Development No Weeks on Parish Ward Listed By: Management Day Of

Development No weeks on Parish Ward Listed by: Management day of Ref No committee F/2010/2266 29/16 Arborfield and Arborfield, and Head of Newland, Shinfield South Development Shinfield Wards Management Applicant Partnerships for Renewables Location Land at Rushy Mead South of Lower Earley Way (Uppetwood Farm) Shinfield RG2 9,414 Proposal The proposed erection, 25 year operation and subsequent decommissioning of a wind energy development comprising of the following elements: Four wind turbines, each with a maximum overall height (to vertical blade tip) of up to 130 metres, together with new and upgraded access tracks temporary works, hardstanding areas, control and metering, building, cabling, improved vehicular access from Cutbush Lane and the A327, an anemometry mast and compensatory flood storage. Type Other largescale major development PS Category 6 Officer Laura Callan FOR CONSIDERATION BY Planning committee on 27 April 201 1 REPORT PREPARED BY Head of Development Management SUMMARY The proposal is to erect 4 wind turbines up to a height of 130m (from ground level to vertical blade tip) and 80m to centre of hublnacelle. The development would also involve the creation of new and upgraded access tracks and hardstanding areas to allow construction, access and maintenance. In order to access the site with abnormal loads works to the public highway would be required. An anemometry mast 80m high would also be required on the site to allow continued monitoring of wind speed data. The development is proposed to have a 25 year operation. The proposal is considered to require an Environmental Impact Assessment under the Environmental lmpact Assessment regulations. An assessment has been submitted and given due consideration. National Planning Policy such as PPSl and PPS 22 advises that increased development of renewable energy resources is vital in order to deliver the governments commitments to reduce emissions and tackle climate change. PPS22 advises that renewable energy projects should be capable of being accommodated throughout England in locations where the technology is viable and environmental, economic and social impacts can be addressed satisfactorily. A balance has to be struck between the need for renewable energy and potential harm to environment and amenity. The proposed development would generate between 15.7 and 21.9 GWh of electricity and would contribute to approximately 5% of the sub-regional renewable energy target as set out in South East Plan Policy NRM14. An Environmental lmpact Assessment (EIA) has been carried out to identify and address the impacts upon traffic and transport, noise, landscape and visual impacts, Part of the site is within Flood Zones 2 and 3 and a flood risk assessment has been carried out and appropriate flood mitigation measures proposed, including compensatory flood storage. The Environment Agency is satisfied that the development would not have an unacceptable impact upon flood risk subject to a detailed flood compensation scheme to be agreed by condition should the application be approved. Relevant consultees have confirmed that subject to conditions or a legal agreement to secure proposed mitigation measures where required, the proposal would not result in unacceptable harm in terms of impact upon potential ecological receptors including protected species and sites of nature conservation value, subject to accordance with the mitigation set out in the relevant chapters of the Environmental Statement (ES) received 8 October 2010 and Supplementary Environmental Information (SEI) received 7 March 201 1. The initial objections raised by the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) and the Council's Ecologist in terms of impacts upon ornithology were withdrawn following the further detail and proposed mitigation measures recommended in the SEI received 7 March 201 1. The Council's Environmental Health department have assessed the impact of the proposed development in terms of noise and shadow flicker and are satisfied with these aspects of the Environmental Impact Assessment and that subject to accordance with conditions, the development could be satisfactorily accommodated without unacceptable harm to amenity. However, it has not been demonstrated that the development can be accommodated without unacceptable harm to the landscape character and visual amenity of the site and surroundings. The undeveloped countryside location is highly valued locally for its remoteness and rural characteristics. The proposal is therefore considered to be contrary to Core Strategy Policies CP3 and CP11 and saved Local Plan Policy WLL4. It is also considered that the proposal would result in unacceptable harm to the heritage assets of Grade II listed Oldhouse