Brixworth Windfarm

Environmental Statement

August 2008

Prepared by Arcus Renewable Energy Consulting Ltd on behalf of Bolsterstone Plc

Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Preface

PREFACE

This Environmental Statement accompanies the application by Bolsterstone Innovative Energy (Brixworth) Ltd, to Daventry District Council, to construct and operate a windfarm near Brixworth, north of in .

This Environmental Statement has been prepared by Arcus Renewable Energy Consulting Ltd on behalf of Bolsterstone and consists of:

1. Non-Technical Summary of the Environmental Statement 2. Environmental Statement – main volume text, figures and visualisations 3. Technical Appendices - supplementing the findings of the Environmental Statement

Copies of the Environmental Statement can be consulted at the following locations, by arrangement:

Daventry District Council, Town Hall, Daventry Daventry Library, North Street, Daventry Northampton Library, Abington Street, Northampton

The Non Technical Summary can be obtained free of charge and the full Environmental Statement can be purchased for £150 per copy. Alternatively the ES is available for £20 on CD- ROM.

Copies of the Environmental Statement and the Non-Technical Summary can be obtained from:

Arcus Renewable Energy Consulting Ltd Suite 2F Swinegate Court East 3 Swinegate York YO1 8AJ

Bolsterstone Plc i August 2008 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Non-Technical Summary

greenhouse gas emissions in 2006 had fallen 15% below 1990 levels while carbon dioxide NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY emissions were 5% below 1990 levels in 2006, (Meeting the Energy Challenge A White Paper on Energy, May 2007, DTI).

Another main objective is to move towards obtaining 10% of the UK’s electricity supply from INTRODUCTION renewable sources by 2010, with an aspiration for 20% renewable generation by 2020. In 2006 electricity supplied from renewable sources stood at around 4% of the UK’s total. This Non-Technical Summary forms part of the Environmental Statement to accompany an application by Bolsterstone Innovative Energy (Brixworth) Ltd (“the developer”) for a The RSS proposes a minimum regional energy target of 2495 GWh by 2010 and a 6 turbine windfarm of approximately 12MW near Brixworth, north of Northampton in suggested requirement by 2020 of nearly 5000 GWh. The RSS notes that at present renewable Northamptonshire. The location of the site is shown in Figure NTS 1.1. energy sources make only a minor contribution to the regions capacity (1.6%) and the proposed targets represent 10.6% of the overall electricity consumption at 2010. Bolsterstone was originally formed in 1988, its first project being to construct an industrial estate on the M18 near Rotherham. Since that date a wide range of property Policy 41 states that Development Plans and future Local Development Frameworks should related investments have been made by the directors through various corporate bodies include policies to promote and encourage the delivery of the indicative County Area 2010 which they run. There are over twenty actively trading or investment companies/bodies targets for renewable energy, as set out in Appendix 6 within the East Midlands RSS. The corporate, owning a wide range of assets including substantial office blocks let to the overall target for renewable energy in the East Midlands by 2010 is 671.6MW with onshore wind government, retail parades and several investments leased to substantial companies. contributing 122MW of this. In Northamptonshire the County Area 2010 target for renewables is Bolsterstone acts as the project management company to the other subsidiary and 55.5MW, of which 12MW is proposed from onshore wind energy. However the RSS emphasises associated companies. that these are minimum targets and consideration should be given to any further targets that may emerge. Bolsterstone has ambitions to become a major provider of ‘green energy’ in the UK. In conjunction with funders, an initial tranche of £50,000,000 has been earmarked for The installed capacity of Brixworth Windfarm will be approximately 12MW, which could provide investment in renewables, of which the majority will be invested in onshore . enough energy for approximately 6260 homes and has the potential to contribute CO2 emission reductions of approximately 16,975 tonnes1 during each year of its 25 year operational life. Bolsterstone intends to fulfil its ambition to help provide a secure energy supply for the nation, reduce climate change and provide a better environment for future generations. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT The current group thinking revolves around ‘future proofing’ it’s investments by better design of new build projects and incorporating energy efficient technologies and vastly The Environmental Statement (ES) has been prepared to accompany the planning application, in improved insulation values during refurbishment of its estate. accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) ( and Wales) Regulations 1999 (“The EIA Regulations”). The Bolsterstone subsidiary, Roy Williamson Homes Ltd, is currently constructing 22 advanced eco friendly homes in Norwich, incorporating various features such as low Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is a process intended to ensure that permissions for energy lighting and appliances, grey water use, massive amounts of insulation, solar developments with potentially significant effects on the environment should be granted only powered street lighting and many other power and water saving devices. It is working after prior assessment of the likely significant environmental effects has been carried out and closely with BRE to ensure this development is a model of what can be achieved with suitable mitigation or management measures identified. available technology. CONSULTATION AND SCOPING Energy underpins virtually every aspect of the economy. However, the use of fossil fuels such as gas and , which currently provide the bulk of our energy, releases The aim of the Scoping process is to identify key environmental issues at an early stage, to greenhouse gases (such as carbon dioxide) into the atmosphere which directly affects determine which elements of the proposal are likely to cause significant environmental effects our climate. To help lessen the effects of climate change, greenhouse gas emissions and to establish the work required for the preparation of the ES. must be reduced. One way of helping to achieve this is by generating energy from sources that emit low or even zero levels of greenhouse gases, such as renewable A scoping opinion for Brixworth Windfarm was requested from Daventry District Council by sources. Bolsterstone. Daventry District Council consults with various statutory and non statutory consultees, such as the Natural England, Civil Aviation Authority and RSPB, who in turn have an In order to meet international obligations, the UK is committed to reducing greenhouse obligation to provide any relevant information. In addition further detailed consultation was gas emissions in an attempt to reduce the effects of climate change. The UK Government has recently set a commitment to cut the UK’s carbon emissions by 60% by 2050, with a 26-32% reduction by 2020, against a 1990 baseline. Latest estimates show that total UK 1 BWEA, Calculations for Wind Energy Statistics, www.bwea.com/edu/calcs

Bolsterstone Plc ii August 2008 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Non-Technical Summary

undertaken by the specialist consultants to feed into the various technical environmental The proposed layout of the wind turbines is shown in Figure 3.1. The candidate turbine assessments. provisionally selected for this site, would have a hub height of 80m and a total height to blade tip of up to 125m. The turbine towers would be of tapering tubular steel construction and the As part of the wider consultation process Parish Councils will be contacted and a public blades would be made from fibre-reinforced epoxy. The finish of the turbines would be semi- exhibition will be held at the time of submission of the application. This will provide an matt pale grey. opportunity for local people to examine the proposals and explore issues of potential concern. The turbines would generate electricity in wind speeds between 4 and 25m/s. At wind speeds greater than 25m/s (56mph) the turbines would shut down for self-protection. Such high wind SITE SELECTION AND LAYOUT DESIGN conditions occur for a maximum of approximately 1% of the year. This windfarm would be generating electricity for approximately 80-85% of the year. Bolsterstone have been meticulous in their search for potential sites for wind energy projects in England. The windfarm will be connected to the national grid via a substation building in the eastern section of the site. The grid connection is the responsibility of CE Electric UK (Central England Using advanced wind speed and duration evaluation software and techniques, Electric) and the details of which would be agreed with Daventry District Council. Bolsterstone have investigated a number of potential sites to develop shortlists of sites which satisfied initial technical viability criteria. Operation Modern wind turbines have an expected operational availability of over 97%, including Further analysis relating to proximity to dwellings, constrained areas, designated sites, shutdowns due to routine maintenance. Each turbine has a computer controller that regulates noise and landscape character/impact as well as analysis of the geographic orientation of every aspect of the turbine’s performance. Routine site maintenance visits would take place the sites were then carried out to refine the lists of potential wind energy projects. approximately twice per week in a four-wheel drive vehicle to ensure that the turbines are operating at their maximum efficiency. Routine servicing would take place one per year with a Outline discussions with the Ministry of Defence, National Air Traffic Services and the main service at twelve monthly intervals and a minor service at six months. Civil Aviation Authority also served to confirm or reject potential sites. Feasibility studies relating to the electrical connection of the potential sites into the local and national grids Decommissioning was also undertaken. The expected productive lifetime of the turbines is estimated at about 25 years. At that time, it would be necessary to decide whether to refurbish, replace or remove the turbines. If Brixworth was one of a number of sites that were initially identified in the East Midlands refurbished or replaced an application would be made to extend its operational life. area and was finally ranked by Bolsterstone as the first project in this area after detailed evaluation of the technical, visual and economic aspects of the potential project. If the site is decommissioned, the turbines and all infrastructure would be removed from site. The upper sections of the foundations would be covered by peat and left to re-vegetate Different turbine layout designs were considered. Further detailed environmental analysis naturally. Underground cables would be cut back and left buried in the already vegetated peat of the windfarm site confirmed two rows of 3 wind turbines provided the optimal layout and tracks left for use by the farmer. This approach is considered to be less environmentally for this particular site based on environmental constraints. damaging than seeking to remove all foundations, cables and roads entirely.

