SCHEDULE A

Complex Planning Applications

SCHEDULE No: 5 SL/2013/04 01

BURTON IN : BURTON MOTORWAY SERVICES AREA, M6, BURTON-IN-KENDAL, LA6 1JF

PROPOSAL: SINGLE WIND TURBINE (UP TO 70M TO BLADE TIP) WITH ASSOCIATED ACCESS AND INFRASTRUCTURE Website Link: MR TONY RAVEN http://www.southlakeland.gov.uk/fastweb/detail.asp?AltRef=SL/2013/ 0401

E352202.2 N476171.4 29/08/2013

SUMMARY Siting of single wind turbine 70 metres high to blade tip adjacent to Burton Motorway Services. The development straddles the boundary between South Lakeland and Lancaster City administrative areas. Revised submission of previously approved scheme. Impacts considered to be acceptable.

DESCRIPTION AND PROPOSAL: Site Description: The site is an area of agricultural land (0.2 hectares) which is bordered by trees and hedgerows to the east, north and south. The land is located on the western side of the M6 motorway, between Junctions 35 and 36 and is 6km to the north of the town of Carnforth. Land levels within the site fall away from the site access off Tarn Lane to the south.

There is a group of buildings to the northern end of the site that form Burton-in- Kendal (M6) Services which is operated by Moto Hospitality Limited. The service area comprises a motel, shop, café/restaurant and a petrol station. There are also areas of hard standing (tarmac) including access roads and vehicle parking areas. The site access is a private road for the use of employees of the service station. The site is surrounded on three sides by farmland, which consists of a mix of arable and pasture grassland and fields enclosed by a network of hawthorn hedgerows. The land is situated between the villages of Burton-in-Kendal to the east and to the west. The nearest residential properties are Ashfield and Cinderbarrow Farm which are approximately 560m to the south west of the site and Cinderbarrow Cottage which is approximately 600m to the south west.

The site is approximately 800m to the east of the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) and is 6.3km to the south east of the Lake District National Park. The runs in a north/south direction and lies approximately 380m away from the site. Yealand Conservation Area is 1.6km to the west of the site and the village of Burton-in-Kendal 1 km to the west also has Conservation Area designation. On a wider scale the Bowland Fells Special Protected Area (SPA) is located approximately 15km to the south; Bay SPA is approximately 6 kilometres to the south-west and Leighton Moss SPA lies approximately 3.5km to the west of the application site.

Proposal: This application represents a revised resubmission of Lancaster City Council planning application reference 11/00172/FUL which sought full planning consent application for the ‘Erection of a single 330kW wind turbine (maximum height to tip of 67 metres) and associated infrastructure’. The development site, (including its access track) is located within the administrative boundary of Lancaster City Council, with a blade over sail of approximately 2 metres traversing into the South Lakeland District Council administrative area. The works within the administrative area of South Lakeland District Council fall within the definition of development contained within Section 55 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, requiring the submission of a full planning application to the authority for determination.

The application proposes to erect a single wind turbine in a small area of arable land located at the southern end of the grounds of the service station.

The proposed will comprise a turbine with a maximum hub height of 44m and a tip height of 70m. The submitted plans illustrate the erection of either the Gamesa G52 500kW turbine with a 44m hub height and a 70m tip height or the EWT DW54 500kW turbine with a hub height of 40m and a tip height of 67m. The turbine will either export power directly to the national grid via the 11kV line which runs adjacent to the proposed turbine location, or would be connected to the on-site substation and provide power directly to the service area. Where the existing 11kV power lines run closest to the wind turbine, these will be either re-routed overhead or buried underground. It is indicated that the turbine will generate 1,414,740 kWh per annum which equates to 89% of the electrical energy needs of the service area.

The proposed turbine would be a 3 bladed, horizontal axis wind turbine and would be off white in colour and have a steel monopole tower. Subject to the final specification of the turbine model and configuration, two small ancillary glass reinforced plastic buildings would be erected within the confines of the application site comprising a transformer station adjacent to the base and a substation building located approximately 13m from its base. The buildings would be dark green or brown in colour.

In order to accommodate the installation and maintenance of the wind turbine an access track and crane hard standing area will be constructed. The new access track will commence 40m along the existing service road and run across the field to the turbine for a distance of 95m. An area of hard standing will be created for the siting of crane platforms during turbine assembly and as a vehicle turning area. This area will commence 50m along the new access track and will be 30m by 35m in size.

Site History: The application site was the subject of a full planning application for the ‘Erection of a single 330kW wind turbine (maximum height to tip of 67 metres) and associated infrastructure’ under Lancaster City Council planning application reference 11/00172/FUL.

South Lakeland District Council as a consultee in respect of this application raised the following objections to the proposals:

“The visual dominance of the turbine would outweigh the benefits of renewable energy. By reason of its height, movement and distinctive appearance, the proposed turbine would have a significant adverse visual effect on the surrounding area. The turbine would be particularly prominent in the wider landscape when viewed from the east and west and, as a consequence, would cause substantial visual harm.”

The application was considered by members of the Lancaster City Council Planning Committee on the 25 th July 2011 and was approved in line with the recommendation of officers. This consent remains valid and lawfully capable of implementation subject to the achievement of the relevant requirements of the planning conditions imposed upon the consent.

CONSULTATIONS: Parish Councils Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) No objections to the proposed development subject to the correct notification and charting of the development as per the international civil aviation requirements in the interests of Aviation Safety.

British Gliding Association No consultation response received

Lancaster Constabulary HQ No specific comments or observations. The wind turbine would not represent a significant hazard to the Air Service.

Ministry of Defence: Safeguarding and Turbines (MOD) No objection. In the interests of air safety the MOD requests that all turbines are fitted with 25 candela omni-directional red lighting or infrared aviation lighting with an optimised flash patterns of 60 flashes per minute of 200ms to 500ms duration at the highest practicable point.

An informative is requested requiring confirmation of design, location and construction parameters to the Defence Infrastructure Organisation Safeguarding department of the MOD.

National Air Traffic Services (En Route) (NATS) No objection. The proposed development has been examined from a technical safeguarding aspect and does not conflict with our safeguarding criteria. Accordingly, NATS (En Route) Public Limited Company (“NERL”) has no safeguarding objection to the proposal.

North West Ambulance Service No consultation response received.

Environmental and Ecological Wildlife Trust No consultation response received.

Environment Agency No comments to make in respect of the proposals

Natural (NE) The application site is approximately 6.3 km from Morecambe Bay Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). This SSSI is part of the Morecambe Bay Special Protection Area (SPA), Special Area of Conservation (SAC) and Ramsar site.

Natura 2000 site – No objection The development if completed in accordance with the details submitted is not likely to have a significant effect on the interest features for which Morecambe Bay SPA, SAC and Ramsar site have been classified. Natural England therefore advises that your Authority is not required to undertake an Appropriate Assessment to assess the implications of this proposal on the site’s conservation objectives.