Farmhouse and Barn and Grade I1 listed Carters Hill House, contrary to PPS5 Planning for the Historic Environment. National Guidance such as The Energy White Paper (2007) and The Renewable Energy Strategy 2009 promotes and supports renewable energy development. This is reiterated in national planning policy guidance such as PPSl and the climate change companion document and PPS22, Renewable Energy which encourages renewable energy development where environmental, economic and social impacts to be satisfactorily addressed. Policy NRM 15 of the South East Plan states that renewable energy development, particularly wind and biomass, should be located and designed to minimise adverse impacts on landscape, wildlife, heritage assets and amenity. Therefore, significant weight must be given to the renewable energy benefits of the proposal however it is not overriding as the development must be sited where environmental, economic and social impacts can be satisfactorily addressed. Having given significant weight to the renewable energy benefits of the proposal, on balance, the wider environmental and economic benefits do not outweigh the harm identified to heritage assets and landscape character and visual amenity and accordingly the recommendation is that the application be refused. The application is brought before the planning committee at the request of the Head of Development Management. PLANNING STATUS a Overhead Cables Badger Sett consultation zone Public Footpath (no. 2) Arborfield Byway no.3 Gas Pipes Archaeological Site Local Wildlife sites Ancient Woodland - St Johns Copse Groundwater Zone 1 and 2 Listed Buildings Within 5km of SPA Sand and gravel extraction Strategic development location - South of M4 (boundary of site falls just within boundary of SDL in south western corner of site) Land liable to flooding - Flood Zone 2 and 3 .. -. RECOMMENDA~ON .. .. .. -- -. .- -7 he applicationbe refused planning consent for the following reasons: 1. The proposed development would have an unacceptable substantial and significant effect upon the landscape character of the site and surrounding area which is highly valued locally for its remoteness and rural characteristics. This is contrary to Core Strategy Policies CP3 and CP11 and saved Local Plan Policy WLL4. The renewable energy benefits of the proposed development are not considered to outweigh the harm identified and the proposal would therefore be contrary to PPS22 Renewable Energy and South East Plan Policy NRM15. 2. The proposed wind turbines by virtue of their size and location, in close proximity to a number of settlements would have a significant effect on the setting and visual amenity of these settlements including private land, public vantage points, footpaths and transport routes. The proposal fails to demonstrate how the development will protect the separate identity of the settlements and maintain the quality of the environment and therefore conflicts with Core Strategy Policy CP11 and CP3. The renewable energy benefits of the proposed development are not considered to outweigh the harm identified and the proposal would therefore be contrary to PPS22 Renewable Energy and South East Plan Policy NRM15. 3. The proposed development would result in material harm to the significance of the Grade II listed Farmhouse and Barn at Oldhouse Farmhouse (LB41457 and LB41458). The rural, isolated landscape setting within which this farmstead is experienced, and to which it relates, contribute to its aesthetic and historic interest. The overwhelming scale, industrial nature, and combined group impact of the proposed turbines are considered to harm this setting and as a result erode the heritage significance of the listed buildings. The renewable energy benefits of the proposed development are not considered to outweigh the harm identified and the proposal would therefore be contrary to PPS5 - Planning for the Historic Environment, PPS22 Renewable Energy, South East Plan Policy NRM15 and Core Strategy Policies CP1 and CP3. 4. The proposed development would result in significant harm to the Grade II Listed Building Carters Hill House (LB41458). In having consideration of views 'of and 'from' the heritage asset in accordance with PPS5, it is considered that turbines 3 and 4 would be visible and prominent within views from the Listed Building and its curtilage and the turbines would appear as industrial features of a scale that are disproportionate to the natural scale of the tree-lined lanes and wooded valley. As a result, the development would cause unacceptable harm to the setting and erode the significance of the Listed building contrary to PPS5 - Planning for the Historic Environment. The renewable energy benefits of the proposed development are not considered to outweigh the harm identified and

Load more