It is estimated that decommissioning a windfarm of this size would take approximately 6 to 12 THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT months.

The proposal is to construct and operate a 12 MW windfarm comprising the following: PLANNING POLICY

6 wind turbines and associated infrastructure including transformers and crane pads; Government planning guidance on renewable energy developments is set out in PPS22: construction of site entrance; Renewable Energy (2004). The policy statement, while maintaining the usual planning controls upgrading of existing access tracks; is designed to encourage the planning system to make positive provision for renewable energy construction of new access tracks; development. construction of a temporary site compound and; erection of an anemometry mast. The Development Plan for the area comprises the Regional Spatial Strategy for the East Midlands (RSS8) (March 2005), The Northamptonshire Structure Plan 1996 -2016 and the Construction would take place over a 9 to 15 month period. Daventry District Local Plan (Adopted 1997) Saved Policies.

Bolsterstone Plc iii August 2008 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Non-Technical Summary

The planning system is currently undergoing a reform in which the development plan is fields, with associated hedge and ditch boundaries, which include several clumps of restructured to comprise of a RSS and a Local Development Framework. The RSS is hedgerow trees. The site is within the upper slopes of a valley, next to an area of currently being revised and is expected to be published in November 2007. plateau. The A508 runs adjacent to the site. The proposed development is within a locally designated landscape; however the rolling topography and mature pockets of tree planting and These all form material considerations to the proposal. high hedgerows within the study area, limit potential visibility of the proposed windfarm considerably. A separate Planning Statement, not part of this Environmental Statement, discusses the policy considerations and reaches some conclusions on the acceptability of the proposed The visual amenity of the study area has been gauged by understanding the views likely to be development in policy terms. experienced by different users within the study area, such as road users, walkers, people in settlements et cetera. In the first instance, computer mapping of the Zone of Theoretical SOCIO-ECONOMICS Visibility (ZTV) was carried out. The ZTV maps illustrate that visibility of the windfarm will be infrequent outside of 10km in the south-western portion of the study area. Elsewhere visibility The areas containing the windfarm infrastructure would be leased from the landowners. will be intermittent and only within the immediate locality of the windfarm. The ZTV illustrates These annual payments would allow the landowners to invest more money into their that there is potential for continuous visibility of the turbines within approximately 5km radius of farms, potentially increasing productivity and furthering employment opportunities. the development. However, in reality, the undulations in the landform and the mature planting within this area will screen the development from many areas resulting in pockets of visibility Impacts on tourism and recreation depend upon attitudes of the viewer. Studies within 5km of the proposed development. The assessment of effects on visual receptors takes undertaken by professional bodies have shown that the public is in favour of generating account of this energy by renewable means. Local people can be concerned with proposals for a windfarm in their area; however, these fears are generally allayed when the windfarm In assessing the effect of the windfarm on the landscape and visual resource, the effects have becomes operational. been divided into three categories: the effect on the landscape that the wind turbines will physically sit in (landscape fabric); the effects on the landscape whilst the windfarm is being Bolsterstone Plc firmly believe that the benefits of renewable energy projects should be constructed (short term effects during the construction phase); and the effects of the windfarm shared with the local community, and that this should involve shared ownership and/or in the long term (operational phase). profit sharing. As such, an agreed percentage of the proceeds of the project will go to the local community. The effects of the windfarm on the landscape fabric are considered to be limited as the area of land taken up by the turbines is relatively small. Effects during the construction phase will LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL EFFECTS include a short-term increase in heavy traffic whilst turbine parts are delivered to site and heavy plant is used to construct them. The effects relating to construction are considered to be limited This assessment investigates the likely effect of the proposed windfarm on the landscape as they are short -term. The longer term effects of the windfarm during its operational phase character and the visual amenity of the study area. It has been carried out by desk- are considered in detail to understand the overall acceptability of the windfarm in this location. based document review, consultation and site based survey work within a study area There are no national landscape designations within the site or study area; however the site is that extends 20km around the proposed windfarm. The assessment has been carried out within the eastern boundary of a Special Landscape Area, which is a local landscape in accordance with current guidance. designation. The study area has several local designated areas, including further Special Landscape Areas, Locally Important Landscape Areas, and Historic Parks and Gardens. The The main effect on landscape character would involve the introduction of 5 wind turbines Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment demonstrates that from the vast majority of these as new elements of the landscape. Impacts would be due principally to the functional areas, potential visual impacts are minor to negligible, due to the local landform and intervening character of the turbines, their overall height and the movement of their rotor blades and vegetation combining to limit views of the proposed development. It should be noted that would last for the 25 year life of the windfarm. access could not be gained to three of the historic landscapes; Althorp, Cottesbrooke and Holdenby House; therefore photographs could not be taken to further illustrate potential effects The landscape of the study area for the Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment is of a on these historic parks and gardens. gently rolling nature, with frequent historic features, such as churches, landscape parks and areas of ridge and furrow. Hedgerows and small woodlands emphasise the The effects of the windfarm on the visual resource have been assessed. The effects include undulating landform and the human scale. Settlements are numerous in number, though those upon the settlements, transport routes and viewpoints. due to the rolling landform, these are not widely visible; church spires are often the only prominent features. There are numerous villages, hamlets and scattered farmsteads within 5kms of the proposed development. The settlements tend to be located at road junctions, and are of an inward facing The proposed windfarm is located approximately 0.6km north of Brixworth, nature. Views are often therefore of an internal nature. Northamptonshire. The proposed windfarm site consists of a number of arable

Bolsterstone Plc iv August 2008 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Non-Technical Summary

In addition, the majority of villages and hamlets are situated within dips in the landform The habitat at the site comprised primarily of intensively farmed arable fields with hedgerows thus further limiting views. Visibility quickly diminishes for settlements located on the and ditches forming field boundaries. A number of small buildings associated within the farm eastern side of the A508. Significant effects are restricted to Hanging Houghton, the were also present within the survey area. This was typical of the type of land use in the area. hamlet located 0.8kms to the north of the proposed development. It is of note that the impacts upon Brixworth, the nearest village to the proposed development, are not The survey and assessment methods used followed recognised ecological guidelines. The results significant. of the survey and literature search revealed that one statutorily designated site, a site of special The nearest transport route to the proposed turbines is the A508. Numerous ‘A’ class scientific interest (SSSI), at Pitsford Reservoir was within 2km of the windfarm site. This roads run throughout the study area, as does the M1. Visibility of the proposed windfarm receptor was identified as being of national importance. Twelve non-statutorily designated sites, along the A508 is surprisingly limited given the proximity of the proposed turbines; local mostly county wildlife sites, were located within 2km of the site. These twelve sites were landform and high roadside hedges restrict views, and these are limited to occasional considered to be of local importance. No habitats within the windfarm site were considered to clear or glimpsed views. The A14 is the other ‘A’ class road within 10kms of the proposed be of ecological importance. One hedgerow was identified as being important as defined by the site. The A14 connects to the M1, and as such is a very fast, busy road. Theoretical Hedgerow Regulations. This receptor was identified as being of local importance. Species that visibility along the A14 is generally intermittent and embankments and roadside planting were found on site considered to be of conservation value and/or required legal consideration serve to further restrict views to the proposed turbines. Significant effects upon roads are were badgers, brown hare (both considered to be of local importance) and certain bat species restricted to localised sections of the A508. (common and soprano pipistrelle, brown long-eared bat and noctule). The bat population was considered to be of regional importance. All these features were considered to be valued Other transport routes within the study area include several national footpaths and cycle ecological receptors (VERs) requiring further detailed assessment of potential impacts from the routes, railway lines and the ; the latter two do not experience windfarm. significant effects. Three national footpaths and one cycle path come within 5kms of the proposed turbines; the Brampton Valley Way, the , the Macmillan Way and Factors that were considered as potentially affecting the VERs were habitat loss, displacement, (the Brampton Valley Way, the Midshires Way and National Cycle direct mortality, disturbance and indirect effects. From the results of the surveys and the initial Route 6 follow the same route for parts of their course). Significant effects upon these assessment, few impacts were identified as having the potential to affect the VERs and none routes are restricted to approximately to a 2km stretch, where they pass by the site and would have a significant impact on their ecological integrity. However, taking a precautionary where there are open views to the turbines. approach, it was recognised that considerations and measures would be required to ensure legal compliance for protected species and the important hedgerow. The assessment also considered the effect of the proposed windfarm in relation to other existing windfarms or those already in the planning system that are or may be A series of mitigation measures have been proposed to ensure legal compliance with wildlife consented. Three other wind developments are located within the 30km cumulative legislation and to be precautionary to minimise the impact of a small number of potential study area, including the existing windfarm at Burton Wold. These wind developments impacts on biodiversity caused by the scheme. are located at some distance from each other. No significant cumulative effects were found. It was also recognised that there is an opportunity to undertake some enhancement activities including land management that would be expected to increase the value of the site to This assessment concludes that as there are relatively few potentially significant effects biodiversity and wildlife in general. of the proposed windfarm on the landscape and visual resource of the study area, the proposed Brixworth windfarm is acceptable in landscape and visual terms. In summary the assessment concluded that the scheme was considered to have no significant impact on any of the valued ecological receptors identified at or near the site. The ecological integrity of the features was expected to remain intact. ECOLOGY