SSSI – No objection Natural England is satisfied that the proposed development being carried out in strict accordance with the details of the application, as submitted, will not damage or destroy the interest features for which the site has been notified. We therefore advise your authority that this SSSI does not represent a constraint in determining this application. Should the details of this application change, Natural England draws your attention to Section 28(I) of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended), requiring your authority to re-consult Natural England

Landscape As mentioned in our previous response (reference 27322), this proposal lies approximately 800 metres east of the Arnside and Silverdale Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) boundary.

The Landscape and Visual Assessment (LVIA) that has been undertaken acknowledges that there would be some localised significant effects along a limited length of the eastern fringe of the AONB. The assessment concludes that there are likely to be significant visual effects from localised parts of Burton-in-Kendal, Holme, Yealand Redmayne and . The Planning Authority may wish to consider this in the local context and consider whether the magnitude of change is acceptable within the locality. We would advise that the Council satisfy themselves that this does not impact on the designated Landscape and its context. In addition, please be aware that in this location a wind turbine may be precedent setting.

Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) No consultation response received.

Westmorland and Furness Bat Group The development site appears to be on the boundary between and Cumbria but no Cumbria based organisations have been contacted for wildlife records. A minimum Cumbria Biodiversity Data Centre should have been contacted and Westmorland and Furness Bat Group could also usefully have been contacted for bat records.

The Ecological survey report is dated January 2011 and based on work undertaken in 2010. This means that date gather is several years old and may be out of date.

The ecologists’ state in their report that additional targeted surveys are required for bats before any impacts can be assessed. We agree with that statement and requested that the results of those surveys are forwarded to us for comment before the application is determined.

The close proximity of the motorway may reduce the numbers of bats roosting and foraging in the areas. Bats may use other local woodland edges and the canal for foraging and movement between these features could include crossing the field very close to the proposed wind turbine. Noctule bats have been recorded foraging over field about 50m away from the M6 at Crooklands. Without additional data it is difficult to make a reasonable assessment of the use of the site by bats.

Highways Cumbria Highway Authority No consultation response received.

Highways Agency No objection.

Arquiva (Digital Britain) No consultation response received.

Cable and Wireless No consultation response received.

Erricson No consultation response received.

Joint Radio Company: UK Energy Industry Objects to the proposed wind turbine on behalf of Electricity North West Limited.

The Energy Industry considers that any wind energy development within 1km of a link operating below 1GHz or 0.5km of a link operating above 1GHz, requires detailed coordinate. For turbines within blade diameter of 32m or less this distance is reduced to 0.5km for links below 1GHz and 03.3km for links above 1GHz. Unfortunately, part (or all) of the proposed development is located within the coordination zone of the site, or path, managed by JRC.

The affected link is Burton in Kendal Motorway Services Area T1 hub 40m blades 27m Grid ref OSGB 352004475988. >1GHz Microwave Point to Point: UU-WESTH- FISHT Westbourne Heights to Fisher Tarn.

As a consequence JRC objects to the proposed wind turbine on behalf of Electricity North West Limited and itself.

MLL Telecom No consultation response received.

Office of Communications (OFCOM) No objection.

Orange No consultation response received.

02 No consultation response received.

Three No consultation response received.

United Utilities No objections. The proposal has been cleared of all UU water links by JRC Wind farms.

Vodafone UK No objection. The nearest Vodafone link is approximately 500m from the proposed which does not pose a threat to the VF ATP microwave network.

Landscape Arnside Silverdale AONB Objection: The AONB Executive Committee stresses the need for development of any kind to take place in ways that avoid adverse impacts on the nationally important protected landscape of the Arnside and Silverdale Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and its setting, including views out from the AONB. Section 115 of the National Planning Policy Framework states: “Great weight should be given to conserving landscape and scenic beauty in … Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, which have the highest status of protection in relation to landscape and scenic beauty.”

It is the view of the AONB Executive Committee that this proposed development would have significant detrimental impacts on the landscape and special qualities of the AONB and consider that this proposal is contrary to both national and local planning policy and therefore raise an objection.

The proposed turbine would be prominent from the farmland, parkland and limestone hills of the eastern margin of the Arnside and Silverdale AONB. It would cause significant harm to the landscape character; such a prominent vertical structure in the low-lying drumlin landscape would cause significant visual intrusion.

There is growing concern regarding cumulative landscape impacts on the AONB from large wind turbine development along the M6 corridor adjacent to the eastern boundary of the AONB. It is the view of the Executive Committee that this development should be resisted due to the high landscape sensitivity and low capacity to accommodate turbine development.

Cumbria County Council: County Landscape Officer The application has been assessed against the policies of the Cumbria Sub-Regional Spatial Strategy (Sub-RSS). The Sub-Regional Spatial Strategy carries material weight as the spatial planning framework for Cumbria’s Community Strategy.

The site is located approximately 800m from the Arnside and Silverdale AONB, at its closest point. It lies partly within landscape character sub-type 7b, ‘Drumlin Field’, as defined by the Cumbria Landscape Character Guidance and Toolkit (2011). Whilst it is noted that the landscape and visual assessment submitted in support of the application makes reference to this classification, no reference is made to the Cumbria Wind Energy SPD, adopted by South Lakeland District Council as supplementary guidance in 2008. The Wind Energy SPD gives relevant guidance in regard to the impact of wind energy development upon the individual sensitivities and characteristics of the county’s landscape sub-types.

The site is surrounded to the east and west by landscape sub-types which are broadly characterised by drumlins (Type 7) or limestone pavement (Type 3). In regard to the former, the Wind Energy SPD advises that this type has ‘low/moderate capacity to accommodate single turbines or small cluster developments’, going on to state that: ‘Turbine development is likely to intimidate the small scale nature of the component hills and ridges….

Other issues include absence of similar manmade features; potential erosion of rural qualities and calmness valued for recreation by residents of nearby towns and localised intrusion on open prospects from limestone hills and important valley rims’

The SPD judges Type 3 to have low capacity to accommodate turbine development, going on to state:

‘Any type of turbine development would have potential to compromise the picturesque coastal limestone scenery around Morecambe Bay. This landscape is valued by both residents and visitors for its varied but generally harmonious and unspoilt character... Any scale of turbine is liable to upset this sensitive balance and appear incongruous with little or no scope for visual linkage or association with comparable structures or regular land cover patterns…

Turbines would also detract from the landmark skylines of limestone escarpments featuring cliffs and screes that often add drama within this landscape. Whilst the scale of some larger hills appears favourable turbine development is likely to conflict with small to medium sized field patterns, small nucleated villages and frequent scale indicators such as dry stone walls and trees.’

The guidance therefore describes a landscape context which is sensitive to wind turbine development. The characteristics described above provide a setting for the AONB, and characterise much of the designation itself.

The applicant’s assessment indicates that the turbine would be most clearly visible from the eastern edge of the AONB. Viewpoint 5, Yealand Redmayne (within the AONB) illustrates the drumlin landscape within which the turbine sits, against the limestone pavement backdrop of Hutton Roof and Newbiggin Crags. With regard to the above noted sensitivities, the turbine would detract from this landscape context, through its form and movement. There are no structures of comparable height or design in this location. The setting of the AONB would therefore be adversely affected.

