ability

of the applicants to microsite during the construction phase should be an important

consideration by the IPC;

• Landscape and Visual: the arrangement of wind turbines should be carefully

designed within a site to minimise effects on the landscape while meeting technical

and operational siting requirements and other constraints; the IPC should consider

any evidence put before it on the experience of similar-scale turbines at similar

distances to residential properties;

• Noise: noise limits will often influence the separation of wind turbines from

residential properties; the IPC should use ETSU-R-97 to satisfy itself that the noise

from the operation of the wind turbines is within acceptable levels; where the

correct methodology has been followed and a wind farm has been shown to comply

with ETSU-R-97 it should be reasonable for the IPC to conclude that it may be

give little or no weight to adverse noise impacts from the operation of the wind

turbines;

• Shadow flicker: where wind turbines have been proposed within 10 rotor

diameters of an existing occupied building, a shadow flicker assessment should be

carried out by the applicant; in circumstances where a wind turbine is fitted with a

mechanism to inhibit shadow flicker where it has a potential to effect a property,

the IPC should judge the shadow flicker impacts on that property to be of

negligible significance;

• Traffic and Transport: the IPC should be satisfied that taking into account the

views of the relevant local highway authorities, that abnormal loads can be safely

transported in such a way that minimises inconvenience to other road users and that

the environmental effects of this and other construction traffic, after mitigation, are

acceptable; the temporary nature of the transport impacts during construction

should be a relevant consideration for the IPC; in view of the level of need for

renewable energy infrastructure, only in exceptional circumstances should the

traffic or transport impacts from the construction phase of a project prevent it from

being approved by the IPC.

3.4 National Planning Policy Statements and Guidance Notes

3.4.1 National Planning Policy Statements and Guidance Notes also form a material

planning consideration and where development plan policies are not saved, during the

32


transition to Regional Spatial Strategies and Local Development Frameworks, national

policy should be referred to.

PPS 1 - Delivering Sustainable Development

3.4.2 PPS1 sets out the framework of the national guidance and provides the basis for the

Government's approach to sustainability. This advice sets out as one of its key

principles the need for the Development Plan system to contribute to global

sustainability by, amongst other things, promoting the development of renewable

energy resources. The use of renewable energy is also set out in paragraph 20 as an

environmental issue which policies in Development Plans need to assess as part of the

mitigation of effects of, and adaptation to, climate change. It appears again under the

section on the prudent use of natural resources

3.4.3 The PPS1Companion Guide; Planning and Climate Change sets out how the spatial

planning system can contribute to reducing emissions, stabilising climate change and

take into account the unavoidable consequences. With regard to Energy Supply, it

states that Planning Authorities should:

• not require applicants for energy development to demonstrate either the overall

need for renewable energy and its distribution, nor question the energy justification

for why a proposal for such development must be sited in a particular location;

• ensure any local approach to protecting landscape and townscape is consistent with

PPS22 and does not preclude the supply of any type of renewable energy other than

in the most exceptional circumstances;

• alongside any criteria-based policy developed in line with PPS22, consider

identifying suitable areas for renewable and low-carbon energy sources, and

supporting infrastructure, where this would help secure the development of such

sources, but in doing so take care to avoid stifling innovation including by rejecting

proposals solely because they are outside areas identified for energy generation;

• expect a proportion of the energy supply of new development to be secured from

decentralised and renewable or low-carbon energy sources.

3.4.4 The proposed development is in accordance with the principles of sustainable

development and therefore complies with PPS1. The supplement paper, Planning and

Climate Change, is also considered to support the proposed development.

PPS 22 - Renewable Energy

3.4.5 PPS22 confirms that the development of renewable energy will make a vital

contribution to the aims of the national energy policy set out in the 2003 White Paper

and continued in the 2007 Energy White Paper. Increased development of renewable

energy sources is thus seen as essential to the delivery of the commitments on climate

change, and the PPS states that positive planning which facilitates renewable energy

developments can contribute to all four elements of the Government’s strategy on

sustainable development. A key objective in the planning context is the emphasis that

is placed on promoting and encouraging renewable energy developments rather than

adopting a restrictive approach.

33


3.4.6 On landscape and visual effects, PPS 22 points out that while wind turbines are likely

to have relatively greater effects as compared with other forms of renewable

technologies, these will vary depending on the scale of a development and the type of

landscape involved. It also points out that these effects may be temporary; as such

sites are capable of being decommissioned. In relation to noise, PPS 22 formally

advises that the 1997 report by ETSU for the DTI should be used to assess and rate

noise from wind energy development.

3.4.7 The provisions of PPS22 support the proposed development.

PPS7 - Sustainable Development in Rural Areas

3.4.8 PPS7 refers to renewable energy, in one of the five objectives (iv) for planning

authorities in preparing Local Development Documents and making planning

decisions:

• (iv) provide for the sensitive exploitation of renewable energy sources in

accordance with the policies set out in PPS22.

3.4.9 The PPS then goes on to deal with local landscape designations, and here it indicates

that there should be sufficient protection under criteria-based policies, based on such

tools as landscape character assessment, to avoid the need for rigid local designations

that may unduly restrict acceptable sustainable development and important economic

activity in rural areas.

3.4.10 The proposed development complies with the development criteria relating to the

landscape in the Development Plan (see section 3.5) and therefore complies with

PPS7.

Other Significant Planning Policy Statements and Guidance

3.4.11 PPG8: Telecommunications explains that interference from new developments,

including wind turbines, on telecommunications signals can be a material

consideration. It states that Local Planning Authorities must satisfy themselves that

the potential for interference has been fully taken into account and, if necessary,

mitigation has been considered. Any such interference has been considered in the ES

and can be adequately mitigated. The proposed development therefore complies with

PPG8.

3.4.12 PPS9:Biodiversity and Geological Conservation contains a number of objectives, of

which the following are relevant in this case:

• to ensure biological diversity is conserved and enhanced, to sustain and improve

the quality and extent of natural habitats and the naturally occurring species which

they support and to contribute to rural renewal.

3.4.13 PPS9 identifies habitat protection as the key to the conservation of wildlife. However,

it also stresses that wildlife interests depend on the wise use and management of all

the land resources and that nature conservation interests should be taken into account

wherever relevant to the decision-making process. The proposed development has

considered all nature conservation interests, has not identified any significant effects

and therefore complies with PPS9.

34


3.4.14 PPG15: Planning and the Historic Environment explains that where nationally

important archaeological remains or their settings are affected by development, there

should be a presumption in favour of their physical preservation. However, cases

involving remains of lesser importance are stated not to be so clear-cut and the

decision has to weigh the importance of archaeology against other factors such as the

need for a development. The ES concludes there will be no significant impact on any

cultural heritage features and therefore the proposed development complies with

PPG15 and PPG16.

3.4.15 Policy guidance on tourism is contained in Good Practice Guidance on Planning for

Tourism, published by the DCLG in July 2006. This sets out the general principles for

planning on tourism, which are to maximise the benefits of tourism, identify optimal

locations, to integrate development with its surroundings and to avoid adverse effects

from developments. No significant adverse effects on tourism have been identified

and the proposed development therefore complies with the Good Practice Guidance on

Planning for Tourism.