Proposals have been prepared for the construction, operation and decommissioning of a ORNITHOLOGY windfarm at Lodge Farm near Brixworth. This includes the installation of six turbines and their associated infrastructure such as access roads, site compound and anemometry A comprehensive suite of ornithological surveys, consultation and desk based literature reviews mast. were undertaken with the aim of generating a set of robust baseline data from which an informed ecological impact assessment could be carried out. This assessment would help to A series of ecological surveys, consultation and desk based literature reviews were determine the potential impacts of the proposals on the ornithological interest at the site. undertaken, their aim being to generate a set of robust baseline data from which an informed ecological impact assessment could be carried out. This assessment would help The survey and assessment methods used followed recognised guidelines. There is one site of to determine the potential impacts of the proposals on the biodiversity at the site. special scientific interest (SSSI) designated for its important bird populations within 2km of the windfarm site: Pitsford Reservoir. This receptor was identified as being of very high importance.

Bolsterstone Plc v August 2008 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Non-Technical Summary

Twelve non-statutory designated sites, mostly county wildlife sites, were located within A fundamental “embedded” mitigation measure is the use of interceptor drains, silt traps and 2km of the site. These twelve sites were considered to be of low conservation balancing ponds in proximity to access tracks to avoid introducing silt to site watercourses. importance in terms of ornithological interest. Six avian receptors of more than negligible conservation value were identified as using To avoid introducing silt to site watercourses, a 50m buffer from watercourses will be the site: red kite, hobby, barn owl, golden plover, lapwing and the farmland bird maintained. community. All these features were considered to be valued ecological receptors (VERs) There will also be a 50 metre buffer zone for all turbine bases around the watercourses on the requiring further detailed assessment of potential impacts from the windfarm. site. This 50 metre buffer zone, in conjunction with a suitable Pollution Prevention Plan should avoid potential impacts on surface water courses. Factors that were considered as potentially affecting the VERs were habitat loss, disturbance, and collision. There is predicted to be no significant impacts on the statutory Finally, the principles of Sustainable Urban Drainage (SUDS) will also be employed where or non-statutory designated sites. From the results of the surveys and the initial appropriate within the development. assessment, very few impacts were identified as having the potential to affect the VERs and none would have a significant impact on their ecological integrity. However, taking a Best Practice precautionary approach, it was recognised that considerations and measures would be A Pollution Prevention Plan (PPP) will set out measures to be employed to avoid or mitigate required to ensure legal compliance for the protection of breeding birds. against potential impacts for all phases of the development, and will also include an Incident Plan to be followed, should pollution occur. A nominated person will have specific responsibility A series of mitigation measures have been proposed to ensure legal compliance with for implementation of the PPP. wildlife legislation and to be precautionary to minimise the potential impact on the farmland bird community. It was also recognised that there is an opportunity to Method statements will also be applied, which will follow the principles laid out in relevant undertake some enhancement activities including land management and provision of Environment Agency Pollution Prevention Guidelines (PPGs). nest boxes that would be expected to increase the value of the site to birds and biodiversity in general. With the proposed mitigation measures, the potential effects of the windfarm on hydrology and hydrogeology are not considered to be significant. In summary the assessment concluded that the ornithological interest at the site is low and the scheme was considered to have no significant impact on any of the valued ecological receptors identified at or near the site. The ecological integrity of the features ARCHAEOLOGY AND CULTURAL HERITAGE was expected to remain intact. This assessment has considered the potential for the proposed development to have impacts HYDROLOGY upon features of cultural heritage interest within and beyond the site boundary. It has considered both the potential for direct impacts (damage or destruction of archaeological The assessment has been based on a detailed desk study, walkover, and consultations features within the site,) and indirect impacts (principally the potential for visual impacts upon with a range of organisations, including Daventry District Council and The Environment the settings of cultural heritage features beyond the site boundary). Agency. A desk-based assessment was carried out, and data collected on cultural heritage features at The geology of the site is predominantly underlain by mudstone of the Whitby Mudstone various ranges beyond the site boundary, in consultation with Northamptonshire County Formation. Land in the north east section of the site is underlain by Ooidal Ironstone of Council. the Northampton Sand Formation and overlain by residual soil materials from the in situ breakdown of rock. Two main surface watercourses drain the site, identified as an The baseline work established that there are no known archaeological remains within the site unnamed watercourse in the southern section of the site and a tributary draining north boundary, although the number of archaeological features close to the site boundary indicates to south. Pitsford Reservoir lies approximately 3.2km southwest of the site centre. that there is potential for buried remains to survive. It is felt that this can be mitigated y the agreement and implementation of an appropriate scheme of archaeological investigation, prior The application site west lies within the catchment area of all two of the abovementioned to and during construction. The scope and extent of such work could be agreed with the Local watercourses, which drain westwards. Planning Authority and secured by means of a condition to any planning consent.

Potential impacts on hydrology have been mitigated through “embedded” measures and Indirect (visual) effects were identified upon the settings of some cultural heritage features through best practice. beyond the site boundary. Only two of these are considered significant in terms of the EIA regulations. These are visual effects upon the settings of the Scheduled Monument at Hanging Embedded Mitigation Houghton and the Grade I listed All Saints Church in Brixworth. These effects will be fully reversed on the decommissioning of the windfarm at the end of its consented lifespan.

Bolsterstone Plc vi August 2008 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Non-Technical Summary

NOISE Any effects on television reception can be resolved through technical solutions, such as changing aerial heights, replacement and retuning of aerials or the provision of satellite or cable An assessment of the potential effects of noise during construction, operation and services for effected properties. decommissioning of the proposed Brixworth windfarm has been carried out. Pager Power was commissioned to undertake a Microwave and Link Survey Analysis in March The principal UK guidance on noise from construction activities is contained in BS 52282. 2008. It concluded that two microwave links (operated by T-Mobile and Orange) traverse the This advocates an approach based on the use of best practice working measures to site. Consideration has been given to the two microwave links that traverse the site and minimise, as far as is reasonably practicable, the adverse effects of construction noise. separation distances from turbines has been maintained in accordance with Fixed-link wind- 3 Therefore, it is proposed to adopt mitigation measures which are considered to be best turbine exclusion zone method . practice to manage construction noise. These will include measures such as restriction of construction activities to times agreed with Daventy District Council, and communication with local communtities. ACCESS AND TRAFFIC

Operational noise from windfarms is assessed following the procedure set out in ETSU-R- The traffic and transport assessment centers on the effects during the construction of Brixworth 97, The Assessment and Rating . This specifies limits on the Windfarm. Traffic levels during this period would be at their highest levels when compared to levels of windfarm noise that are considered acceptable at the nearest houses. These are operation traffic. set relative to the existing background noise levels at the houses. Noise levels from the proposed windfarm have been ofpredicted Noise from using Wind a Farmsrecognised computer modelling One route would be utilised during the construction period. Abnormal loads would be brought technique, and have been assessed as being in compliance with the requirements of via the and follow the route below; ETSU-R-97. They are therefore considered to be not significant. Abnormal loads; The table below illustrates the typical levels of some familiar noise sources and compares these with levels from a typical windfarm. From M1 Junction 19 proceed east onto A14; OR Source / Activity Indicative noise level dB(A) From A1 proceed west onto A14 at Brampton; Threshold of pain 140 Turn (south) onto A508 (Junction 2 on A14); Jet aircraft at 250m 105 Turn right (west) into site at Grid Ref. SP 752 727. Pneumatic drill at 7m 95 Truck at 30mph at 100m 65 No significant effect on traffic along the A508 is expected. Agreements would be drawn up to Busy general office 60 ensure that these vehicle movements do not coincide with local peak traffic periods. Car at 40mph at 100m 55 Windfarm at 350m 35-45 Abnormal loads would be escorted by the police or private contractor and delivered outside of Quiet bedroom 35 peak periods due to the likely delays these could create. Wheel washing and road sweeping in Rural night-time background 20-40 the vicinity of the site access would be in place to reduce the effect of dust, dirt and mud on the public highway. In addition, a Traffic Management Plan would be agreed with Daventry District Threshold of hearing 0 Council to address any other concerns associated with the construction traffic. Source:Planning for Renewable Energy, A companion Guide to PPS22, ODPM 2004

Best Practice measures will be employed during decommissioning to ensure compliance OTHER ISSUES with legislation and guidance relevant at the time.