The NPPF (paragraph 115) clarifies that great weight should be given to conserving landscape and scenic beauty in Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Given the AONB designation, condition of the landscape, and lack of detractors, it is unclear why the applicant regards the viewpoints located within the AONB as having ‘high/medium’ sensitivity, rather than ‘high’. A high sensitivity rating would generate a greater effect, which would be regarded as significant in EIA terms.

The applicant concludes that beyond 1-2km of the site, the scale of the turbine would correspond with the larger scale elements of the landscape. Whilst it is noted that the wider landscape includes major roads including the M6 and A6, there are no structures comparable in height or form to the proposed turbine, which would therefore appear conspicuous, and contrast with the smaller scale elements of the landscape.

In light of the above issues, it is considered that, on balance, this proposal is contrary to the policies of the Cumbria Sub Regional Spatial Strategy, and supporting guidance outlined in the Cumbria Wind Energy SPD. An objection is therefore raised on behalf of Cumbria County Council.

Campaign for the Protection of Rural England (CPRE) No consultation response received.

Friends of Eden, Lakeland and Lunesdale Scenery (FELLS) Objection: Landscape and Visual Impact The visual impact from the west of Burton-in-Kendal, Yealand Conyers, Yealand Redmayne, and the Arnside and Silverdale AONB will be significant. The Turbine would be the only significant vertical element in the landscape and the view. The turbine would significantly detract from the walking experienced at Hutton Roof Crags and Farleton Knott. The accumulation of turbines, together with Lambrigg and Armistead is already having serious cumulative effect on the very nature of South Lakeland and especially on the much valued qualities of the landscape. These turbines will be viewed sequentially as you journey into and around the area. The simultaneous and sequential cumulative impact of the scheme with existing wind turbines is understated.

Capacity Factor and Claimed Benefits The assumed Capacity Factor is 34% based upon a wind speed derived from the BWEA ‘NOABLE’ wind speed database and not upon the actual wind speed date for the sited collected from the erected meteological mast on site. It contested that the application significantly exaggerations the quantity of electricity that will be provided and the perceived environmental benefits. The average load factor of the existing wind farms of only 21.4% is highlighted and expressed in the context of the potential for wind shadow existing within the landscape.

Shadow Flicker on the M6 The Shadow Flicker Calculation for EWT DW54 Wind Turbine illustrates that there will be maximum shadow flicker of (51-1,000 hours per year across the M6 Motorway. The resultant shadow flicker is extremely distracting and very dangerous to drivers and could result in a serious safety risk to drivers on the M6.

Other Burton-in-Kendal Parish Council Object: The Parish Council considered that the significant landscape impact of the proposed turbine, especially when considered in the context of the other turbines in the vicinity, is unacceptable in an area of unspoilt rolling farmland. The turbine would be visible anomaly when seen from all the many local access areas.

The application notes that a minority of residents would suffer significant adverse impact from the turbine and no justification or mitigation is presented for this neighbourly proposal.

There is some indication that the plans are being pushed through without the technical evidence to support the proposal. Although a wind measuring mas has been in place for some time, the wind analysis has not been completed and the plans are based on estimates. The Parish Council is concerned that the plans are being rushed through to get ahead of changing policy. The main justification for the proposal is based on governmental renewable energy proposal which is in the process of changing.

The Energy Minister has clearly stated that planning guidance to local councils in England will now say more that local people’s concerns should take precedent over the need for renewable energy, and give more weight to the impact of the turbines on the landscape and heritage. He said that he wants to give local communities more control over wind turbine development so that they are consulted much more fully so that they are appropriately sites and where communities are happy to benefit from them. In view of this, it is unacceptable that the local community has not been consulted more fully. Apart from the usual planning consultation, no evidence has been presented of community consultation.

Cumbria County Council: County Archaeologist No objection.

Preston Richard Parish Council Object: This being such a large structure towering above nearby villages will be a very prominent feature of the landscape throughout many of the neighbouring parishes and will adversely affect not only the residents but the vibrant tourist industry.

The cumulative impact of the development of this development in conjunction with the existing Armistead and Burton Road development would overload the visual impact of the area.

The council are concerned little or no community consultation has taken placed regarding this very large structure. It is not our wish to be surrounded by a proliferation of Wind Turbines as the general consensus of local opinion indicates from the recent consensus in the preparation of the Community plan.

Local wildlife and the Lancaster Canal nearby may also be adversely affected.

Whilst the need for renewable energy is appreciated, it is considered that the benefits will be negated by the adverse effect on tourism, ecosystems and business.

South Lakeland District Council: Environmental Protection Group No comments to make with respect to potential noise nuisance.

Consultation Responses Received by Lancaster City Council and Not South Lakeland District Council North Lancashire Bat Group The following issues have been raised in the consultation response received by Lancashire City Council:

The turbine site appears from plans to be located close to hedgerows and other features suitable for use by bats e.g. ponds, tree belts, Lancaster Canal and woodland. No information has been included with the application on the distance between any of these features and the proposed turbine site. The applicant has not supplied any survey data or any assessment of the impact of the turbine on protected species (bats) which may use any of these habitat features. We think that this omission must be rectified prior to the application being determined so that all relevant information can be taken into account.

BAE Systems BAE Systems supports the response submitted by the MOD.

Ramblers Association Ramblers Association objects to this application for a wind turbine at Longlands Farm. The proposed site is very close to a public bridleway and would be unsightly to walkers and even dangerous to horse riders. This Bridleway is an historic route of the former road to Scotland. It is also near the Canal towpath which is also well used by walkers and the locks have particular significance. The details of the impact are insufficient with no impressions from viewpoints. The cumulative impact of wind turbines in this area is getting severe with several approved (Back Lane) or under consideration (Burton Services) along the M6 and nearby. We hope that the replacement of the communications mast by this development will not follow with a new application for a mast.

River and Canal Trust No comments to make in respect of the proposals

Lancashire County Council Upon completion of the works, there will be a negligible traffic impact associated with the development proposal.

During the sites period of construction; delivery of components and lifting equipment to/from site are likely to have a significant impact on vehicle movements over surrounding lengths of the public and private highway network. A range of planning conditions requiring the submission and implementation of a Construction Traffic Management Method Statement and the pre-agreement of a designated route for construction traffic.

Representations Received from Neighbours and Other Members of the Public: • A total of 38 letters of representation were received as a result of neighbour notification and the erection of a site notice. The issues raised comprise the following:

• The proposed turbine by virtue of its overall height and distinctive appearance will become the defining feature of the area and is out of keeping within the surrounding landscape.

• The proposed turbine will adversely impact upon the character of the local landscape with specific regard to the villages of Yealand Conyers, Yealand Redmayne, Beetham, Holem, Farleton, Burton and Clawthorpe.

• The proposed will adversely impact upon the setting of the adjacent Lancaster Canal and Arnside and Silverdale AONB which is afforded the highest level of protection in the National Planning Policy Framework. The proposed is incompatible with the authority’s statutory duty to conserve and enhance the natural beauty of the AONB.