3.4.16 PPG24: Planning and Noise provides the general Government advice on this issue,

but in practice the particular characteristics of wind turbines have led to the need for

the definition of more detailed advice on how noise should be measured and

controlled. As a result, the Department of Trade and Industry set up a Working Group

on Noise from Wind Turbines, and its report in 1997 (ETSU-R-97) provided a detailed

set of methods for the measurement of wind farm noise and conditions for controlling

it. The report of the Working Group is now recommended for use by PPS22 as noted

above. The proposed development would be below ETSU limits and therefore

complies with Government advice on noise.

3.5 Emerging Local Planning Policy

3.5.1 Kings Lynn and West Norfolk Council are currently in the process of producing their

Local Development Framework which will consist of various Development Plan

Documents. The weight that can be given to these documents as a material

consideration is dependant on the stage of production of each document and

strengthens as they move towards being finalised.

Kings Lynn and West Norfolk Local Development Framework

3.5.2 The Council had previously published produced an Issues and Options paper in 2005

and a subsequent Preferred Options paper in 2006; however, following a review of the

central government guidance further consultations were carried out in 2008 and a Core

Strategy regulation 25 document has been produced which amalgamated these

previous documents and the further consultation. The Council consulted on this

document between February – April 2009 though at the time of writing, the draft

Submission Core Strategy was not published.

3.5.3 Policy 9 of this regulation 25 document refers to renewable energy and states “The

council and it’s partners will support and encourage the generation of energy from

renewable sources. These will be permitted unless there are unacceptable locational or

other impacts that could not be outweighed by wider environmental, social, economic

and other benefits”.

35


3.5.4 The proposed development would result in significant renewable energy generation

and no unacceptable impacts have been identified within the ES and therefore the

development is in accordance with the emerging Core Strategy.

3.6 Overall Conclusions of Material Considerations

3.6.1 The material considerations in the renewable energy policy and national planning

policy, stress that the importance of renewable energy schemes is of national

significance; and that although the benefits of such schemes are not always obvious in

the locality, the wider benefits need to be given sufficient weight when considering

such proposals. The emerging policies within the Core Strategy also support and

encourage the generation of energy from renewable sources.

3.6.2 The proposed development is not considered to have any unacceptable adverse effects

resulting from its construction or operational phases, in terms of visual effects or

effects on landscape character, on nature conservation or bio-diversity, on agriculture

or through any cumulative effects and is therefore compliant with national and

emerging planning policy. Taking these material considerations into account it is

considered that the proposed development is capable of being granted planning

permission.

36


37


4. Statement of Community Involvement

4.1 Background

4.1.1 The Borough Council of King’s Lynn and West Norfolk adopted their Statement of

Community Involvement DPD in January 2007 as part of their Local Development

Framework. The document sets out how and when the council will involve the local

community, stakeholders and other interested parties in the preparation of documents

that form the LDF and, in making development control decisions on planning

applications. It also provides guidance to developers on how they should engage with

communities. Chapter 5 of The Statement of Community Involvement (SCI) sets out

the guidelines to developers on involving the public and others in the planning

application process. The SCI highlights that by involving the public at an early stage

local issues and environmental information will be identified which that can influence

the scheme and, providing these are taken into consideration, can enable developers to

expect the local authority to deal with the application more quickly.

4.2 Consultations

4.2.1 EC&R has undertaken a comprehensive programme of public consultation to ensure

that the community is fully aware and involved in the development and progress of the

proposals. The public consultation programme is briefly summarised as follows;

• Initial contact was also made with the Local Planning Authority at an early stage of

the project’s development. The scoping stage was undertaken through a

combination of informal consultation discussions, formal scoping meetings and a

formal scoping opinion. A Scoping Report was submitted to the Borough Council

of King’s Lynn and West Norfolk on 13 December 2006 with a request for a

formal Scoping Opinion. The response to this request was issued on 13 March

2007 (presented in full in Appendix 2B of the ES);

• A ‘scoping meeting’ was held on 10 May 2007 between the Applicant, Entec UK

Ltd, King’s Lynn and West Norfolk Council and Norfolk County Council

(Landscape Architect). The meeting served in particular to discuss the design

evolution of the development and the scope and methodology of the landscape and

visual assessment. Further meetings between Entec and the LPA took place at the

beginning of October 2007;

• A wide range of statutory and non-statutory organisations were consulted prior to

and after submission of the Scoping Report in order to gain agreement from all key

parties regarding the proposed EIA methodology and to invite comments on

relevant environmental information;

• Key stakeholders were sent an introductory mailing in September 2006, which was

then followed by a second mailing in February 2007;

38


• Newsletters were sent to the community (defined as all households living in

parishes that fall within 3km from the Chiplow site boundary) in February 2007

and June 2007. The June 2007 newsletter was accompanied by an invite to the

public exhibition;

• The public exhibition was held at Amy Robsart (Syderstone) Village Hall on 14th

and 15th June 2007. The exhibition was attended by more than 200 people and 73

comment and feedback forms were received. Of the 73 feedback forms, 37

responses were in favour of the development, 18 raised concerns, 13 objected and 5

requested more information. The issues that were raised, and which are covered by

the relevant technical chapter of the accompanying ES, were primarily concerned

with potential impacts on public amenity (visual, noise and shadow flicker) with

other issues including the questioning of the relevence of wind energy and the

suitability of the Chiplow site14

. Further information on the feedback forms is

presented in Section 2.3 of the accompanying ES. With regards to issues raised

that are not covered in the accompanying ES, a negative impact on property values

was a commonly expressed concern. However, at the drop-in exhibition the

inconclusive nature of the available evidences was referred to, together with

findings that the fear of a potential wind farm development may well be a more

significant influence on values than the actuality of an operational wind farm;

4.2.2 It should be noted that the submission of the final ES was delayed to allow further

winter bird surveys to be undertaken by Entec during autumn 2008 and winter

2008/09. This was in response to the potential impact of the proposed wind farm on

wintering geese being raised during the lead up to the planning appeal in June 2008

for the on site meteorological mast (Appeal Ref:APP/V2635/A/07/2060273). Taking

into account current interim guidance from Natural England relating to assessments of

the potential impacts of wind farms on bats, further bat activity surveys were also

undertaken by Entec in 2009 to supplement the results of the surveys undertaken in

2007 by Bureau Veritas.

4.2.3 However, as there have been no substantive change to the design of the wind farm, it

was not considered necessary to undertake additional consultation work. The survey

results of winter 08/09 and the draft Ecology and Ornithology ES chapter were

however discussed in a meeting with Natural England in February 2009 (there was no

case officer in post at RSPB at the time, but the former RSPB case officer also

attended the meeting in their new role with Natural England).

4.2.4 Consultation with Key Stakeholders will continue following submission of the

planning application.