Brixworth Windfarm will have a positive benefit of emission savings. Every year of its 25 year EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE operational life it will displace 16,975 tonnes of CO2, from entering the atmosphere.

Any health and safety risks will be addressed through mitigation measures and normal Brixworth Windfarm is not expected to have a significant effect on existing infrastructure construction and operational procedures. All relevant legislation will be adhered to during all including aviation, television and telecommunications and utilities. stages of development. The implementation of current best practice and technology will be used

so as to minimise any health and safety risks that might be associated with this project.

2 BS 5228:1997: Noise and vibration control on construction and open sites. 3 http://www.jrc.co.uk/windfarms/docs/windfarmdavidbacon.pdf

Bolsterstone Plc vii August 2008 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Non-Technical Summary

The implementation of the construction design and management principles will result in a quality windfarm development, built, operated and maintained to the highest standards of safety.

Sensors and protection equipment will be fitted to turbines and operational procedures followed to mitigate any safety risks associated with extreme weather.

An assessment of potential shadow flicker effects has been carried out. Shadow flicker is an effect that can occur when the shadow of a moving wind turbine blade passes over a small opening (window), briefly reducing the intensity of light within the room, and causing a flickering to be perceived.

It occurs only under certain combinations of relative sun, turbine and window locations, turbine orientation, times of day, days of the year and weather conditions.

The flickering may have the potential to cause disturbance and annoyance to residents if it affects occupied rooms of a house. Although some persons with photosensitive epilepsy are sensitive to flickering light, the frequencies of flicker caused by modern wind turbines (less than one Hertz) are well below the frequencies known to trigger effects in these individuals.

The assessment has identified properties likely to be affected, within a distance of ten rotor diameters (900m) and 130 degrees of north relative to the proposed turbine locations, as this is the area in which effects are known to occur, according to the Companion Guide to PPS22.

The approximate times of day and year that effects may occur at these properties have been calculated, based on a number of worst-case assumptions.

A control system will be employed during operation of the which will prevent shadow flicker from occurring, by automatically shutting down turbines at times that flicker may occur, based on pre-programmed locations for the turbines and properties, and measurement of light intensity.

Bolsterstone Plc viii August 2008 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Table of Contents

Figure 6.6 Burton Wold (Existing) Hub Height Cumulative ZTV CONTENTS Figure 6.7 Burton Wold (Extension) Hub Height Cumulative ZTV Figure 6.8 Tesco Wind Turbine Hub Height Cumulative ZTV

Figure 6.9 Viewpoint 1 Photograph and wireline 1 Introduction Figure 6.10 Viewpoint 2 Photograph, wireline and photomontage Figure 6.11 Viewpoint 3 Photograph, wireline and photomontage 2 Environmental Impact Assessment Figure 6.12 Viewpoint 4 Photograph, wireline and photomontage 3 Project Description Figure 6.13 Viewpoint 5 Photograph, wireline and photomontage 4 Planning Policy Figure 6.14 Viewpoint 6 Wireline Figure 6.15 Viewpoint 7 Photograph, wireline and photomontage 5 Socio-Economics Figure 6.16 Viewpoint 8 Photograph and wireline 6 Landscape and Visual Figure 6.17 Viewpoint 9 Photograph and wireline Figure 6.18 Viewpoint 10 Photograph and wireline 7 Ecology Figure 6.19 Viewpoint 11 Photograph and wireline 8 Ornithology Figure 6.20 Viewpoint 12 Photograph and wireline Figure 6.21 Viewpoint 13 Photograph, wireline and photomontage 9 Hydrology and Hydrogeology Figure 6.22 Viewpoint 14 Photograph and wireline 10 Archaeology and Cultural Heritage Figure 6.23 Viewpoint 15 Photograph and wireline Figure 6.24 Viewpoint 16 Photograph and wireline 11 Noise Figure 6.25 Viewpoint 17 Photograph and wireline 12 Existing Infrastructure Figure 6.26 Viewpoint 18 Photograph and wireline

13 Other Issues Figure 8.1 Bird Survey Areas 14 Access and Traffic Figure 8.2a-g Breeding Bird Surveys Figure 8.3a-b Bird Flight Paths

Figure 9.1 Surface Watercourses and Catchments LIST OF FIGURES Figure 9.2 Solid Geology

Figure 1.1 Site Location Figure 10.1 Cultural Heritage Features Within or Adjacent to Site Figure 10.2 Scheduled Ancient Monuments Within 2km of Site Figure 3.1 Proposed Site layout Figure 10.3 Historic Parks and Gardens Within 10km of Site Figure 3.2 Typical Wind Turbine Figure 3.3 Typical Turbine Foundation Figure 11.1 Noise Contour Plot: Scoping Layout Figure 3.4 Typical Crane Hardstanding Figure 11.2 Noise Contour Plot: Assessment Layout Figure 3.5 Typical Access Track Design Figure 3.5a Typical Site Entrance Figure 12.1 Location of Medium Pressure Gas Pipeline Figure 3.6 Typical Culvert Design Figure 3.7 Typical Drainage Details Figure 13.2 Shadow Flicker Study Area and Receptor Locations Figure 3.8 Typical Cable Trench Figure 3.9 Illustration Of The Substation Building Figure 14.1 Proposed Routes for Vehicle Movements and Component Delivery Figure 3.10 Typical Meteorological (Anemometer) Mast Figure 3.11 Indicative Compound Design

Figure 6.1 Site Location Figure 6.2 Local Landscape Designations Figure 6.3 Joint Character Areas Figure 6.4 Local Landscape Character Areas Figure 6.5 Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV)

Bolsterstone Plc ix August 2008

440000 450000 460000 470000 480000 490000 500000 510000 300000 300000

Key

Site Location 290000 290000 280000 280000 270000 270000 Licence number 0100031673 Licence number 260000 260000 250000 250000 1:250,000Scale @ A3

0510km

Site Location Figure NTS 1.1 240000 240000 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement 440000 450000 460000 470000 480000 490000 500000 510000 Reproduced under licence from Ordnance Survey digital map data. Crown Copyright.All rights reserved.

Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 1: Introduction

change and providing a better environment for future generations’. Bolsterstone concentrates 1. INTRODUCTION on smaller projects which can be more effectively blended into the landscape and sited closer to the point of use thus reducing the amount of power lost between the point of generation and 1.1 THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT the end user.

Bolsterstone Innovative Energy (Brixworth) Ltd., (the Applicant) is proposing to develop a The current approach revolves around ‘future proofing’ its investments by better design of new windfarm (hereafter referred to as “the windfarm”) on land adjacent to Lodge Farm, build projects and incorporating energy efficient technologies and vastly improved insulation approximately 1.7 kilometres (km) north of Brixworth and 1.1km south of Hanging Haughton in values during refurbishment of its estate. Northamptonshire. The location of the site, to be known as Brixworth Windfarm, is shown in Figure 1.1. The Bolsterstone subsidiary, Roy Williamson Homes Ltd, is currently constructing 22 advanced eco friendly homes in Norwich, incorporating various features such as low energy lighting and The installed capacity of the windfarm will be approximately 12 MegaWatts (MW)1, depending appliances, grey water use, massive amounts of insulation, solar powered street lighting and on the choice of turbine manufacturer, which will provide enough energy to power many other power and water saving devices. It is working closely with the Building Research 2 Establishment (BRE) to ensure this development is a model of what can be achieved with approximately 6260 homes and displace over 17,000 tonnes (te) of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions during each year of operation3. available technology.

The windfarm will consist of 6 turbines, with associated infrastructure including access tracks, New office blocks shortly to have applications submitted for planning consent in Sheffield and on-site substation control building and underground power cables. One anemometer mast will Derby will follow the same thought processes and principles. also be erected to monitor wind speed. The development of the windfarm will be subject to the grant of planning permission by Daventry District Council, following statutory consultation with 1.3 THE PLANNING APPLICATION Northamptonshire County Council and others. Under Schedule 2 of the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations4, windfarms that The windfarm will generate electricity during a period of 25 years and after this time will be involve the installation of two or more turbines or where the hub height of any turbine or height removed. Alternatively, the life of the windfarm may be extended subject to further of any other structure exceeds 15 metres (m) may be subject to an Environmental Impact environmental studies and new consents. Assessment (EIA) where it is likely to have significant effects on the environment by virtue of factors such as its size, nature or location. It has been agreed with Daventry District Council Arcus Renewable Energy Consulting Ltd (“Arcus”), in conjunction with a range of other specialist that an EIA should be undertaken for Brixworth Windfarm, given it involves proposals for 6 consultants has compiled an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) of the proposals. The turbines. EIA is reported in this Environmental Statement (ES), which accompanies the planning application to Daventry District Council. An application for planning permission, accompanied by the ES, is being made under The Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to Daventry District Council. The windfarm will be connected to the local electricity grid via a new substation building on site. An application for the grid connection between the site substation and the national grid will be This ES comprises the following volumes: made separately. Environmental Statement, Volume I: contains EIA text (this document) which reports the 1.2 THE APPLICANT findings of the EIA and visualisations that accompany the written report; Environmental Statement, Volume II: contains Technical Appendices with detailed technical Bolsterstone are a North Midlands-based property development and investment company that information supplementing the findings presented within Volume I; and have developed expertise in renewable energy projects, and are making considerable Environmental Statement, Non Technical Summary: provides a summary of the information investments in the renewable energy market, particularly on-shore wind power. presented in Volume I.