• The cumulative impact of the development in the context of the existing and planned turbine developments within the context of the application site comprising developments at Armistead and Quarry on Burton Road will induce unacceptable impacts upon the landscape.

• The proposed turbine will be within 800m of existing residential dwellings, the living conditions of which will be adversely affected through visual intrusion, noise intrusion and shadow flicker without compensatory benefits.

• The site is in close proximity to an existing motel and adverse impacts upon the residents and staff will result.

• The proposed development will damage the visitor experience of the area and will undermine the established tourism economy within the locality and Lake District National Park.

• There is limited justification for the proposed development. The proposed output of the development continues to be based upon estimated wind speeds and not on the anemometry date collected at the site; therefore, potential exists that the environmental case for the development is overstated.

• The proposed turbine would be a significant distraction to motorists using the M6.

• Negative impact of the development upon the setting of the public rights of way enjoyed by walkers within the locality.

• The proposal would seriously harm the visual amenity of the significant number of locations in and around Burton Village, including some on the rising ground to the east of A6070, an area which is not referred to in the Visual Impact Assessment.

• Impacts upon the natural population of migratory birds.

• Impact upon TV reception.

• The proposed development is within the M6 corridor alongside the commercial area that is Burton Services. Within a mile of the proposed site runs the A6, the now sadly disused canal, the West Coast mainline and the M6; therefore, this is a highly suitable place to site a wind turbine as historically this corridor has always had development.

Planning Policies: National Planning Policy Framework Section 10 Meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and coastal change, states that planning plays a key role in supporting the delivery of renewable and low carbon energy and associated infrastructure. When determining applications, LPAs should approve the application if its impacts are (or can be made) acceptable. I t should also be recognised that even small-scale projects provide a valuable contribution to cutting greenhouse gas emissions.

Section 11 Conserving and enhancing the natural environment, states that the planning system should seek to protect and enhance valued landscapes and to minimise impacts upon biodiversity. Planning Practice Guidance for Renewable and Low Carbon Energy A new Government guidance document, issued in July 2013, sets out the main planning considerations relating to wind turbine applications. This replaces the Companion Guide to PPS22 and is a material consideration in planning decisions. These include: • The need for renewable energy does not automatically override environmental protections. • Cumulative impacts require particular attention, especially the increasing impact that wind turbines can have on landscape and local amenity as the number of turbines in an area increases. • Local topography is an important factor in assessing whether wind turbines could have a damaging effect on landscape and recognise that the impact can be as great in predominantly flat landscapes as in hilly or mountainous areas. • Great care should be taken to ensure heritage assets are conserved in a manner appropriate to their significance, including the impact of proposals on views important to their setting. • Proposals in National Parks and AONBs, and in areas close to them where there could be an adverse impact on the protected area will need careful consideration. • Protecting local amenity is an important consideration which should be given proper weight in planning decisions.

Saved Policies of the South Lakeland Local Plan Saved Policy C6 states proposals for development or land use change which may affect a European site, a proposed European site, or a Ramsar site will be subject to the most rigorous examination. Development or land use change not directly connected with or necessary to the management of the site and which is likely to have significant effects on the site (either individually or in combination with other plans or projects) and which adversely affects the integrity of the site, will not be permitted unless the authority is satisfied that: (a) there is no alternative solution; and (b) there are imperative reasons of overriding public interest for the development or land use change.

Saved Policy C7 confirms that proposals for development in or likely to affect Sites of Special Scientific Interest will be subject to special scrutiny. Where such development may have a significant adverse effect, directly or indirectly on interests of nature conservation importance it will not be permitted unless the reasons for the development clearly outweigh the value of those interests and the national policy to safeguard the intrinsic nature conservation value of the national network of such sites.

Saved Policy C26 of the Local Plan covers wind energy proposals and states that their acceptability will be judged according to whether a number of defined criteria can be satisfied. One of the criteria is that the proposal’s energy contribution and other benefits outweigh any significant adverse impact on the character and appearance of the landscape, the amenity of residential properties, nature conservation, archaeological or geographical interests.

Saved Policy L10 states that existing rights of way will be maintained and protected from any development that would adversely affect their character. Development which results in the loss of or disruption to existing rights of way will only be permitted where a satisfactory diversion can be provided.

Saved Policy S2 provides guidance in respect of the design of all new development.

Saved Policy S3 states that a high standard of landscaping will be required of all new development, both for the initial scheme and its long-term maintenance. Where possible, existing landscape features shall be integrated into landscape schemes. Where the District Council intends to adopt an area of landscaping, principally of benefit to the development itself, a commuted payment will be required to meet the cost of 10 years maintenance. The requirements of this policy will be implemented as a condition of planning consent, or by planning obligation, as appropriate.

South Lakeland Core Strategy Policy Policy CS1.1 supports increasing the proportion of energy derived from renewables or other more sustainable options, whilst citing it is vital to protect the countryside for its intrinsic beauty, diversity and natural resources and also for its ecological, geological, cultural and historical, economic, agricultural, recreational and social value. Specific reference is made to the need to take account of and enhance landscape character and features particularly the AONB and coastal areas. The area’s role as a setting for and gateway to the Lake District and Yorkshire Dales National Parks should be developed.

Policy CS5 seeks to ensure that new development safeguards and enhances the natural environment – notably the AONB and international designations within the area, and supports habitat creation. It is stated that when considering development proposals within or affecting the setting of the Arnside and Silverdale AONB, give high priority to: the conservation and enhancement of the character of the landscape, including its historic dimensions; the protection and, where appropriate, enhancement of flora, fauna and geological features; and, safeguarding these identified attributes from inappropriate change and development.

Policy CS7.7 supports in principle appropriately located renewable energy schemes. It is acknowledged that there are some energy sources which need to be remote from residential areas and other sensitive land uses, and projects should avoid any harmful impact upon the historic environment.

Policy CS8.2 states that development proposals should be informed by and be sympathetic to the distinctive character landscapes identified in the Cumbria Landscape Character Guidance and Toolkit; the Arnside and Silverdale AONB Landscape and Seascape Assessment; features identified in relevant settlement studies and local evidence; and, the Arnside and Silverdale AONB Management Plan. It is stated that development proposals should demonstrate that their location, scale, design and materials will protect, conserve and, where possible, enhance: the special qualities of the environment associated with the nationally designated areas of the National Parks and Arnside and Silverdale AONB including their settings; the special qualities and local distinctiveness of the area; distinctive settlement character; and, the setting of, and views into and from the AONB, the National Parks, conservation areas and individual built/manmade features that contribute to landscape and settlement character.

Policy CS8.4 relates to biodiversity and geodiversity and states that all development proposals should protect, enhance and restore the biodiversity and geodiversity value of land and buildings. It also states that development proposals that would have a direct or indirect adverse effect on nationally, sub-regional, regional and local designated sites will not be permitted unless they cannot be located on alternative sites that would cause less or no harm; the benefits of the development clearly outweigh the impacts on the features of the site and the wider network of rural habitats; and prevention, mitigation and compensation measures are provided.