14 It should be noted that where responses expressed concerns, these were generally across several issues.

39


5. Summary and Conclusions

5.1 Summary and Conclusions

5.1.1 The principal issues that arise from consideration of the proposed development are:

• The need to increase electricity generated from renewable sources and to reduce

energy generation from the burning of fossil fuels, consequently reducing the

emissions of greenhouse gases. The proposed Chiplow Wind Farm could generate

enough electricity to power approximately 5,60015

homes. The actual amount of

CO2 that is saved by using wind power has been a matter of debate because of

changes in the energy mix and cleaner fossil fuel technologies being introduced

over time. However, in any event it is predicted that Chiplow Wind Farm will help

prevent the release of many thousands of tonnes of CO2. In producing an estimate

of the quantities of CO2 saved, using an assumption that electricity from wind

power would offset that produced from a coal fired power station, this would see a

reduction in emissions of CO2 of around 11,30016

tonnes per year;

• The proposed wind farm is expected to have an installed capacity of 10MW which

would contribute toward regional and sub-regional renewable energy targets;

• The design process has evolved to take into consideration comments, advice and

issues which have arisen. This evolution is considered to have produced a proposal

design which is appropriate for the site, its environment and the local community;

• No significant effects on the landscape character types and areas, national

landscape designations, national trails and cycle roués or historic parks and gardens

have been identified. Several receptors have been identified as having the potential

to experience significant effect through the visual assessment. However, this relates

to the classification of residential properties as being of high sensitivity and none

of those assessed would experience significant effects on their visual amenity and

therefore would not become unattractive and unsatisfactory places to live;

• It is not anticipated that there would be any significant effects on existing

infrastructure, telecommunications, television broadcasts, civil aviation, public

safety or amenity; it is proposed that any issues arising with regard to

telecommunications, television broadcasts, shadow flicker and noise be controlled

and managed through planning conditions/obligations;

• Any residual effects on hydrology and hydrogeology after inherent mitigating

construction measures are incorporated would not be significant due to the low

sensitivity of the development site;

15 based on 30% load factor and average annual domestic usage of 4.7 MWh/year (Digest of UK Energy Statistics, 2004)


40


• There are no statutory or non-statutory designated wildlife sites within the

proposed development site. The consultation undertaken and the full set of field

surveys have provided comprehensive information regarding the site and its

surroundings. Various mitigation measures have been incorporated into the scheme

design including the incorporation of buffer zones around potentially sensitive

features and the replacement of sections of hedgerow that require removal for

access tracks. The assessment of residual effects indicates that the proposed

development would not have significant effects of ecological receptors. In respect

of birds, the main species of high nature conservation value that were recorded

during surveys were pink-footed geese. While no pink-footed geese were recorded

foraging on the site (or within 1km of it), they were recorded flying over the site.

Collision risk analysis was therefore carried out and it was concluded that the

proposed wind farm would not have a significant effect on the population of this,

or any other species, of bird;

• The potential for effects on cultural heritage has been assessed using site visits and

the use of wireframe drawings to illustrate likely views of the wind farm.

Following this detailed review, it is concluded that there will not be any adverse

effects on the setting of these features and that the development will not detract

from an appreciation of them. No cultural heritage features are recorded within the

site, although artefact finds from the vicinity of the site suggest that the area has

been occupied from the prehistoric period. Archaeological monitoring is therefore

proposed to be undertaken according to a Written Scheme of Investigation which

would be conditioned as part of the planning permission;

• The local highway network has been identified as having ample capacity for the

additional construction traffic. Delays may occur during the five days of concrete

deliveries for turbine bases; however, this would be controlled through a Traffic

Management Plan, formulated in consultation with the Highways development

control department within the Council, which could be conditioned as part of the

planning permission;

• No significant adverse effects on existing businesses or the tourism industry are

envisaged. The proposed wind farm could help contribute toward locally sourced

employment during the construction, operational and decommissioning phases. A

community fund of up to £20,000 per annum and a one off low carbon fund for

energy saving technologies in local homes and public buildings will be set up in

association with the development for the long-term benefit local communities.

5.1.2 The proposed development complies with all specific relevant policies of the

Development Plan and with the Development Plan as a whole. Other material

planning considerations, including central government renewable energy policy,

planning policy and the national imperative to reducing the emissions of greenhouse

gases weigh strongly in favour of the grant of planning permission. There are no other

material considerations which indicate that the application should be refused planning

permission.

© Entec UK Limited

Appendix 1 Figures

© Entec UK Limited

E.ON Climate & Renewables UK Developments Ltd

Chiplow Wind Farm

Design and Access Statement

May 2010

Entec UK Limited

Copyright and Non-Disclosure Notice

The contents and layout of this report are subject to copyright

owned by Entec (© Entec UK Limited 2010) save to the extent

that copyright has been legally assigned by us to another party or

is used by Entec under licence. To the extent that we own the

copyright in this report, it may not be copied or used without our

prior written agreement for any purpose other than the purpose

indicated in this report.

The methodology (if any) contained in this report is provided to

you in confidence and must not be disclosed or copied to third

parties without the prior written agreement of Entec. Disclosure of

that information may constitute an actionable breach of confidence

or may otherwise prejudice our commercial interests. Any third

party who obtains access to this report by any means will, in any

event, be subject to the Third Party Disclaimer set out below.

Third Party Disclaimer

Any disclosure of this report to a third party is subject to this

disclaimer. The report was prepared by Entec at the instruction of,

and for use by, our client named on the front of the report. It does

not in any way constitute advice to any third party who is able to

access it by any means. Entec excludes to the fullest extent

lawfully permitted all liability whatsoever for any loss or damage

howsoever arising from reliance on the contents of this report. We

do not however exclude our liability (if any) for personal injury or

death resulting from our negligence, for fraud or any other matter

in relation to which we cannot legally exclude liability.

i

v:\ea-210\26098 chiplow wind farm\es\final es and application docs\design and access\d & a statement.doc © Entec UK Limited May 2010

Contents

1. Introduction 1

1.1 Background 1

1.2 Methodology 1

1.3 Wind Power 2

1.4 Chiplow Wind Farm 3

2. Site Identification 5

2.1 Site Location 5

2.2 Site Review Criteria 5

2.3 Compatibility of the Chiplow Site with Site Review Criteria 6

3. Design Influences 9

3.1 Introduction 9

3.2 Wind Farm Design Criteria 9

3.3 Planning Policy Context 10

3.4 Design Guidance 11

3.5 Consultation 12

4. Design Evolution 15

4.1 General Design Principles 15

4.2 Chiplow Wind Farm Design Considerations and Iterations 17

5. Access 21

5.1 Introduction 21

5.2 Existing Highway Environment 21

5.3 Development Requirements 22


ii


1


1. Introduction

1.1 Background

1.1.1 In May 2006 the Government introduced changes to the Town and Country planning

process. Section 42 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act, 2004 substitutes a

new section 62 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to provide that a

statement covering design concepts and access issues is submitted with an application

for planning permission.