Bolsterstone has ambitions to become a major provider of green energy in the UK. Bolsterstone The Environmental Statement, Volume I, is structured as follows: believes in ‘doing their part to provide a secure energy supply for the nation, reducing climate Chapters 1 and 2 provide an overview of the windfarm proposals and the environmental 1 The actual final generating capacity of the windfarm could be slightly higher than this, however it would in all cases be less than 50 MW assessment process including the proposed mitigation strategy; 2 Based on a windfarm of 12MW (assuming a of 26.3%) and an average electricity consumption in the East Midlands in 2006 of Chapter 3 provides a full description of the proposed windfarm, site selection and outlines 4415kWh (Digest of UK Energy Statistics ,www.berr.gov.uk/energy/ statistics/ regional/regional-local-electricity/ page36213.html) the number the construction and decommissioning methodologies; of homes supplied is calculated as 6262. It should be noted that the number of homes supplied will vary depending on site wind speeds and household electricity consumption. Chapter 4 examines relevant national, regional and local planning policies; and 3 Based on a windfarm of 12MW (assuming a capacity of 26.3%) and figures for CO2 emissions from UK generation fossil fuel mix of 614 tonnes of CO2 per GWh in 2007 in March 2008 Energy Trends, page 22, BERR the Brixworth Windfarm would displace 16,975 Tonnes of CO2 emissions each year. 4 The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 1999 (as amended)

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 1-1 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 1: Introduction

Chapters 5 - 14 cover individual technical areas, with each containing a discussion of likely To help lessen the effects of climate change, greenhouse gas emissions must be reduced. One significant effects, proposed mitigation measures, and subsequent residual effects. way of helping to achieve this is by generating energy from sources that emit low or even zero levels of greenhouse gases, such as renewable sources. 1.4 THE PROJECT TEAM 1.5.1 CO 2 Savings The EIA has been project managed by Arcus with technical input from a range of specialist consultants with renewable energy expertise. The ES has been compiled by Arcus. Table 1.1 The windfarm has the potential to displace electricity generated from fossil fuels and identifies the team members and their responsibilities. consequently prevent CO2 from being released. The actual amount of CO2 released through in the UK relates directly to the generating plant in use at any given time. Table 1.1 Project Team This mix changes on a daily basis and will change in the future as UK generating plant is Area of Expertise Consultant replaced and as a consequence it is not possible to predict exactly how much CO2 release the Project Management Arcus windfarm will prevent over its lifetime. Planning Policy Framework Arcus Hydrology and Hydrogeology Arcus 6 The BERR Energy Trends March 2008 statistics report states that 366 te of CO2 are released Noise Arcus each gigawatt hour (GWh) when generating electricity from gas; this is increased to 911 te per Landscape and Visual Circle Design Consultants GWh when generation is from coal. The average CO2 release from the fossil fuel mix, which also Ecology and Ornithology Arcus includesworld needs oil, is a614 more te percoherent GWh. system of internation Archaeology and Cultural Heritage Arcus invest more in green technologies Aviation Pager Power Onglobal this basis, warming the windfarm,and its effects.” with an estimated energy yield of 12 MW, could displace between Existing Infrastructure Arcus approximately 10,118 (based on gas) and 25,186 (based on coal) te of CO emissions each year Access and Traffic Carazon 2 from entering the atmosphere. In addition the operation of the windfarm could, based on the The Applicant has provided key information to the process of windfarm design and its same assumptions, also displace otherand gases smarter related policies. to coal-fired And we electricity generation including operational parameters, the iterative site layout design process and mitigation measures to those associated with acid rain such as sulphur dioxideal (SO environmental2) and oxides gover of nitrogen (NOX). minimise the environmental effects of the windfarm. 1.5.2 International Context need to do far more to adapt to 1.5 RENEWABLE ENERGY DEMAND nance. We need to Ban Ki-Moon, at the UN Climate Change Conference 2007 (Bali, Indonesia), stated that, "The Energy underpins virtually every aspect of the economy. However, the use of fossil fuels such as gas and coal, which currently provides the bulk of our energy, releases greenhouse gases

(such as carbon dioxide – CO2) into the atmosphere. Due to factors such as population growth and changes in lifestyle, the demand for energy has increased to levels where the burning of The 2007 UN Climate Change Conference in Bali brought countries together to discuss how to fossil fuels is releasing enough greenhouse gases into the atmosphere to affect the climate. reduce greenhouse gas emissions after the current Kyoto Protocol targets expire in 2012. The There is now scientific consensus that climate change is occurring and that it poses a Bali Action Plan was agreed whereby countries will now look to having new emission reduction considerable global threat. targets in place by December 2009. The UK is currently responsible for the release of around 2 per cent of the world’s global man- Under the current Kyoto Protocol, participating countries have agreed to limit or reduce their made emissions of CO . In 2007, 544 million tonnes of CO (MtCO ) are estimated to have been 2 2 2 emissions of greenhouse gases and have been assigned targets stipulating the maximum emitted from the UK. CO emissions from electricity generation are the largest single 2 amount that they can emit per year over the period of commitment (2008-2012)7. contributors to UK greenhouse gas emissions, contributing a third (180 MtCO2) of the total amount of carbon dioxide emitted in the UK5. 20 GW, or 20,000 MW, of new wind energy was installed in 2007, an increase of 30% compared to new wind installations in 2006. At the end of 2007 the total installed wind power Renewable energy is the term used to describe energy flows that occur naturally and capacity worldwide stood at over 94 GW (94,000 MW). The global capacity of 94 GW of wind continuously in the environment, such as energy from the wind, waves or tides. The origin of power would save approximately 122 million te of CO every year, which is equivalent to the majority of these sources can be traced back to either the sun (energy from the sun helps 2 approximately 20 large coal fired power stations8. to drive the earth’s weather patterns) or the gravitational effects of the sun and the moon. This means that these sources are continuously replenished. The key issue is how to extract this energy as effectively as possible and convert it into a usable form. 6 Energy Trends March 2008. BERR National Statistics Publication. Page 22. 7 Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, 1997 8 Global Wind Energy Council (GWEC). www.gwec.net Latest News Continuing boom in wind energy – 20 18th 5 Energy Trends March 2008. BERR National Statistics Publication. January 2008

GW of new capacity in 2007 Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 1-2 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 1: Introduction

1.5.3 Renewable Energy in Europe protocol). However, the UK Government has set a domestic target for reduction of CO2 emissions beyond the commitment to the European Union of 20% from 1990 levels by 2010. The European Union (EU) produces around 22% of global greenhouse gas emissions and has agreed under the Kyoto Protocol to a cut of 8% from 1990 levels by 2008-2012. In 2003 the Energy White Paper “Our Energy Future – Creating a Low Carbon Economy” was published. In this, the Government announced a goal to cut CO2 emissions by 2050 with ‘real In March 2007, The European Council agreed to a common European strategy for energy progress’ by 2020. security and tackling climate change. This includes a binding target of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 20% by 2020 and by 30% in the context of international action. In March 2007 a draft Climate Change Bill was published which creates a new legal framework for the UK to achieve a mandatory 60% cut in the UK’s CO2 emissions by 2050 (compared to The EU’s 2001 Renewables Directive9 aims to increase the share of electricity produced from 1990 levels), with an intermediate target of between 26-32% by 2020. If approved, the UK is renewable energy sources in the EU to 21% by 2010, thus helping the EU reach its target of likely to become the first country in the world to set such a long-term and significant carbon overall energy consumption of 12% by 2010: reduction target into law.