The Cumbria Wind Energy Supplementary Planning Document This was adopted in 2007 and provides guidance for the consideration of wind energy developments. Part 2 of the guidelines provides specific guidance on landscape and visual issues and identifies the potential capacity of various landscape types throughout the county to accommodate different scales of wind farms. The areas designated as drumlins are considered to have low/moderate capacity to accommodate single turbines or small cluster sized developments. This reflects a moderate/high sensitivity overall, rarity and moderately strong historical and geomorphological interests and cultural associations. It states that turbine development is likely to intimidate the small scale nature of the component hills and ridges and that the restricted views created by this relief are vulnerable to visual dominance, an issue likely to be of heightened significance in South Lakeland which has a heavy pattern of small dispersed settlements.

Cumbria Landscape Character Guidance and Toolkit This document was prepared by Cumbria County Council in conjunction with the district authorities in March 2011. The site is located in/adjacent to an area identified as drumlin field. The key characteristics of this landscape are tracts of high drumlins; rounded tops with steep sides; distinct landform grain; hedges and stone walls from strong boundaries; streams and wet hollows are found in the valleys and dips between the drumlins; farms and development often nestle in intersecting valleys; narrow lanes with tall hedges and steep banks criss-cross through the drumlins. With regards to development, the guidance states that infrastructure developments such as large scale wind energy and pylons could cut across the grain of the landscape and introduce structures that dominate the drumlin characteristics. It advises that the siting of large scale wind energy should be avoided in open and prominent areas where they could degrade the rural character of the area.

It is worthy of note that the site falls within a landscape areas designated as 12b Warton- character type per the Landscape Strategy for Lancashire. The respective areas share similar key characteristics and are defined as separate types/sub types are they are located within different local authority boundaries. The site is located on the boundary where the transition is gradual and barely perceivable.

Companion Guide to PPS22: Planning for Renewable Energy The NPPF replaced all the previous PPG and PPS documents. However, the Companion Guide to PPS22: Planning for Renewable Energy is not contained within the list of replaced documents and therefore still a material planning consideration. It states that there is no statutory separation between a wind turbine and a public right of way, however fall over distance is often considered an acceptable separation, and the minimum distance is often taken to be that the turbine blades should not be permitted to over sail a public right of way. Fall over distance is the height of the turbine to the blade tip and 10% is often added to this as a safe separation distance from occupied buildings. In relation to shadow flicker, the guide makes the following statements:

• shadow flicker only occurs inside buildings where the flicker appears through a narrow window opening;

• only properties within 130 degrees either side of north of the turbines can be affected at UK latitudes;

• shadow flicker has been proven to occur only within ten rotor diameters of a turbine position;

• less than 5% of photo-sensitive epileptics are sensitive to the lowest frequencies of 2.5-3 Hz; the remainder being sensitive to higher frequencies; and

• a fast-moving three-bladed wind turbine will give rise to the highest levels of flicker frequency of well below 2 Hz. The new generation of wind turbines is known to operate at levels below 1 Hz.

HUMAN RIGHTS ACT: This application has been determined to accord with the rights and limitations of the Act in relation to Article 6 (Right to a fair and public hearing), Article 8 (Right to respect for private and family life, home and correspondence), Article 14 (Prohibition of discrimination) and Article 1 of Protocol 1 (Right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions and protection of property).

ASSESSMENT: The main issues for Members to consider in the determination of this application are: 1. The benefits and contribution that the proposal would make to achieving regional and national targets for renewable energy generation.

2. The effects of the proposal upon the character and appearance of the landscape of the surrounding area the Arnside and Silverdale AONB, and the Lake District National Park. 3. The effects of the proposal on the nearby heritage assets.

4. Cumulative impact of the proposal with concerted and operational sites. 5. Impact on public amenity.

6. The effects of the proposal upon the living conditions of nearby local residents, particularly in terms of visual impact, noise and shadow flicker.

7. The effects of the proposal upon biodiversity and habitat.

8. Highway impacts.

The principle of erecting a single 330kW wind turbine (maximum height to tip of 67 metres) and associated infrastructure has been accepted by Lancaster City Council under planning application reference 11/00172/FUL and that this consent remains lawfully extant. The existence and the ability of the applicant to implement this consent is a material consideration in the determination of this current application.

1. The benefits of the proposal in terms of meeting targets for renewable energy generation

Paragraph 98 of the National Planning Policy Framework states that when determining planning applications, local planning authorities should not require applicants for energy development to demonstrate the overall need for renewable or low carbon energy and also recognise that even small-scale projects provide a valuable contribution to cutting greenhouse gas emissions; and, approve the application if its impacts are (or can be made) acceptable. The companion guide to PPS22 indicates that the principle of harnessing wind energy by wind turbines is well established and that there is no doubt about the technical viability of wind power. Furthermore, it states that the UK is particularly well placed to utilise wind power.

The application states that the estimated annual energy production of the Gamesa wind turbine is 1,414,740 kWh per year, which over the lifetime of the turbine (approx. 25 years) will equate to 35,368,500kWh of electricity. This is the equivalent to 363 homes being supplied with electricity each year, assuming the average household in Lancaster uses 3,895kWh per year based on Lancaster 2011 domestic electricity consumption data from the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC). Over 25 year the approximate emissions saving will be over 16,000,000kg CO2. In this regard the proposed turbine will provide a limited but valuable contribution towards to the overall outputs. Although some objectors have questioned the predicted efficiency of the turbine and lack of justification, opposition on the grounds of the efficiency, validity and viability of wind energy technology and development is not a material consideration.

2. The impact of the development upon the landscape, AONB and Lake District National Park

The application site is located within an area of moderate – high landscape sensitivity to wind energy development as denoted in the Landscape Sensitivity to Wind Energy Development in Lancashire study. The Cumbria Wind Energy Supplementary Planning Document, Part 2, Landscape and Visual Considerations (Cumbria County Council) confirms that the area adjacent to the county boundary in the vicinity of the site is also of moderate – high sensitivity to wind energy development. Both of these assessments represent broad scale studies undertaken at a county level to provide strategic guidance only.

The application site is adjacent to the M6 motorway to the north of Carnforth and comprises a central lowland area bounded by hills and fells to the west and east and is undesignated in landscape terms. The hills to the west are situated within the Arnside and Silverdale AONB and rise up to around 160m. The upland areas to the east and north east are at much higher elevations and include Farleton Knott (269m), Holmepark Fell and Hutton Roof Crags (274m).

The application is supported by the detailed Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) submitted in support of Lancaster City Council planning application reference 11/00172/FUL, which is supported by a supplementary document comparing the impact of the consented turbine with that of the current proposal.

In respect of the impacts of the proposed turbine, the natural character of the immediate surrounding landscape is compromised to a certain extent by the existing communications corridor comprising a canal, motorway, an A-road, and railway. The landscape is further punctuated by transmission lines, electricity pylons and masts which form prominent features albeit at a lower level than the proposed. Collectively these interventions do impact upon the landscape tranquillity and frequently comprise component of views within and across the area and often alter the landscape perception through noise intrusion.