1.1.2 This Design and Access Statement has been produced in accordance with the

Department for Communities and Local Government (DLCG) Circular 01/2006

‘Guidance on Changes to the Development Control System’, and with reference to the

Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment publication ‘Design and

Access Statements – how to write, read and use them’ (2006). It accompanies a

planning application submitted by E.ON Climate & Renewables UK Developments

Ltd (EC&R) ‘the Applicant’ for a proposed wind farm on land to the west of

Syderstone, in the Kings Lynn and West Norfolk district of North West Norfolk. The

planning application is accompanied by two other key documents, these being the

Environmental Statement and the Planning and Community Involvement Statement.

1.1.3 This Design and Access Statement explains the design rationale for the proposed wind

farm, providing an explanation of the design principles and concepts that have

informed the proposed development (as described in Chapter 4 of the ES), and how

transport and access issues have been taken into consideration. The Design and

Access Statement is set out as follows:

• Chapter 1: Introduction - provides background information on Design and

Access Statements, renewables and the proposed wind farm site;

• Chapter 2: Site Identification - provides a description of the site review process;

• Chapter 3: Design Influences - outlines the main influences that have guided the

wind farm design process, including planning policy guidelines and consultation;

• Chapter 4: Design Evolution - presents the evolutionary process of designing the

proposed wind farm layout and explains how the design guidelines outlined in

chapter 3 have been applied to the site. This chapter summarises factors that were

considered in the development of the design and provides the eventual design

solution; and

• Chapter 5: Access - considers the issues associated with transportation and access.

1.2 Methodology

1.2.1 The design process involved in formulating the layout of the proposed Chiplow Wind

Farm has been led by a combination of engineering requirements and environmental

2


considerations in order to produce an appropriate layout in terms of function and

energy yield whilst seeking to avoid or reduce environmental effects. The Design and

Access Statement is seen as having an important role in contributing to the design

process through the clear documentation of design evolution.

1.2.2 The proposed wind farm has been developed with environmental considerations at the

forefront of both site selection and design. This is demonstrated through a site

selection process that ensures sufficient buffer zones from relevant potential

constraints including residential properties and potentially sensitive ecological

receptors. Other factors that have guided the site design have included the

consideration of planning policy, the management practices of the landowner, existing

infrastructure and the views and opinions of the public.

1.2.3 A detailed understanding of the existing environment (including land use, highway

infrastructure, ecology, hydrology and water quality, ornithology, noise and

archaeology) aided in the design process via a constraints map which was

subsequently discussed during design team meetings. This has ensured a holistic

design approach to the proposed wind farm.

1.3 Wind Power

1.3.1 It is now widely accepted that one of the primary causes of climate change is the

emission of large volumes of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gases into

the atmosphere by burning fossil fuels, such as coal, oil and gas. Reducing the use of

fossil fuels and increasing the proportion of power generated from renewable energy

sources is seen as having a vital role in reducing these emissions and slowing climate

change (as well as slowing the world wide effects it has on sea levels, water supplies

and agricultural patterns).

1.3.2 In spring 2007 the EU heads of Government agreed to a binding target of 20% of the

EU’s energy consumption to come from renewable sources by 2020. This target was

agreed by European Parliament in December 2008. Each member state has therefore

agreed to a binding target ranging from 10% to 49%, of which the UK’s target is 15%.

These binding targets have now been included within the EU Directive 2009/28/EC

and the deadline for implementation is the 5th December. Under this Directive the UK

also has to submit a National Action Plan to the European Commission by the end of

June 2010, detailing how it will meet its obligations.

1.3.3 The UK Renewable Energy Strategy was published in July 2009 and is aimed at

reaching the goal of 15% of energy from renewables by 2020. The lead scenario of the

strategy could see: more than 30% of our electricity generated from renewables; 12%

of our heat generated from renewables, and; 10% of transport energy from renewables.

It is expected that the majority of this growth would come from wind power, through

the deployment of more onshore and offshore wind turbines1.

1.3.4 The Regional Spatial Strategy, the East of England Plan was adopted in 2008 and sets

the regional framework for development plans in East Anglia for the period to 2021.

Policy ENG2 sets a target of 10% of the regions energy coming from renewable

1 Pg 42, UK Renewable Energy Strategy, July 2009

3


energy sources by 2010, and 17% by 2020. These targets equate to 820 MW by 2010

and 1620MW by 2020 (excluding energy from offshore wind) and are subject to

meeting European and International obligations to protect wildlife.

1.4 Chiplow Wind Farm

1.4.1 The Applicant is seeking planning permission to construct and operate a wind farm of

five wind turbines, together with associated infrastructure including access tracks, an

anemometry mast, control building and underground connection to the electricity

distribution network. Each turbine would consist of a tubular steel tower supporting

three blades on a hub at a height of up to 60m, with an overall maximum height to

blade tip of 100m. While the final total installed capacity could be higher depending

upon the final wind turbine selected, it has been assumed that this will be 10MW for

the purposes of the assessment (based on five 2MW machines). Based on a 2MW

machine, the proposed five turbine development would generate enough electricity to

power approximately 5,600 homes nationally2.

1.4.2 It is widely accepted that electricity produced from wind energy has a positive benefit

compared to traditional forms of electricity generation in terms of reducing emissions

of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. The actual amount of CO2 that

is saved by using wind power has been a matter of debate because of changes in the

energy mix and cleaner fossil fuel technologies being introduced over time. However,

in any event it is predicted that Chiplow Wind Farm will help prevent the release of

many thousands of tonnes of CO2. In producing an estimate of the quantities of CO2

saved, using an assumption that electricity from wind power would offset that

produced from a coal fired power station, this would see a reduction in emissions of

CO2 of around 11,3003 tonnes per year.

1.4.3 The wind farm will be operational for up to 25 years and will include site management

to ensure the adequate maintenance of site facilities such as roads, boundaries, gates

and signage. At the end of the operational life of the turbines, the wind farm would be

decommissioned unless alternative options are sought such as further planning

consents.

2 Based on 30% load factor, average annual domestic usage of 4.7MWh/year (Digest of UK Energy Statistics, 2004) and grid

electricity converting factor of 430Kg CO2/MWh (DEFRA).


4


5


2. Site Identification

2.1 Site Location

2.1.1 The Chiplow site is located on lowland arable farmland between the villages of

Bagthorpe, Barmer and Syderstone in the King’s Lynn and West Norfolk District of

North West Norfolk (see ES Figure 1.1 in Appendix 1). The central grid co-ordinate

for the site is TF 812 321. The topography of the site undulates between 50 to 70m

above sea level and is predominantly under arable with associated hedgerows and

scattered woodland blocks. In the centre of the site are some farm buildings and

storage containers, which are known as White House Farm. A farm track runs east to

west across the site, while the access track from the public highway runs north to

south. Mixed plantations of coniferous and deciduous varieties screen much of the

site.

2.2 Site Review Criteria

2.2.1 The careful review of potential wind farm sites is a crucial aspect of the overall

development process. The applicant uses a phased site development approach

whereby potential wind turbine sites are initially screened through a combination of

site visits and surveys, use of computer-based Geographical Information Systems

(GIS) to identify local/regional/national site designations and constraints, review of

planning policy and through direct consultation with key statutory consultees and

authorities. This screening exercise allows the early identification of key technical,

environmental and planning issues associated with each site which could either rule it

out, or point towards further detailed studies and consultation which need to be

undertaken as part of further phases of work in order to establish whether or not the

site is feasible for wind farm development.

