P/2015/0024 Bwlchau, Bettws, Hundred House, Llandrindod Wells
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Planning, Taxi Licensing and Rights of Way Committee Report Application No: P/2015/0024 Grid Ref: 311749.61 258650.13 Community Glascwm Valid Date: Officer: Council: 07/01/2015 Holly-ann Hobbs Applicant: Mr Richard Jones, Bwlchau, Bettws, Hundred House, Llandrindod Wells, Powys, LD1 5RP. Location: Bwlchau, Bettws, Hundred House, Llandrindod Wells, Powys, LD1 5RP. Proposal: Full: Erection of a single wind turbine 27.13m to blade tip, 20.58 to hub height and 13.10m blade diameter Application Application for Full Planning Permission Type: The reason for Committee determination The proposed wind turbine measures in excess of 24 metres to blade tip. Site Location and Description Bwlchau Farm is located within the open countryside approximately 1.6 miles north of Glascwm. The proposed site of development is located approximately 95 metres to the north of the farmhouse and associated buildings and is bounded by agricultural land. Access to the application site is facilitated via an existing access of an unclassified highway. Consent is sought in full in respect of the erection of a single wind turbine measuring approximately 27.13 metres to blade tip, 20.58 metres to hub. The rotor diameter measures approximately 13.10 metres. The estimated power output is 20kW. Consultee Response Glascwm Community Council Correspondence received 5th February 2015 – At the last meeting of Glascwm Community Council planning application P/2015/0024 was discussed and the following questions were raised as a concern: 1) Does a turbine have to be placed a minimum number of metres away from a highway and if so what is the distance? 2) Can you please explain what the classification of the bridal way is now if it has been diverted as it is now called a permissive route. What does this mean and who would have access to this? Correspondence received 18th February 2015 – 1 Please be aware that at the last Glascwm Community Council meeting the above application for a wind turbine at Bwlchau was discussed with the outcome that 5 members supported the application with 1 member opposed. Correspondence received 12th March 2015 - Please be informed that Glascwm Community Council have no further comment to make on the additional information supplied for application P/2015/0024. Highway Authority Correspondence received 13th January 2015 - The County Council as Highway Authority for the County Unclassified Highway, U1306 wish the following recommendations/observations be applied Recommendations/Observations On the basis that the largest component part is as detailed at 6.275m length I am satisfied that delivery to the site will be no different to standard agricultural activity to the farm. I therefore do not wish to comment on this application. Environmental Health Correspondence received 20th January 2015 – Having looked at this application this service would recommend refusal on the grounds that insufficient information has been supplied. The following list summarises the minimum requirements in respect of noise assessment for all applications for small and medium sized wind turbine developments:- 1. Identification of the nearest noise sensitive premises and details of their respective distances from the proposed development. 2. A modelled assessment detailing the level of turbine noise (LA90) for each identified receptor for all wind speeds up to and including 10m/s. 3. A full and detailed description of the above assessment. In circumstances where applicants can demonstrate compliance with the simplified methodology contained within ETSU-R- there is no need to proceed with a further assessment. If however compliance cannot be demonstrated then the applicant will have to proceed with a full assessment under ETSU-R-97. Cumulative Impact 2 One of the most complex scenarios in respect of noise impact from wind turbines occurs when there are multiple turbines in a location. In respect of cumulative impact ETSU-R-97 states that:- ‘Noise limits and margins above background should relate to the cumulative effect of all wind turbines in the area contributing to the noise received at the properties in question.’ In situations where a turbine already exists or multiple turbines are proposed a cumulative noise impact assessment will be required. Correspondence received 23rd March 2015 – Following the submission of a noise report the application has shown that they can comply with the simplified methodology so if members be minded to grant this application then I would recommend the following conditions be attached. ETSU-R-97 provides a method for determining operational noise limits for wind farm developments. For single turbines or developments where there are large separation distances between turbines and sensitive receptors, a simplified method can be adopted whereby, if operational noise is limited to LA90, 10 min of 35 dB(A) at the closest receptors in wind speeds up to 10 ms at 10m height. This limit may be increased to 45 dB where the occupier of a property has a financial involvement in the application. 