The erection of a turbine on the application site would result in some significant landscape and visual impacts within the host landscape. A turbine would become a determining characteristic of the site and the immediate surroundings resulting in a significant but localised change in the character of the immediate vicinity of the site up to radius of approximately 1-2km. Significant impacts would also occur in an area between Yealand Conyers and Yealand Redmayne particularly from the rear of residential properties on the eastern fringes of these villages. In these areas the wind turbine would appear as a new vertical element within the local landscape character and would from some viewpoints appear above the skyline. The backdrop of Farleton Knott, Dalton Craggs, Farleton Fell and Hutton Roof to the east will prevent the turbine being viewed above the skyline from some vantage points to the south and west. The mitigating effects of distance, copse, drumlins, trees and woodlands would ensure that the proposed wind turbine would become a lesser feature within the landscape beyond a 2.5km radius of the application site.

In the above regard, the principle of erecting a single 330kW wind turbine (maximum height to tip of 67 metres) and associated infrastructure and the resultant impacts of the development have been accepted under planning application reference 11/00172/FUL. The resultant impacts of the revisions to the proposed turbine must be considered in the context of the impacts of this approved scheme. The revised comprises turbine options incorporate reduced hub heights and larger rotor diameters resulting in an increase in the overall rotor diameter height by 3m. The LVIA assessment of the revised scheme identifies that these alterations would be materially noticeable to a distance of 2km and in some areas out to approximately 5km only and thus would be contained within the area deemed most significantly affected by the approved development.

AONB The visibility of the turbine would be limited predominantly to the eastern fringes of the AONB on flat ground west of the A6 with it is also considered that visual sensitivity in the upland areas to the west of Yealand Conyers and Yealand Redmayne is high. The ZTV maps indicate that the proposed turbine would be theoretically visible from approximately 13% of the Arnside and Silverdale AONB; however, the actual visibility of the turbine would be much lower due to the screening effects of woodland vegetation which covers much of this area and the view filtering provided by copses, hedgerows and the undulating topography. Extensive woodland blocks and landform would limit visibility of the turbine from other central and western areas of the AONB which generally has an intimate and introspective landscape. From the villages of Yealand Conyers, Yealand Redmayne and Yealand Storrs the turbine would be visible in the middle distance (area between the foreground and skyline) with varying degrees of screening from intervening vegetation. The turbine would be seen in the context of the overhead transmission line and pylons which run on a north-south axis adjacent to the proposed turbine. The presence of the turbine in views from lower ground levels along the eastern edge of the AONB would not significantly impact upon the characteristics of the landscape as the magnitude of change would be moderate in isolated instances and would not significantly impact on the reasons for AONB designation. It is concluded that there is a moderate landscape sensitivity to wind energy development in the 5km ZTV area. The high landscape sensitivity levels of the AONB are reduced by the low to moderate levels of landscape sensitivity in the main central lowland area. The impacts of the proposed turbine would not therefore be materially different from those resulting from the approved turbine.

The Lake District National Park A further designated landscape for consideration is the Lake District National Park (LDNP) which is located approximately 6.3km north west of the proposed turbine. From the lower ground at the south eastern edges would be limited by intervening landforms. From higher ground the proposed turbine would be seen as a distant element of wider landscape views and the movement of the blades would not draw the eye at this distance. The turbine would be seen against a backdrop of topography and so would not break the skyline. The LDNP is a high sensitivity landscape, and the magnitude of change would be negligible. The proposed wind turbine would be visible from less than 0.3% of the total area of the National Park. The applicant's photomontage from Dallam Tower Deer Park shows that the proposed wind turbine, when viewed at a distance of 4.9km, is a small but noticeable component of a broad view. The National Park boundary is a further 2.1km to the north west of this viewpoint which by nature of this separation distance would have a significant mitigating effect on visual impacts. Due to the very limited extent of National Park area that is likely to be affected by the proposed turbine and the significant mitigating effects of the viewing distances between them, the likely impacts on the character and setting of the National Park would be of little significance.

3. Impact upon Heritage Assets The application is supported by a full heritage assessment. There are two conservation areas within 2km of the application site being the Yealand Conservation Area and the Burton-in-Kendal Conservation Area. The intermittent glimpsing views of the turbine will have some significant impacts on the conservation areas. The increased scale of the proposed turbine would not result in additional unacceptable harm since the development will still enable the conservation area and its surrounding landscape backdrop to be appreciated and enjoyed. Furthermore given the degree of separation and scale nature of the proposed, the turbine would not unduly dominate the setting of the conservation areas. The development can be considered as 'preserving' the setting of the conservation area.

Designated Heritage Assets There are a number of listed buildings and structures within 1km of the application site including the grade II Listed bridges on Tarn Lane and Hilderstone Lane. Listed buildings include Hilderstone (approximately 800m to the north) and Cinderbarrow Farm (approximately 560m to the south) as well as other designated heritage assets further afield within the Yealand and Burton-in-Kendal Conservation Areas. The turbine will be visible to varying degrees from these structures, with the setting of these assets contributing towards their heritage significance. In the context of the separation distances existing and the presence of the railway line and transmission pylons, the proposed development a negligible impact on designated heritage assets only will result.

4. Cumulative Impacts with Operational and Consented Sites The key considerations here are whether the proposed wind turbine would be seen in combination with other wind turbines/wind farms and if this occurs, would there be any significant landscape and visual impacts. The existing and consented wind energy developments that the proposed wind turbine may be seen in combination with have change since the approval of the initial turbine application and comprise:

• Caton Moor (8 x 2MW turbines) approximately12.5km south west (operational).

• Armistead, Old Hutton (6 x 2MW turbines) approximately 12.6km north (approved).

• Fanny House, (Single turbine), approximately 12.6km north (approved).

• South Windfarm (3 x 2MW) approximately 10km south west (approved);

• Lancaster University (1 x 2MW turbine) approximately 18.5km south (operational).

Proposed schemes:

• Barkin House, Gatebeck (3 x 2MW turbines) approximately 11.5km north.

• Claughton Moor (13 x 3MW turbines) approximately12.5km south west.

The changes relate to the fact the Lancaster University (1 x 2MW turbine) approximately 18.5km south is now operational and the Heysham South Windfarm has been approved (3 turbines at 125m to tip) which is located approx. 20 km to the south west. In addition Fanny House Farm Wind Turbine has been consented and is located approx. 18km to the south west near Morecombe. Given the minimal extent of the significant effects arising from the proposed geometry revisions, it remains that the cumulative effects on visual receptors would be very limited again due to the small scale of the Burton Service Area proposal, the limited extent of significant visual effects (2-3km) and the distance from the existing and proposed schemes (over 10km). Sequential visual effects with Lancaster University would occur along the M6 corridor; however due to the separation distance of 18.5km between the two schemes, these effects are not considered significant and wood not be exacerbated by the proposed scalar increase.