2.2.2 The Chiplow site was originally identified as having potential for a wind farm in early

2006. This was initiated after E.ON was contacted by the landowner of the site.

Subsequent initial investigations by EC&R considered the feasibility of the site by

applying various site review criteria. The site was assessed against the following

criteria:

• land use and context: the existing land use and environmental or planning

designations;

• wind resource: the wind resource on the site;

• electricity grid: proximity to electricity grid and its likely capacity;

• transport infrastructure: proximity to public road infrastructure for construction,

operation & maintenance;

• residential amenity: proximity to dwellings and settlements;

6


• landscape and visual capacity: potential effects of wind turbines on landscapes and

visual effects; and

• military and aviation constraints: potential effect of wind turbines on military and

aviation function.

2.2.3 The outcome of EC&R initial screening and feasibility investigations for the Chiplow

site highlighted that:

• Land Use and Context: the site itself was not subject to any statutory planning or

environmental designations;

• Wind Resource: there was likely to be good wind resource potential to make the

site economically viable;

• Electrical Connection: there were potential connection options on the EDF Energy

electrical grid system;

• Transport Infrastructure: proximity to public road infrastructure for construction,

operation and maintenance was good;

• Residential Amenity: the site was of reasonable distance (at least 600m) from the

nearest residential dwellings; and

• Military and Aviation Constraints: the potential effect of wind turbines on military

and aviation function was not likely to present a constraint.

2.2.4 On the basis of applying these criteria, it was determined that the site showed potential

for a wind farm and warranted further detailed environmental and technical

assessment.

2.3 Compatibility of the Chiplow Site with Site Review Criteria

Land Use and Context

2.3.1 A range of potential constraints were considered in the identification of the Chiplow

the site. Initial investigations revealed there were no direct conflicts with National,

Regional or Local designations including inter alia World Heritage sites, and National

Parks. Further compatibility in land use terms can be demonstrated through reference

to the study undertaken by Land Use Consultants titled “Wind Turbine Development:

Landscape Assessment, Evaluation and Guidance” (Land Use Consultants, August

2003). This study categorised the site as having ‘high capacity’ for a wind farm

development of the size proposed.

Wind Resource

2.3.2 The Applicant’s initial wind resource assessment was based on a wind analysis

completed by Power Technology (the operating name of E.ON’s energy engineering

centre at that time). This analysis predicted wind speeds and energy yields for the

proposed Chiplow Wind Farm using long term wind speed/direction data (from 1975

7


to 2000) from RAF Marham (located approximately 25km to the south west of the

site). This indicated that the wind resource at the site was appropriate to make the

development of a wind farm at Chiplow commercially viable.

Electrical Connection

2.3.3 The wind turbines are anticipated to be connected to the Coxford Primary Substation.

EDF Energy has provided an indicative grid connection route that would run

underground from the site to the B1454 and then south eastwards alongside the west

side kerb of the B1454 to Coxford Primary. This anticipated connection route has

been assessed in the ES.

Transport Infrastructure

2.3.4 Based on the results of an access study undertaken by Entec UK in December 2006,

the preferred route for transporting wind turbines and construction materials to the site

is from the A47 at King's Lynn, then continuing northeast on the A149, then taking the

A148 towards Fakenham and then left onto the B1454 towards Syderstone. A left turn

is required onto an unclassified road towards Bircham Tofts from which access to the

site is then taken.

Residential Amenity

2.3.5 In order to ensure that the residential amenity of surrounding properties is protected a

constraints map was produced that placed a precautionary 600m buffer zone around all

residential properties around the site. There are no wind turbines or associated

infrastructure proposed within 600m of any residential properties.

Military and Aviation Constraints

2.3.6 The Ministry of Defence (MOD), Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) and National Air

Traffic Services (NATS) were all sent letters in January 2006 informing them of the

proposed development site. The CAA raised no objections or observations on the

proposal. NATS identified a possible effect on the performance of Cromer radar and,

as a result of this, the Applicant appointed Pager Power Ltd, a consultancy that

specialises in aviation and communication studies for wind farms, to assess the

potential significance of the effect. The study undertaken by Pager Power considered

the likely operational effects of the proposed wind farm on the provision of en-route

air traffic services from NATS En-Route plc (NERL). An analysis of significant

airspace in the vicinity of the site was conducted and an assessment made of En-Route

plc’s (NERL) likely concerns. An estimation was provided by Pager Power regarding

the likelihood of a sustained NERL objection. Following the full technical and

operational assessment undertaken by Pager Power they advised that “there is a low

risk of NATS/NERL objecting to a wind farm at this location ….”. The report

produced by Pager Power in included in the ES at Appendix 14A.

2.3.7 Initial consultation with the MOD raised concerns regarding a tip height of 126.5m,

leading to a reduction in turbine height to 100m. The MOD was subsequently re-

consulted in 2006 in relation to the reduced height to blade tip and did not respond.

However, as a result of the reduction in the height of turbines and an assessment of the

8


screening of the site from RAF Marham (25km to the SW) by topography and

woodland cover, it was considered that the proposed wind farm would not

significantly affect radar operations4.

Conclusion

2.3.8 EC&R’s approach to site selection, which was consistently applied, is consistent with

the relevant policies and indicated that the site had sufficient merit to warrant detailed

study. On the basis of the practical, technical and environmental constraints to

development identified in the early stages of the project, the proposed site was judged

to offer a good opportunity for wind farm development and detailed studies were

undertaken culminating the planning application and Environmental Statement.

4MOD have subsequently objected to the proposed wind farm following a re-consultation exercise in 2009 and further investigations

have been commissioned by EC&R, details of which are provided in paragraphs 3.2.47 and 3.2.50 of the Planning Statement which

accompanies the ES.

9


3. Design Influences

3.1 Introduction

3.1.1 Once a site has been reviewed, the design of the wind farm is optimised in order to

produce a layout which maximises the use of the land available for wind power

generation, balancing this against the overall environmental, social and economic

effects of the proposed development. Optimising the layout of a wind farm depends

on a range of technical, economic, planning and environmental criteria.