“Promoting renewable energy will help to In May 2007 “Meeting the Energy Challenge” A White Paper on Energy was published14. In this competitiveness, through the creation the UK Government reiterated its commitment to cut the UK’s CO2 emissions by 60% by 2050 eco-technologies. It is also a lon and by 26-32% by 2020 against a 1990 baseline. by 2010 is producing at least Latest estimates show that total UK CO emissions in 2007 were 8% below 1990 levels15. sources”. 2 Andris Piebalgs, Commissioner for Energy, Strasbourg. Further action is needed to curb carbon dioxide emissions over the next few years if the of new jobs and cementing t g term investmentcombat in securityclimate ofchange and contribute to Governments targets are to be met. The 2007 European Council agreement sets a further target for 20% of the EU’s overall energy 12 % of EU’s overall energy consumption to be from renewables by 2020. With an installed capacity of approximately 12 MW, the windfarm has the potential to contribute CO emission reductions of approximately 17,000 te during each year of its operational life, he European Union’s lead on 2 The 20% renewables target is an ambitious goal representing a large increase in Member assuming the energy mix of fuel sources remains as it is currently. States’ renewables capacity. Latest data shows that the current shareenergy of renewables supply. Our in objectivethe EU consumption from renewable as a whole is around 6% and projections indicate that by 2020, on the basis of existing policies, The Government has a target of 10% of the UK’s electricity supply to come from renewable renewables are unlikely to exceed 10% of the EU’s energy consumption10. The Commission sources by 2010, with an aspiration for 20% renewable generation by 2020. In 2006 brought forward detailed proposals for each Member State’s contribution to the EU targets on renewables accounted for only 4.6% of electricity generated in the UK16. The recent draft renewables in January 200811. The draft Renewable Energy Directive takes into account Renewable Energy Directive set a target of 15% of the total energy consumed in the UK different national starting points and potentials for renewable energies and the UK has been set (electricity, heat and transport) to come from renewable sources by 2020. This would require a a target of 15% of energy from renewable sources in final energy consumption in 2020. ten-fold increase in the level of renewable generation and use in the UK over the next 12 years17. The UK Government is now reviewing and consulting on its renewable energy strategy In 2007, 8,662 MW of new wind power capacity was installed in the EU, taking the total in order to meet the UK share of the EU renewables target. It is expected that the UK installed capacity in Europe at the end of 2007 to over 57,000 MW, representing 61% of the Renewable Energy Strategy will be published in Spring 2009. Possible measures to deliver the global total12 and which would produce 119 TeraWatt hours (TWh) in an average year equal to UK share of the EU target include: 3.7% of EU power demand. Over the past 10 years, cumulative wind power capacity in the EU has increased by an average 28% per year13. Extending and raising the level of the Renewables Obligation to encourage up to 30-35% of UK electricity to come from renewable sources by 2020 (currently it is less than 5%); and 1.5.4 Renewable Energy in the UK Helping the planning system to deliver, by agreeing a clear deployment strategy at regional level similar to the approach established for housing. The United Kingdom is committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 12.5% from 1990 levels by 2008-2012 as part of the Framework Convention on Climate Change (the Kyoto In order to meet the 2020 target, the Renewable Energy Strategy Consultation expects the currently commercial technology of wind power (on and offshore) to be a key growth area. Initial modelling suggests the UK needs 14 GW of onshore wind power generation capacity

9 EU 2001 Renewables Directive - http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2001:283:0033:0040:EN:PDF 10 EU Commission Renewable Energy Road Map. Renewable energies in the 21st century: building a more sustainable future. 11 Commission of the European Communities. Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the promotion of the 14 use of energy from renewable sources. 23.01.2008. (COM 2008). http://ec.europa.eu/energy/climate_actions/doc/2008 _res_directive_en.pdf Meeting the Energy Challenge A White Paper on Energy, May 2007, DTI 12 15 Global Wind Energy Council (GWEC). www.gwec.net Latest News Continuing boom in wind energy – 20 GW 18th BERR Energy Trends March 2008 16 January 2008. BERR UK Energy in Brief July 2007 www.berr.gov.uk/files/39881.pdf 13 17 Global Wind 2007 Report, Global Wind Energy Council (GWEC) UK Renewable Energy Strategy www.berr.gov.uk/energy/sources/renewables/strategy/page43356.html

of new capacity in 2007 Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 1-3 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 1: Introduction

compared to 2 GW today. This equates to around 4,000 new 3 MW onshore turbines in addition The statutory East Midlands Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) was published by the Government to the approximately 2,000 turbines already installed18. Office for the East Midlands in 2005. The East Midlands RSS proposes a minimum regional energy target of 2495 GWh by 2010 and a suggested requirement by 2020 of nearly 5000 GWh. Another important energy issue is security of supply, which is vital to the UK economy. The UK’s The RSS notes that, at present, renewable energy sources make only a minor contribution to natural energy resources are declining and are currently only partly replaced by indigenous the regions capacity (1.6%) and the proposed targets represent 10.6% of the likely overall supplies of energy such as wind. Consequently, the UK will become more dependent on electricity consumption in 2010. imported fuels to meet its energy demand. The May 2007 White Paper on Energy19 states that, by 2020, around 80% of the UK’s fuels are likely to come from overseas. The UK therefore Policy 41 of the RSS states that Development Plans and future Local Development Frameworks faces greater exposure to developments in the global energy system including becoming more should include policies to promote and encourage the delivery of the indicative County Area vulnerable to the impact of overseas disruptions to energy supplies caused by international 2010 targets for renewable energy. The overall target for renewable energy in the East disputes and accidents, facing higher and more volatile energy prices. Midlands by 2010 is 671.6 MW with onshore wind contributing 122 MW of this. In Northamptonshire the County Area 2010 target for renewable power generation is 55.5 MW, of Increasing the use of indigenous renewable sources of energy will reduce our dependence on which 12 MW is proposed from onshore wind developments. However the RSS emphasises that imported fossil fuels and will increase diversity and security of supply to the UK’s energy these are minimum targets and consideration should be given to any further targets that may infrastructure. The Renewable Energy Strategy Consultation estimates that meeting the 15% emerge. renewable energy target in 2020 could reduce gas imports by between 12 and 16%, with increasing benefits as gas becomes more scarce and expensive20. The East Midlands Regional Plan (RSS8) is currently under review. The draft RSS which provides a broad development strategy for the East Midlands until 2026 is expected to be adopted in The UK energy industry still relies on finite, diminishing sources of fossil fuel such as coal, oil Autumn 2008. The current draft RSS24 states that to contribute to the UK Governments 60% and gas. In 2006, approximately 75% of the UK’s electricity was generated from fossil fuel reduction in CO2 emissions by 2050 would require a reduction in electricity consumption of sources, 18%t from nuclear sources, and 4.5% from renewable sources21. In 2006, biofuels around 1.5% per year each year in the East Midlands. It states that renewable energy sources accounted for 82% of renewable energy power generation capacity, hydro (large scale) currently make only a minor contribution to the regions capacity and the East Midlands lags accounted for 8% and wind power contributed 8.2%. At the present time, the UK wind industry behind other English Regions. In Appendix 5 it reiterates the regional target for onshore wind (on and offshore) has an installed capacity of 2545.5 MW from 175 projects, sufficient energy to energy in 2010 of 122 MW and goes on to provide a target for onshore wind energy in 2020 of power the equivalent of 1,423,300 homes. Of this there are 168 onshore operational windfarms 175 MW. It adds that the targets given should be treated as a minimum and it should not be contributing 2141 MW22. inferred that once the targets have been met that efforts should not continue to deliver additional renewable schemes. Wind turbines generate electricity for 70-85% of the time. The proportion of time a wind turbine is generating depends on the average wind speed at the site and the numberof hours At present there are 7 windfarms in the East Midlands with a total capacity of 71.1 MW25. All the wind is blowing strongly enough to turn the turbine blades. We estimate that turbines at the except one of these windfarms are located within Lincolnshire, the other being within site will have a capacity factor of around 26.3% (this means that, over the course of the year, Northamptonshire with a capacity of 20 MW26. the turbines produce approximately 26.3% of their theoretical maximum energy output).

1.5.5 Renewable Energy in the East Midlands

Regional priorities for renewable energy have been informed by the Regional East Midlands Energy Strategy23. The Regional Energy Strategy recognises that the Region has an important role to play in ensuring the UK Governments targets for renewable energy are met.

The Regional Energy Strategy goes on to note that although the East Midlands has a lower wind resource than some other parts of the UK, it still has a greater resource than Germany or Denmark and improving competitiveness of wind power means that there are a variety of suitable sites in the East Midlands.