5. Impact upon Public Amenity It is acknowledged that the wider site surroundings have considerable landscape and amenity value for a very wide range of groups including residents, tourists, workers, motorists, walkers and cyclists. The Lake District National Park and Arnside and Silverdale AONB landscapes are of national importance and there are numerous attractions in the area including Lakeland Wildlife Oasis, Leighton Moss Nature Reserve, Park Wood National Nature Reserve, Fairy Steps (local beauty spot), Tewitfield Locks and the dense network of public rights of way which includes the published, regionally important Limestone Link.

There will be some significant impacts upon visual receptors along Lancaster Canal which runs in a north/south direction to the west of the site and is 0.3km away at its closest. These impacts would be experienced primarily within 1km of the proposed turbine where it would appear as a new vertical feature. To the south of Cinderbarrow Lane visibility of the turbine would be partially restricted by vegetation along the M6 corridor and the canal banks while to the north of Holme Mills visibility of the turbine would be partially restricted by landform and vegetation along the canal banks. From beyond these areas the visibility would be reduced due to increased distance.

There are some areas where canal users experience views over the rural landscape but for much of its length within a 5km radius of the site, the canal is in close proximity to the M6, West Coast Main Line, built up areas and pylons. Up to a distance of 2.5km from the proposed turbine where landscape and visual impacts would likely be most significant, the turbine would largely be seen in a context where these man influenced features are particularly evident. At distances beyond a 2.5km radius from the proposed wind turbine, the mitigating effects of the rolling topography, trees, woodlands, hedgerows and overall modest development scale would significantly reduce likely landscape and visual impacts on the canal.

A number of public rights of way permeate the area with the closest running along the northern boundary of the site and would be within 20m of the proposed turbine. Adverse impacts would be felt on public rights of way in the vicinity of the site although this would depend on the views and attitude of the receptor. Again the degree of severity and significance would decrease over distance. With regard to public safety, paragraph 57 of the companion guide to PPS22 states that there is no statutory separation between a wind turbine and a public right of way although the minimum distance is often taken to be that the turbine blades should not be permitted to oversail a public right of way. The turbine would accord with this recommendation and the blades will not over sail the public right of way, and a footpath diversion will not be required.

The proposed wind turbine will continue to have landscape and visual impacts of slight to moderate significance on users of Lancaster Canal and landscape amenity impacts of slight to moderate significance, although it should be borne in mind that there would be locally major impacts in some areas such as the public right of way to the north of the site. While it is recognised that a significant effect would be experienced by users of the rights of way closest to the appeal site, the proximity to the A6, the West Coast mainline and the motorway must be acknowledged. The resultant impacts remain within acceptable limits.

6. Impact upon Residential Amenity A number of properties exist within 1km of the proposed turbine which will be affected by the development. From many vantage points the turbine will be viewed in the context of existing overhead transmission lines and pylons, the M6 corridor and the West Coast Main Line rail corridor. The turbine would be visible to varying degrees from surrounding villages; however, owed to the scale of the proposal, separation distances and intervening structures, the proposal will not have an overbearing visual impact on residential occupants. Whilst acknowledging that significant effects may arise in the private context, it is considered that the overall change in visual amenity would not be unacceptable, given the separation distance from proposed turbine and in general the restricted nature of views from dwellings in the local area. Focus is placed upon four properties which are deemed most sensitive to the development comprising the following:

Ashfield Ashfield is approximately 560m to the south west of the site and is 50m from the West Coast main line. The property has a predominantly north-south orientation but does have one living room window which has an easterly outlook towards the turbine site. There are mature trees of varying species between the property and the railway line and it is considered that this existing screening will mitigate the visual impact of the turbine on the residential occupants of Ashfield.

Cinderbarrow Farm This property is Grade II Listed and lies approximately 560m to the south west of the application site and is situated immediately adjacent to the rail line. This appears to be a working farm comprising a farmhouse and associated buildings in connection with the farming enterprise. The farmhouse has a north/south orientation with the principal elevation facing south. The northern elevation faces onto the farmyard and overlooks a large barn. This will block views of the turbine from the ground floor living accommodation. Furthermore the distance from the turbine means that there will be no overbearing impact on the first floor area.

Cinderbarrow Cottage Cinderbarrow Cottage is approximately 600m to the south/south-west of the turbine site and is approximately 100m from the rail line. With regard to residential amenity of this property the principle elevation (front) has a southerly outlook. Views of the turbine from the rear of the property will be filtered to some degree by tree and hedge planting within the garden and a garage in the north east corner of the plot. Views will be further mitigated by the distance from the turbine, the undulating landscape and intervening trees and hedgerows.

Hilderstone Hilderstone is a Grade II Listed former mill which is in residential use and is situated approximately 800m north/north-west of the application site. There would undoubtedly be views of the upper portion of the turbine from the southern elevation but this would be mitigated by intervening land forms and tree screening. Shadow Flicker The submitted assessment confirms that theoretical potential exists for shadow flicker at Ashfield of 11 hours per year for periods of between 4 and 25 minutes between 05:06 and 05:38 GMT in April, May, July and August only. Expectation exists that the existing intervening woodland would screen any impacts. In respect of the existing motel it is demonstrated that potential exists for shadow flicker to occur for up to 99 hours taking place between 1pm and 3pm fro November to February. The motel is also orientated such that only one side of the building has the potential to be effected, and there is currently a large oak tree that blocks the view of the turbine along the majority of that part of the hotel. It is therefore anticipated that occupants of the motel will either not be effected by shadow flicker or its effects will be remain at an acceptable level.

Noise The application is supported by a noise assessment completed in accordance to the methodology and guidance in ETSU-R-97. The guidance advises that turbine noise levels at the nearest noise sensitive properties should be kept to within 5dB(A) of the existing evening or night time background noise level. This is in line with standard practice for assessment of most sources of noise except for transportation and mineral extraction where higher levels are permitted. A fixed lower limit of between 35 and 40dB(A) (day-time) and 43dB(A) (night-time) may be specified when background noise is very low, i.e. less than 30dB(A).

For the purposes of this submission a background noise survey with regard to the seven residential properties nearest to the proposal site was undertaken in May 2010. The survey found that the minimum “quiet daytime period” background noise level measured in the vicinity of the closest property Ashfield was 40.30dB(A). This figure exceeds the predicted noise level from the turbine at this property which is 39.51dB(A) (highest predicted noise level). No objections have been received from the Environmental Protection Officer.

Electromagnetic, TV Reception and Radio Interference Wind turbines like all electrical machines produce electromagnetic radiation, which can cause interference to other electrical devices. However most turbines and their components comply with the European Commission Directive on Electromagnetic Compatibility (89/3360EEC). OFCOM have been consulted in respect of this application and has raised no objections to the proposals.

The Joint Radio Company have objected to the proposed on behalf of Electricity North West Limited and itself as the proposed will affect equipment operated in this area. The applicant is working to resolve the relevant issues.

Initial research by the applicant has established that the turbine could potentially cause interference with TV reception to 291 dwellings for which there is no alternative off-air service. In order to address this issue the applicant is agreeable to the addition of planning condition to include a baseline TV reception study which would include the identification and implementation of any mitigation measures required.