3.2 Wind Farm Design Criteria

3.2.1 The technical, economic, planning and environmental criteria considered are as

follows:

• Ground conditions: ground conditions must be suitable for the installation of wind

turbines, access tracks and cables;

• Distance between turbines: to minimise the turbulent interaction between wind

turbines (wake effect), turbines should be separated by set distances both

perpendicular to, and in line with, the prevailing wind direction. Spacing

requirements may vary between turbine manufacturers and prevailing wind

conditions. This design feature is a key factor in maximising the overall power

generating capacity of a site;

• Proximity to occupied dwellings: wind turbines have to be located sufficiently far

away from houses to protect residential amenity in relation to issues such as noise;

• Environmental constraints: features and areas of local environmental sensitivity

(ecology, archaeology, hydrology etc) are identified and their implications

considered. The principle of incorporating inherent mitigation through proposal

design is applied, such that effects were avoided or minimised. Wherever

practicable, environmental enhancement is undertaken, for example increasing the

overall length of hedgerow on the site, thus going beyond effects mitigation toward

net environmental gain;

• Landscape and visual: landscape and visual design considerations are taken into

account and, where appropriate, the layout modified accordingly;

• Existing land use: whilst the wind turbines and their associated infrastructure

typically occupy no more than 5% of the development site, the existing use of the

land is considered in the layout of tracks and turbines. For example, existing track

lines are used where practicable;

• Proximity to obstructions: such as tall trees or buildings which can create

turbulence in the air flow and reduce the power generated from the site;

10


• Existing services/infrastructure: existing services and infrastructure such as

pipelines and telecommunication links can be affected by wind turbines. It is

therefore necessary to take into account the presence of such services/infrastructure

when designing a wind farm.

3.2.2 Further information on how these criteria have been applied to the site is described in

Chapter 4. In addition to the above considerations, planning guidance and discussion

with statutory and non-statutory consultees, the local communities and the landowners

also have an influence over the evolution of the design.

3.3 Planning Policy Context

National Guidance

3.3.1 National planning guidance and advice was taken into account in designing the

proposed Chiplow Wind Farm. Planning Policy Statements considered included:

• PPS 1 - Delivering Sustainable Development;

• PPS 22 – Renewable Energy; and

• PPS 7 – Sustainable Development in Rural Areas.

3.3.2 There is then a series of PPGs/PPS’s dealing with specific technical topics that need to

be taken into account on a proposal of this type. More information on relevant

PPGs/PPS’s can be found in the Planning Statement and Chapter 5 of the Chiplow

Wind Farm ES. The following sections highlight policies where the design of the site

is a consideration (it is not however, an exhaustive list that the proposal will be

assessed against).

Regional Spatial Strategy

3.3.3 The East of England Plan Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS), was adopted in 2008 and

sets out the regional strategy for planning and development in the East of England to

the year 2021. It sets out policies which address the needs of the region and key sub-

regions; the following are relevant to the design of the project:

• WAT4 – Flood Risk Management;

• Paragraph 8.2 – Principles for the Management of the East of England’s natural,

built and historic environment;

• ENV2 – Landscape Conservation;

• ENV3 – Biodiversity and Earth Heritage; and

• ENV6 – The Historic Environment.

Local Authority Development Plan

3.3.4 The relevant Local Development Plan for the area is made up of the ‘saved’ policies

of the: Kings Lynn and West Norfolk Local Plan; Norfolk Structure Plan; and Norfolk

11


Minerals Local Plan, as well as the Kings Lynn and West Norfolk Statement of

Community Involvement. The ‘saved’ policies within the Structure Plan and Local

Plan will eventually be replaced by and the Local Development Framework in

accordance with the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act (2004). Nonetheless, the

Kings Lynn and West Norfolk Local Plan contains the following ‘saved’ policies

which are relevant to the design of the site:

• Policy 4/6 – Areas of Important Landscape Quality;

• Policy 4/14 – Development adjoining conservation areas; and

3.3.5 There are no relevant ‘saved’ policies within the Norfolk County Structure Plan or the

Norfolk Minerals Local Plan that relate to design or access.

3.4 Design Guidance

3.4.1 The Design and Access Statement has been prepared with reference to a number of

‘best practice’ documents and in particular, the following publications and guidelines:

• Scottish Natural Heritage, 2001, Guidelines on Environmental Impacts of Wind

farms and Small Scale Hydro Electric Schemes;

• Scottish Natural Heritage Advisory Services Landscape Group, 4th Draft May

2004, Guidance for the Assessment of Cumulative Landscape and Visual Impacts

Arising from Wind farm Developments;

• The Landscape Institute, Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment,

2002, Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment, Second Edition;

• University of Newcastle, 2002, Visual Assessment for Wind farms: Best Practice,

SNH, Report No F01AA303A;

• University of Sheffield and Landuse Consultants, 2002, Landscape Character

Assessment: Guidance for England and Scotland (Countryside Agency and SNH

publication);

• The Countryside Agency, Planning Principles for Landscape, Access and

Recreation, Moving on from ‘Planning Tomorrow’s Countryside’, June 2005;

• The Countryside Agency, North East Region Briefing Note – Treatment of

Landscape, Access and Recreation Issues in Environmental Impact Assessment

(The Countryside Agency North East Regional Office, in association with Chris

Blandford Associates), February 2005;

• Planning Policy Statement 22, Renewable Energy, Office of the Deputy Prime

Minister, 2004;

• Scottish Natural Heritage, ‘Visual Representation of Wind Farms - Good Practice

Guidance, 29. March 2006 (Published March 2007), Horner & Maclennan and

Envision.

12


The Countryside Commission

3.4.2 Vol.6 of the Countryside Commission Landscape Character Assessment relates to the

East England region. The design of the site has had regard to the key characteristics

of landscape character areas (LCA) 76 –North West Norfolk. However, this landscape

character assessment does not offer any specific design guidance with regards to wind

farm development.

Kings Lynn and West Norfolk Borough Council

3.4.3 Landscape Character Assessment (March 2007) provides a comprehensive assessment

of the entire Borough, the proposed Chiplow Wind Farm sitting within the Bagthorpe

and Bircham LCAs. The earlier (2003) Wind Turbine Development Study undertaken

by Land Use Consultants provides details of the borough in terms of the capacity of

areas for development of wind turbines at a variety of numerical scales.

3.5 Consultation

3.5.1 EC&R has undertaken a comprehensive programme of consultation to ensure that key

stakeholders are fully aware and involved in the development and progress of the

proposals. Consultation can also be valuable in identifying potential issues/constraints

that could influence the design of the wind farm. The public consultation programme

can be briefly summarised to include the following activities;

• Key stakeholders were sent an introductory mailing in September 2006, which was

then followed by a second mailing in February 2007;

• Newsletters were sent to the community (defined as all households living in

parishes that fall within 3km from the Chiplow site boundary) in February 2007

and June 2007. The June 2007 newsletter was accompanied by an invite to the

public exhibition, which was held at Amy Robsart (Syderstone) Village Hall on

14th and 15

th June 2007.

• Initial contact was also made with the Local Planning Authority at an early stage of

the project’s development. The scoping stage was undertaken through a

combination of informal consultation discussions, formal scoping meetings and a

formal scoping opinion. A Scoping Report was submitted to the Borough Council

of King’s Lynn and West Norfolk on 13 December 2006 with a request for a

formal Scoping Opinion. The response to this request was issued on 13 March

2007 (presented in full in Appendix B of the ES);

• A ‘scoping meeting’ was held on 10 May 2007 between the Applicant, Entec UK

Ltd, King’s Lynn and West Norfolk Council and Norfolk County Council

(Landscape Architect). The meeting served in particular to discuss the design

evolution of the development and the scope and methodology of the landscape and

visual assessment. Further meetings between Entec and the LPA took place at the

beginning of October 2007;

• A wide range of statutory and non-statutory organisations were consulted prior to

and after submission of the Scoping Report in order to gain agreement from all key

13


parties regarding the proposed EIA methodology and to invite comments on

relevant environmental information.