1. The wind turbine noise level measured shall be in accordance with the guidance contained within the Department of Trade and Industry Report ‘The Assessment and Rating of Noise from Wind Farms’ (ETSU-R-97) and, as such, shall not exceed an absolute noise level of 35 dB expressed as L A90 10min at any existing dwelling with a non-financial involvement, up to on-site wind speeds of 10m/s measured at a height of 10m. Bwlchau can be afforded a higher noise level of 45 dB expressed as L A90 10 min as it has a financial involvement. 2. The level of noise emitted by the wind turbine shall be demonstrated at the request of the Local Planning Authority. Should the wind turbine be identified as operating at an absolute noise level that exceeds 35 dB expressed as L A90 10min at any existing dwelling that is not financially involved, and 45 dB at Bwlchau up to on-site wind speeds of 10m/s measured at a height of 10m, the turbine shall be taken out of use until such time as maintenance or repair is undertaken sufficient to reduce the absolute noise level of the operating turbine to within the parameters specified in condition 1. Reason: In order to maintain and protect the amenity of nearby residents by the reduction of ambient noise levels to an acceptable level in accordance with the requirements of Section 13.13 (Reducing Noise and Light Pollution) of Planning Policy Wales, Edition 4 (February 2011); Technical Advice Note (Wales) 11 (October 1997) and; Policy SP12 (Energy Conservation and Generation) of the Powys Unitary Development Plan, adopted 1st March 2010. Correspondence received 26th August 2015 – 3 I wonder if you could clarify a point please, the Noise Impact Assessment has identified the nearest noise sensitive properties with the exception of Cwm Mawr, West of the proposed turbine, clearly the closest property so I wonder why this has not been included in the calculations. It is unlikely to breach the 35dB limit but for clarity purposes could the question be asked. Countryside Services Correspondence received 22nd January 2015 - I am writing to express Countryside Services’ views on the proposed development. Countryside Services recommend that turbines are kept at least tip height from footpaths and 200m from public rights of way of bridleway status or higher. The proposed turbine would be 72m from Bridleway BT1615. Therefore, this turbine fails to meet our recommended distance from a bridleway. The Landscape and Visual Report erroneously refers to the path as a footpath in section 8.5, it is in fact a bridleway. This raises concerns that the impact on horse-riders has not been properly addressed. Please could the visual impact on the bridleway users, especially horse- riders, be assessed by PCC? The Design and Access Statement is also incorrect. A ‘bridleway diversion order’ is not in progress. The applicant has offered a permissive alternative route, there is nothing in progress to alter the line of bridleway BT 1615. After being on site, the line of the offered alternative permissive bridleway is not acceptable due to the layout of the land and because the route is a dead end. The suggested permissive route ends on a track with no public access. As the turbine fails to meet our recommended distance from a bridleway and the offered alternative permissive route is unacceptable, Countryside Services object to this application. Please could the applicant be made aware that at no time should any public right of way be obstructed during the development process and that no materials are to be placed or stored on the line of any public right of way. Any damage caused to the surface of any public right of way must be made good to at least its current condition or better. Correspondence received 5th May 2015 – Following a site visit I am writing to express Countryside Services’ updated views on the proposed development. Countryside Services recommend that turbines are kept at least tip height from footpaths and 200m from public rights of way of bridleway status or higher. The proposed turbine would be 72m from Bridleway BT1615. Therefore, this turbine fails to meet our recommended distance from a bridleway. There is the potential for an additional, permissive alternative route as proposed by the applicant, which keeps more than 200m from the proposed turbine. For the route to be acceptable there would need to be high quality gates installed in two fence lines, minor groundworks at a couple of places, the route would need to be regularly cut in one area due to bracken and vegetation growth, overhanging branches kept clear and all existing gates 4 maintained to a high standard for the life of the wind turbine. All of this work should be to the standard as agreed with Countryside Services.