7. Biodiversity and Ecological Impacts Bats and Breeding Birds The habitats present within the site include amenity grasslands, formal beds planted with ornamental species, trees and shrubs that have been planted for screening purposes, and hedgerows and ditches. The site has been the subject of a Phase 1 Habitat Survey, which recommended the completion of addition bat and breeding bird surveys that have subsequently been completed and submitted in support of the application. The breeding bird survey and vantage point survey and a bat survey has been completed.

A total of 17 bird species were recorded during the breeding bird surveys. Five of these species are of medium conservation concern with the remainder either of low conservation concern or have no formally recognised status. Given the habitats present, the site is unlikely to be of any particular value to wintering birds. Based on the limited activity recorded and assessment of the habitats present it is concluded that a single turbine within a relatively low value habitat is unlikely to give rise to a significant ornithological impact in the vicinity of the Burton-in-Kendal Service Area. A limited range of mitigating measures are proposed within the survey report and a condition is proposed to ensure compliance with these requirements.

The bat survey completed in respect of the proposals identified that no bats were active or recorded emerging from any of the buildings or trees on the application site. Pipistrelle bats were observed commuting and feeding along the site boundaries in the direction of the Lancaster canal to the west.

In respect of the impact upon breeding birds and bats, the proposed turbines fails to achieve the guidance requirements of Natural England, being within 30m of the overgrown hedgerow to the north of the site; however, represent an improvement on the existing scheme. In mitigation of this it remains proposed to remove the part of this hedgerow which is located within 50m of the turbine and plant a new hedgerow along the existing fence which is situated along the western boundary of the site. This will be 144m in length and provide a significant increase in the hedgerow habitat on site and will maintain the link towards the canal. Natural England in consultation with the applicant has raised no objections to these arrangements. A condition is proposed to secure the completion of these works.

The proposed development will not result in harm to a European Protect Species; therefore, consideration of the likelihood of a licence being granted and engaging with the three derogation tests of The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulation 2010 is not applicable.

Trees A tree survey was carried out to provide an analysis of the impact of the proposed development on trees and local amenity. A total of 2 individual trees and 3 groups of trees have been identified which are implicated by the proposed development. Individual tree species are ash, elder and hawthorn, whilst identified groups 1 & 2 (G1 and G2) include elder and hawthorn, and group 3 (G3) includes various mixed species broadleaf trees.

The applicant has proposed the removal of two individual trees (T1 and T2) and two groups of hedgerow (G1 and G2). The intention is that trees within G3 although implicated by the development are to be retained and protected. G1 and G2 are old hedgerows that are established on mounds/rocks. The loss of the trees and hedges identified above will have no undue impact on the site or the surrounding area. Notwithstanding new tree planting has been proposed to include a mixed species hedgerow (as referred to in paragraph 7.2), including hawthorn, field maple, hazel, blackthorn, dog rose and dog wood. The species, location, planting density and species selection are appropriate. A condition requiring adherence to a maintenance regime is proposed.

8. Highways Impacts The highway implications associated with wind turbine development are concentrated over three phases; construction; operation and maintenance and; decommissioning.

Lancashire County Council has confirmed that upon completion of the works, there will be a negligible traffic impact associated with the development proposal. A range of planning conditions requiring the submission and implementation of a Construction Traffic Management Method Statement and the pre-agreement of a designated route for construction traffic are proposed.

The Highways Agency (HA) has raised no objection to the proposed development.

The issue of driver distraction is covered in the companion guide to PPS22 which states: ‘At all times drivers are required to take reasonable care to ensure their own and others’ safety. Wind turbines should therefore not be treated any differently from other distractions a driver must face and should not be considered particularly hazardous’ . Consequently, the issue of driver distraction, in the absence of objections from the relevant authorities is not a valid cause for concern in this case.

Conclusions In conclusion, it is considered that the proposal offers a small but positive step towards renewable energy targets and would wholly comply with national and regional policy with regards to its contribution towards meeting the UK’s government targets.

There is no doubt that the character and appearance of the landscape would be subject to a degree of change and the countryside in this location would be affected by the proposed development; however, the site in question does not occupy a completely uninterrupted landscape. The site is situated in a transitional landscape which is punctuated by communications’ infrastructure and transport networks. The presence of pylons, the service station buildings and the motorway on either side of the site already have a significant impact on the character of the landscape. It must also be noted that the character of the landscape is a product of past influences both natural and manmade and that landscape will continue to evolve in response to changes in climate, farming practices, housing and development needs as we move towards a low carbon future.

In conclusion and in the context of the existing consent on the application site, the wind turbine would be located within a significant transport corridor that has sufficient landscape capacity to accommodate the amount and type of development proposed. Landscape and visual impacts would be mitigated in many areas by the combination of topography, vegetation and presence of man made features particularly at distances beyond 2.5km from the turbine. There would likely be some locally significant impacts on Arnside and Silverdale AONB but overall these would not be of sufficient scale and extent to significantly affect the AONB’s setting and character. On balance the overall landscape character of the area would not be unduly affected to the extent that a refusal of planning permission could be substantiated.

RECOMMENDATION: Grant subject to the following conditions:

1. Standard Time Limit.

2. Development in accordance with the approved plans.

3. Turbine and associated infrastructure and hard standing shall be removed from site and land reinstated in accordance with a scheme to be agreed with the local planning authority before the expiry of 25 years from the turbine being operational.

4. If the turbine fails to produce electricity for a continuous period of 12 months, it and associated infrastructure and hardstanding shall be removed within a period of 6 months and the land reinstated in accordance with a scheme to be agreed with the local planning authority.

5. No micro-siting unless otherwise agreed in writing with the local planning authority.

6. All cabling on the site shall be installed underground.

7. Implementation of mitigation measures highlighted in the respective ecology reports.

8. No development shall commence until precise details of the semi-matt external finish and colour of the turbine have been submitted and approved by the local planning authority. The turbines shall not be illuminated, other than aviation lighting (in the form of infrared lighting, which is required to be agreed prior to the construction of the turbine), or display any name, sign, symbol or logo.

9. Noise condition restricting the turbine to the limits set by ETSU-R-97.

10. Noise condition – in the event of a complaint received, on the request of the local planning authority, the wind farm operator shall, within 28 days of the request, at its expense, employ a consultant approved by the local planning authority, to assess the turbine noise levels at the complainant's property, and where noise levels exceed the ETSU-R-97 carry out necessary mitigation.

11. Scheme for Additional Tree Planting and 10 year maintenance regime.

12. Retention of Existing Trees/Hedges (with the exception of identified individual species and groups.

13. Wheel cleaning facilities.

14. Restriction of abnormal load vehicular movements to those outlined within the submitted access information.

15. Prior to commencement of development: submission of a TV reception study.

17. Prior to commencement of development: submission of a Coordination Report and Mitigation Report provided by the Joint Radio Company in consultation with Western Power Distribution and shall set out any relevant mitigation measures and securing implementation.