3.5.2 It should be noted that the submission of the final ES was delayed to allow further

winter bird surveys to be undertaken by Entec UK Ltd (Entec) during autumn 2008 and

winter 2008/09. This was in response to the potential impact of the proposed wind farm

on wintering geese being raised during the lead up to the planning appeal in June 2008

for the on site meteorological mast (Appeal Ref:APP/V2635/A/07/2060273). Taking

into account current interim guidance from Natural England relating to assessments of

the potential impacts of wind farms on bats, further bat activity surveys were also

undertaken by Entec in 2009 to supplement the results of the surveys undertaken in

2007 by Bureau Veritas.

3.5.3 However, as there have been no substantive change to the design of the wind farm, it

was not considered necessary to undertake additional consultation work. The survey

results of winter 08/09 and the draft Ecology and Ornithology ES chapter were however

discussed in a meeting with Natural England in February 2009 (there was no case

officer in post at RSPB at the time, but the former RSPB case officer also attended the

meeting in their new role with Natural England).

3.5.4 Consultation with Key Stakeholders will continue following submission of the planning

application.

14


15


4. Design Evolution

4.1 General Design Principles

4.1.1 The process of EIA plays an integral part in the design of a wind farm site as it enables

technical constraints to be identified which then influence the location of wind

turbines. The evolution of the design of the proposed Chiplow Wind Farm has been

informed by matters such as stand off distances from residential properties, public

roads and footpaths. This process allows the turbines to be sited in the most

appropriate locations while minimising environmental impacts.

4.1.2 A starting point when designing a wind farm site is the production of a constraints

plan (see Appendix 1 ES Figure 2.1) which incorporates relevant buffer distances, key

features and other factors that could potentially constrain the location of turbines and

other infrastructure. In the case of Chiplow, this led to the following considerations

for the layout design:

• 140m buffer zone around Orange link running through the site;

• 50m buffer zone around known on-site clay pits/ponds;

• 45m buffer zone within the site boundary (oversailing distance from the site

boundary);

• a minimum 110m buffer zone from existing Public Rights of Way (PRoWs);

• a minimum 50m buffer zone between blade tip and woodland/hedgerows in line

with Natural England bat/wind farm guidance (NE 2009);

• 600m buffer from potential noise receptors; and

• To minimise the turbulent interaction between wind turbines (wake effect), which

is a key factor in maximising the overall power generating capacity of a site,

turbines were also separated by set distances both in line with the prevailing wind

direction and perpendicular to it (in the case of Chiplow, this being 5 x 4 rotor

diameters).

Relevant Planning Policies

4.1.3 The planning policies identified in section 3.2 have been taken into consideration in

the site selection process and also subsequently, where relevant, in the design of the

proposed development.

Public Consultations

4.1.4 The public consultation exercise detailed in section 3.5 is often a useful tool in

informing site design, however, in this instance no issues arising from the public

exhibition have influenced the design of the site.

16


Land Use

4.1.5 In the development of the proposed wind farm layout consideration has been given to

minimising agricultural land loss and to minimising adverse effects on farming

practices during the construction and operation of the wind farm.

Noise

4.1.6 In February 2007 Entec UK Ltd consulted with the Environmental Health Officer

(EHO) of King's Lynn and West Norfolk Borough Council and agreed the

methodology of the noise assessment and the selection of monitoring locations. Noise

monitoring was completed at four locations near to residential properties surrounding

the proposed site and a noise assessment conducted in accordance with the

Government’s guidelines for the assessment and rating of noise from wind farms; the

ETSU-R-97 guidelines. The results show that noise levels from the proposed wind

turbines at Chiplow would fall well within the acceptable noise limits at all of the

surrounding properties as well as those households further away.

Ecology and Ornithology

4.1.7 A comprehensive programme of desk study (including consultation) and survey was

carried out during the EIA to identify possible constraints that could be taken into

account in the layout design to mitigate any adverse effects.

Archaeology and Cultural Heritage

4.1.8 The studies undertaken as part of the EIA have revealed no recorded archaeological

features within the site boundary, there are a number of scheduled monuments within

the area surrounding the site, most of which are Prehistoric burial mounds. Houghton

Hall Historic Park (Grade I listed) is located approximately 3km to the south of the

site but the presence of mature trees in the locality is likely to screen views of turbines

from the majority of these sites.

Geology & Hydrogeology

4.1.9 The site lies between the River Burn (to the north) and the River Tat (to the south) and

is underlain by Sand & Gravel deposits, beneath this strata is Chalk, which is

designated as a major aquifer. Measures will be adopted as part of the development to

protect the water environment and these will focus on the protection of water quality

in the Chalk ground waters. The Environment Agency has designated a flood zone to

the east of the site, within the catchment of the River Burn. It is considered that this

flood zone would not be affected by the proposed development.

Landscape and Visual

4.1.10 The layout design of the wind farm has been largely determined by the technical

constraints on the site. However, the principal landscape design objectives of the

Chiplow Wind Farm remain, as assessed within the LVIA, as follows:

17


• Develop the wind farm and associated infrastructure designed to respond to the

local landscape character and provide an acceptable design solution in terms of

scale, layout and visual composition;

• The aim of the design process is to achieve a simple, balanced, rational, and

coherent image that may be viewed as an acceptable or positive component of the

visual composition;

• Minimise landscape and visual effects on views from local residents and

communities;

• Minimise landscape and visual effects from recreational areas/routes, designated

landscapes; and

• Minimise landscape and visual effects from main transport routes.

4.2 Chiplow Wind Farm Design Considerations and Iterations

Noise

4.2.1 The initial six turbine layout was assessed to determine whether noise levels at

sensitive receptors would be within acceptable limits. Existing noise levels were

measured at the nearest receptors to the proposed wind farm which were Bagthorpe

Hall, Frizzleton Farm, Finchdean and near to North Cottage. Noise levels were

measured for a six week period and were also correlated with wind speed data to

determine the 'average' background noise level at wind speeds of up to 12m/s in

accordance with The Assessment and Rating of Noise from Wind Farms (ETSU-R-97)

(Department of Trade and Industry, 1996).

4.2.2 As a result of these findings the number of wind turbines proposed was reduced from

a six turbine scheme to five, resulting in a proposed layout with predicted noise levels

within recommended limits.

Radar

4.2.3 Consultation with the MoD revealed that turbines heights of 126.5m were likely to

have adverse effects on the functioning of the radar at RAF Marham. MoD advised

that reducing the height of wind turbines was likely to overcome their concerns.

Based on this consultation, the maximum height proposed for the wind turbines was

identified as 100m.