18 Renewable Energy Strategy Consultation http://renewableconsultation.berr.gov.uk/ 19 Energy White Paper 2007 http://www.berr.gov.uk/energy/whitepaper/page39534.html 20 Renewable Energy Strategy Consultation http://renewableconsultation.berr.gov.uk/ 21 BERR UK Energy in Brief, July 2007 www.berr.gov.uk/files/39881.pdf 22 24 Wind Farms of the UK, www.bwea.com/ukwed/index.asp (It should be noted that the number of homes supplied may vary depending on http://www.emra.gov.uk//files/file1018.pdf 25 wind speeds and household electricity consumption). www.bwea.com/ukwed/operational.asp 23 26 The East Midlands Energy Challenge The Regional Energy Strategy Part 1 March 2004 and Part 2 May 2007. Burton Wold Windfarm, operational since April 2006. http://www.bwea.com/ukwed/operational.asp

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 1-4 440000 450000 460000 470000 480000 490000 500000 510000 300000 300000

Key

Site Location 290000 290000 280000 280000

270000 270000 260000 260000 250000 250000 1:250,000Scale @ A3

0510km

Site Location Figure 1.1 240000 240000 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement 440000 450000 460000 470000 480000 490000 500000 510000 Reproduced under licence from Ordnance Survey digital map data. CrownAll rights Copyright. reserved. number 0100031673 Licence

Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 2: Environmental Impact Assessment

Guidelines for Environmental Impact Assessment (Institute of Environmental Management 2. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT and Assessment 2004).

2.1 INTRODUCTION Good practice advises that the EIA should be an iterative process rather than a unique, post design, environmental appraisal. In this way the findings of the technical environmental studies Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is a process undertaken to identify and evaluate the can be used to inform the design of the project, and hence achieve a ‘best fit’ within the likely significant effects of a proposed development on the environment and identify measures environment. This approach has been adopted in respect of the Brixworth Windfarm; where to mitigate or manage any significant adverse effects on the environment. The EIA carried out potentially significant effects have been identified, every effort has been made to avoid these for Brixworth Windfarm (“the windfarm”) has been carried out on the basis of information through evolving the design of the site. This is referred to within this ES as mitigation supplied by the applicant and following consultation with statutory consultees, other bodies and embedded in the project layout and design or simply ‘embedded mitigation’. members of the public. 2.2.2 The Environmental Statement The requirement of the European Council Directive 85/337/EEC on the assessment of the effects ofgenerally certain publicdepend and upon private the scaleprojects of on the environment, as amended by the European Council The environmental information presented in this ES was derived through a systematic process Directivenoise impacts. 97/11/EC, EIA are is moretransposed likely towith regard to the proposal in question by the Town and of identification, prediction and evaluation of the likely environmental effects of the windfarm, critically identifying those considered to be significant in terms of the EIA Regulations. Together Countryturbines, Planning or more (Environmental than five MW ofImpact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 1999 (as amended) (hereafter referred to as “the EIA Regulations”). Schedule 2 of the EIA with post submission consultation, this document aids the planning authority in considering and Regulations lists developments for which an EIA must be undertaken where there are likely to determining the planning application. the development, and its visual be significant effects on the environment by virtue of factors such as its nature, size or location within a sensitive area, including “installationsbe required for for th ecommercial harnessing of wind power for energy Schedule 4 Part II of the EIA Regulations requires that the following information is provided as new generating capacity”. production (wind farms)”. a minimum: Guidance on what amounts to a significant effect is given in the Department of the impact, as well as potential A description of the development comprising information on the site, design proposals and Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR) Circular 02/99developments on Environmental of five Impactor more size; Assessment1. Annex A states that the likelihood of significant effects from windfarms “will A description of the measures envisaged to avoid, reduce and if possible remedy any significant adverse effects; The data required to identify and assess the main effects which the development is likely to

have on the environment; In view of the nature and size of the windfarm, the Developer, in agreement with Daventry An outline of the main alternatives considered and main reasons for why this choice was District Council, considered that Brixworth Windfarm is a Schedule 2 development and that an made, taking into account the environmental effects; and EIA should be undertaken. A non-technical summary of the above.

2 2.2 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT The recent White Paper on Energy (May 2007) sets out a number of initiatives and proposals to reduce uncertainty in planning and shorten overall timescales from application to a final decision 2.2.1 EIA Guidance on consent of renewable developments. These include underlining that applicants no longer have to demonstrate either the overall need for renewable energy or for the particular proposal The Applicant is required to submit certain information resulting from the EIA, and this is to be sited in a particular location. presented within this Environmental Statement (ES). The preparation and production of this ES has been conducted in accordance with the latest Government Regulations and advice on good 2.3 EIA METHODOLOGY practice, comprising: 2.3.1 Scoping and Consultations The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) The aim of the Scoping process is to identify key environmental issues at an early stage, to Regulations 1999; identify which elements of the proposal are likely to result in significant effects on the The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (Amendment) environment and to establish the extent of survey and assessment required for the EIA. Regulations 2006; Planning Policy Statement (PPS) 22, 2004; Planning for Renewable Energy: A Companion Guide to PPS 22, 2004; and

1 Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions Circular 02/99 on Environmental Impact Assessment, 12th March 1999 2 Meeting the Energy Challenge A White Paper on Energy, May 2007, DTI, Chapter 5, para. 5.3.67.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 2-1 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 2: Environmental Impact Assessment

Consultation took place in early 2008 with Daventry District Council, other Statutory Consultees Comments / Environmental Issues Raised and a number of recommended non-statutory consultees. A number of public exhibitions were

also held in August 2008.

A summary of the consultation responses received is shown in Table 2.1. Issues Consultee & Visual Table 2.1 – Consultation Responses None None Land Use Land Use Hydrology Hydrology Comments / Environmental Issues Raised Economics Construction Construction Planning Policy Water Quality & Geology / Soils/ Cultural Heritage Disruption due to Recreation, Socio- Recreation, Cumulative Cumulative Utilities & Aviation Utilities & Aviation

Contaminated land Contaminated Landscape Landscape Ecology/Ornithology Ecology/Ornithology Noise and Air Quality Air Noise and Traffic and Transport Telecommunications, ITC Office of Issues

& Visual & Visual Communications  Consultee (OFCOM)

None None Joint Radio

Land Use Land Use  Hydrology Hydrology Economics Economics Company Construction Construction Planning Policy Water Quality & Geology / Soils/ Cultural Heritage

Disruption due to Lamport Parish Recreation, Socio- Recreation, Cumulative Cumulative Utilities & Aviation Utilities & Aviation Contaminated land Contaminated Landscape Landscape  Ecology/Ornithology Ecology/Ornithology Noise and Air Quality Air Noise and Traffic and Transport Traffic and Transport Telecommunications, Council Parish Anglian Water     Council Arqiva   Ministry of Defence  BBC Research and National Grid  Development  National Grid  Brixworth Parish Transco   Council National Grid  Chapel Brampton Wireless  Parish Council NATS  Civil Aviation  Natural England   Authority Creaton Parish Northamptonshire   Council County Council Cottesbrooke Parish Old Parish Council       Council Orton Parish Council  CSS Spectrum Pitsford Parish  Management  Council Services Ltd Ramblers Droughton Parish   Association Council Royal Society for Daventry District the Protection of   Council Birds (RSPB) English Heritage  Scaldwell Parish  Council Environment Agency    Spratton Parish E.on Central      Council Networks Sustrans Garden History   Society Wildlife Trust  Hanging Haughton  Parish Council Highways Agency 

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 2-2 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 2: Environmental Impact Assessment

2.3.2 Identification of Issues 2.4.2 Prediction of Potential E As a result of the scoping responses and other consultation throughout the EIA process, the The prediction of potential environmental effects covered the three phases of construction, following issues have been technically assessed in this Environmental Statement: operation and decommissioning. During each phase, different environmental effects are likely to arise. For example, during the construction phase, traffic volumes are far greater than Land-use, Socio economics and Recreation; nvironmental Effects during the operation of the windfarm. Each technical assessment considered: Noise; Hydrology and Hydrogeology; Direct and indirect effects; Landscape and Visual; Short, medium and long term effects; Ecology; Permanent and temporary effects; Ornithology; Positive and negative effects; and Cultural Heritage; Cumulative effects. Existing Infrastructure including aviation and telecommunications; Access and Traffic; and Following the identification of potential environmental effects, associated changes to baseline Shadow Flicker. conditions were evaluated and an assessment of the significance of these changes was carried Effects associated with all elements of the windfarm, including the construction, operation and out. decommissioning phases, access tracks and associated infrastructure, have been assessed in the EIA and reported in this ES. Consent for the connection to the electrical National Grid is subject 2.4.3 Assessment of Effects to a separate application under Section 37 of the Electricity Act 20003, however environmental effects associated with this have been included in the EIA. The effect that the windfarm may have will be influenced by a combination of the sensitivity of the environment and the predicted degree of alteration (the ‘magnitude’) from the baseline 2.4 TECHNICAL ASSESSMENTS state (both positive and negative). Environmental sensitivity may be categorised by a multitude of factors; for instance: status of rare or endangered species; transformation of natural Each of the technical assessments follows a systematic approach, with the principal steps as landscapes; soil quality and land use; etc. The initial assessment, consultation and scoping follows: stages identified these factors along with the implications of the predicted changes.