Landscape and Visual Composition

4.2.4 The ‘Guidelines on the Environmental Impacts of Wind farms and Small Scale

Hydroelectric Schemes’ published by Scottish Natural Heritage advise on the

following design criteria which would be appropriate to this site location:

• Retention of ‘simplicity of image’, by relating the layout design to the underlying

landscape character;

18


• Relating scale of wind farm and turbine size to the existing landscape scale and

character aiming to achieve a ‘sensitive, sculptural and simple’ effect that appears

rational to the landscape setting;

• In the case of cumulative effects, a simple image may be retained by ‘all being of a

similar image and relationship in the landscape’; and

• Further guidance is provided on the design and layout of roads and ancillary

development

4.2.5 The landscape and visual assessment was assessed against the new five wind turbine

layout and there was no noticeable difference in relation to landscape and visual

issues.

Turbine Colour

4.2.6 From most viewpoints the turbines would be viewed against the background sky. For

these reasons the turbines are proposed to be coloured pale grey with a semi-matt

finish to reduce their contrast with the background sky. The turbines would be

uniform in colour and would not support company logos or similar. Transformers

would be located within turbine towers or externally alongside at the base of each

turbine tower. This detail is dependent on the model selected through a competitive

procurement process.

Turbine Movement

4.2.7 The turbines will introduce movement to the landscape, however, the movement will

be slow and regular with each machine turning at the same speed and in the same

direction. The rotation speed will range 6 to 18 rpm and will be slower than the

rotation speed of smaller turbines.

Telecommunications

4.2.8 Additional issues arising that led to design iterations were based on consultation with

CSS Spectrum and Anglian Water. These consultations revealed that there was a

number of scanning telemetry links running across/nearby the site that belong to

Anglian Water. Further consultation with Anglian Water highlighted that there are

three links that run across or near to the site and that, broadly speaking, the links run

in a north west to south east direction. This information resulted in minor

amendments to the layout of the five wind turbine scheme.

Ecology

4.2.9 Additional bat survey work was in part undertaken in response to the recent

publication of Natural England’s guidance notes on bats and onshore wind farms

(2008 & 2009). This guidance advices that a 50m buffer should be maintained around

‘bat-friendly features’ such as hedgerows into which no part of the turbine intrudes.

As a result, the positions of the turbines were reviewed in 2009 and two of the turbines

(2 and 5) were relocated slightly to achieve this 50m stand-off.

19


4.2.10 The final proposed location of the turbines, access tracks and other associated

infrastructure, in relation to the identified environmental constraints is shown in

Appendix 1 ES Figure 2.1

20


21


5. Access

5.1 Introduction

5.1.1 This part of the statement is intended to demonstrate the issues and options considered

during the development of the proposals to ensure that the transport and construction

of the wind farm causes the minimum disruption to the highway network and highway

safety. Traffic and Transport has been considered in detail in Chapter 10 of the

Environmental Statement.

5.1.2 There is one access point to the development site. The site access track linking wind

turbines and other infrastructure is shown in Appendix 1 ES Figure 1.2. Access to the

development site and the accompanying track layout has been designed to

accommodate the range of vehicles anticipated during the construction and operation

of the proposed wind farm, the largest anticipated vehicles are Heavy Goods Vehicles5

(HGVs) required to deliver or replace the turbine components.

5.1.3 It should be noted that there are no existing rights of public access to the site and no

proposal for such provision as part of the development. Therefore consideration of

inclusive access and vehicular and transport limits with regard to the general public

have not been considered further.

5.2 Existing Highway Environment

5.2.1 Based on the initial access study, the results of the desk-study and the visual

inspection, the preferred route to the site is from the A47(T) at King’s Lynn. This

route assumes that vehicles exit the A47(T) and travel northeast on the A149, carrying

straight-ahead at the roundabout junction with the B1145. A right turn is then

required onto the A148 towards Fakenham, following which a left turn is required

onto the B1454 towards Syderstone. A left turn is then made onto the unclassified

road towards Bircham Tofts, from which access to the site is then taken.

5.2.2 This route to the site does not incorporate any structures passing over the highway

which are subject to signed height restrictions. The only features that may present a

vertical clearance issue are telephone cables and power transmission lines that span

the carriageway at various points along the route. However, given that there are no

hazard signs in place, it is assumed that a minimum vertical clearance of 4.95m is

available at all points on the route. Limited trimming of tree branches alongside the

route may also be required to allow the loads to overhang adjacent land if necessary.

Any such works would only be able to be confirmed close to the time of deliveries

after inspecting the route.

5

Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGVs) are defined as goods vehicles exceeding a gross vehicle weight of 7.5t

22


5.3 Development Requirements

Construction Phase – Delivery of Materials

5.3.1 During the construction phase the main transport movements will be associated with

the movements of commercial HGVs to and from the site. Vehicles will be associated

with delivering turbine components, cabling, aggregate, sand, concrete and the

movement of site workers to and from the site.

Operational Phase – Delivery of Spare Parts, Maintenance, etc

5.3.2 Once the development is operational, it is envisaged that the amount of traffic

associated with the scheme would be minimal. Occasional visits may be made to the

site for maintenance activities. The vehicle used for these visits is likely to be a 4x4 or

similar and there may be an occasional need for a HGV to access the site for

maintenance/repairs.

Decommissioning Phase

5.3.3 It is assumed that the turbines will be dismantled and removed at the end of their

operational life. HGVs will be required to remove equipment and materials from the

site. Traffic would be similar in nature to the construction phase but on a smaller

scale.

Public Access and Transportation Links

5.3.4 It is intended that the wind turbines, control building and other infrastructure on site

will only be accessed by construction personnel and maintenance teams who will

periodically attend the site to, for example, carry out routine maintenance and

servicing of turbines. It is not intended that the wind farm turbines and associated

infrastructure will be accessed by the general public.

Access Design Process

5.3.5 Preliminary assessments of the ability of the potential delivery routes to accommodate

the large components that make up the wind turbines have been undertaken. A GIS

swept path analysis assessment was undertaken to identify if the delivery route can

accommodate the swept path of the abnormal load delivery vehicles carrying

components such as the turbine blades and nacelle. This type of analysis is

consequently used to identify any necessary accommodation works. In addition,

preliminary design work for the main site entrance and access track was undertaken.

5.3.6 This initial work identified that the development site was capable of accommodating

the delivery of large turbine components (such as blades) along the preferred route

outlined in 5.2.1.

Design Evaluation

5.3.7 The design of the proposed development has taken into consideration the movement

and subsequent access of vehicles involved with the construction and operation of the

wind farm. The initial site selection considered potential access restrictions associated

23


with the movement of vehicles required to transport large turbine components, such as

blades, and this was subject to a further assessment using detailed topographical

survey information.

5.3.8 The internal access roads have been designed to take into consideration technical and

environmental constraints. The layout for the site access roads has been designed to

meet engineering constraints of gradient, drainage, and vehicle turning circle

requirements. All access tracks have been located as close to field boundaries as

possible and their length kept to a minimum, in order to minimise the potential

disruption to ongoing agricultural management and land loss. In addition, advantage

has been taken of established or natural breaks in hedgerows and other field

boundaries when identifying access points from public roads. All site tracks have

been located in areas identified during the EIA as not being environmentally sensitive.

24


© Entec UK Limited


© Entec UK Limited