Description of baseline conditions; In order to evaluate environmental effects, assessment criteria are identified within each Prediction of potential effects including cumulative effects; technical chapter. Thresholds of significance are then used to make explicit the conclusions of Assessment of effects; the assessment process, as far as is practicable. Identification of appropriate mitigation measures; and For the purposes of environmental assessment, ‘effects’ are generally identified as being one of Assessment of residual environmental effects (i.e. those remaining after proposed mitigation the following categories of significance: has been incorporated). Not significant – no detectable or material change to a location, environment, species or 2.4.1 Baseline Description sensitive receptor; In order to evaluate potential environmental effects, information relating to the existing Minor – a detectable but non-material change to a location, environment, species or sensitive environmental conditions was collected. This is known as the baseline. It is used to assess receptor; what changes may take place during the construction, operation and decommissioning phases Moderate – a material, but non-fundamental change to a location, environment, species or of the windfarm. sensitive receptor; Major – a fundamental change to a location, environment, species or sensitive receptor. For each technical assessment, the methods of data collection were discussed with relevant consultees. Data were also collected from public records and other archive sources and, where This Environmental Statement generally follows this theoretical approach. Where specific appropriate, field surveys were carried out. Data sources are described in each technical technical assessment areas adopt a variation, this is identified within the methodology set out in chapter. The timing of the work and the defined study area, specifically relating to the subject the relevant chapter. Within each assessment chapter the criteria for assessing significance of matter in question, are also outlined within each chapter. effects are also made explicit. Each chapter also proposes measures to avoid, reduce or remedy significant adverse effects (mitigation measures). Each assessment chapter concludes with an examination of residual effects after mitigation has been applied.

3 The Electricity Act 1989 - http://www.opsi.gov.uk/ACTS/acts1989/ukpga_19890029_en_1

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 2-3 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 2: Environmental Impact Assessment

2.4.4 Mitigation For some of the technical chapters (5 to 14) of this ES, specific guidance exists advising that effects associated with existing windfarm developments should be considered as cumulative Where the assessment process identified potential significant adverse effects, mitigation has effects. These are Chapter 6 (Landscape and Visual Impact) Chapter 8 (Ornithology), Chapter been proposed as part of the iterative design process in order to avoid, minimise or remedy 10 (Cultural Heritage) and Chapter 11 (Noise). these effects, where appropriate. Such measures included the consideration of alternatives; design evolutions, for example the movement or loss of turbines, access tracks and other Where no cumulative effects have been identified, this is also stated. infrastructure; and management and operational measures. 2.4.6 Assumptions and Limitations This strategy of avoidance, reduction and remediation is a hierarchical one which seeks: A number of assumptions have been made during preparation of the ES, which are set out first to avoid potential effects; below. Assumptions specific to certain environmental aspects are discussed in the relevant then to minimise those which remain; and Chapters of the ES. lastly, where no other measures are possible, to put forward remediation measures. The principal land uses adjacent to the site remain as they are at the time of the ES Appropriate mitigation measures have been proposed in each technical assessment. As indicated submission, except in cases where planning permission has already been granted for previously, these measures have been largely integrated into the overall design strategy development. In these cases, it is assumed that the approved development will take (embedded mitigation) rather than “added on” to the proposals post-design. By adopting a place, and these have been treated as contributing to "cumulative" effects; and flexible and iterative approach to the design of the windfarm, the Applicant has been able to Information provided by third parties, including publicly-available information and respond to the findings of consultation and environmental assessment work, and mitigate databases is correct at the time of publication. accordingly.

2.4.5 Cumulative Effects The EIA has been subject to the following limitations:

In accordance with the Regulations, the ES has given consideration to 'cumulative effects'. By Baseline conditions have been assumed to be accurate at the time of the physical definition these are effects that result from incremental changes caused by past, present or surveys but, due to the dynamic nature of the environment, conditions may change reasonably foreseeable actions together with the Development. For the cumulative assessment, during the site preparation, construction and operational phases; and two types of effect have been considered: The assessment of cumulative effects has been reliant on the availability of information The combined effect of individual effects, for example noise, airborne dust or traffic on a single on consented developments. receptor; and

The combined effects of several developments that may on an individual basis be insignificant but, cumulatively, have a significant effect, such as landscape and visual effects.

Development schemes that have been included in the cumulative effect assessment for most chapters are:

Burton Wold Windfarm (operational);

Burton Wold Windfarm Extension (consented); and

Wind Turbines -Tesco Distribution Centre, Crick (consented).

The locations of these developments are shown on Figure 1.2.

The landscape and visual effect assessment considers, in addition to the schemes listed above, other built or consented windfarms and windfarms subject to an application with a likelihood of intervisibility at locations within the study area. This study area and the other projects considered for the landscape and visual assessment are described in Chapter 6: Landscape and Visual Impact, of this ES.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 2-4 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 3: Project Description

3.3 SITE SELECTION 3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Applicant has conducted a desk survey of nearly 1000 potential sites throughout the UK 3.1 INTRODUCTION before refining this to a shortlist of around than 10 sites, for which planning applications will be made. Potential sites were evaluated against the following criteria: This chapter of the Environmental Statement (ES) describes the Brixworth Windfarm proposals (“the windfarm”), including its components, the site selection process and the design process. It Indicative wind speeds (from the NOABL wind speed database); also provides an indication of the proposed methods and timescales for the construction and Ecological and Ornithological sensitivity; decommissioning phases. Feasibility of grid connection; Interest of landowner in having the site taken forward for possible development on 3.2 GENERAL DESCRIPTION appropriate terms; Planning policy; The proposal is to construct and operate an onshore windfarm development of approximately Area topography, including gradients, exposure, watercourses and land use; 12 MegaWatts (MW) comprising the following: Landscape character; Visibility from key receptors; 6 wind turbines and associated infrastructure including transformers and crane hardstanding Distance from dwellings; areas; Noise; new access tracks; Feasibility of access; a site compound and a new substation building; and Cumulative impact from other windfarm developments; and one meteorological mast. Proximity to civil and military airspace and other MoD facilities.

The proposed layout of the turbines is shown in Figure 3.1. This Figure also shows the planning 3.4 WINDFARM DESIGN application boundary, the location of the access tracks, the anemometer mast, the substation building and the location of the site compound area. 3.4.1 Iterative Design Process

Construction will take place over a 9 to 15 month period after which the windfarm will become The purpose of a windfarm is to harness energy from the wind. It is important that wind operational and generate electricity over a 25 year period. After 25 years it will either be de- turbines are sited in the optimum position to maximise the wind yield whilst minimising commissioned or a new application made for consent to extend its operational life. environmental effects.

Turbines with a rating of 2 to 2.3 MW are under consideration for this windfarm. The final The optimum layout of a windfarm depends on a range of criteria. These vary depending on the choice of turbine will be dependent on the technology available at the time of construction, type and size of turbine as well as the local topography and the turbulence created by the project economics and the desired output from the windfarm. However, the selected turbine ground conditions within and around the site. Turbine manufacturers recommend that the will be within the maximum dimensional envelope of 125 metres (m) to blade tip. The turbines be spaced between three and five rotor diameters apart depending on the prevailing "candidate" turbine is the V90 with a hub height of 80 metres (m) and rotor diameter of wind direction. The available capacity of the electricity grid into which a windfarm will connect 90 m, as shown in Figure 3.2, and this turbine has been used in the Environmental Impact can also limit its size. Assessment (EIA) reported in this ES. An initial layout was determined in advance of any detailed environmental appraisal on the basis The windfarm will be connected to the national grid and an application for the grid connection of preliminary environmental constraints, known technical constraints, such as slope and wind between the site substation and the national grid will be made to Central Networks East E.ON. speed and physical constraints, such as powerlines and field boundaries. The off-site connection to the grid falls under a separate consenting process and will be subject to a separate environmental investigation and application, however this ES includes Information collated at the baseline assessment stage was used to progressively inform the consideration of an indicative grid connection for completeness. design.

The total area within the planning application boundary, as shown in Figure 3.1, is 17.6ha. It is Table 3.1 below outlines the main stages of the iterative process of layout design. estimated that the total land-take of the windfarm, made up of the wind turbines, access tracks, substation, control building and hard-standings will be approximately 2.7ha or approximately 15% of the total site area. The site is currently mainly arable farmland, farmed by two landowners.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 3-1 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 3: Project Description

Table 3.1 Layout Iterations with Daventry District Council, the finish and colour of the turbines is likely to be semi-matt and Iteration No. of Turbines Comment pale grey. Layout 1 5 wind turbines Preliminary layout – this assessment was based on turbines of 125 tip height. It was created as a means to investigate the potential of The turbines will be of a variable speed type, so that the turbine rotor speed will vary according the site for wind development. The turbine locations follow the to the energy available in the wind. The candidate turbine has a rotational speed of between landform and take account of technical constraints such as slope approximately 8 and 19 revolutions per minute (dependent on variations in wind speed), gradients. No account taken of environmental constraints. generating power for all wind speeds between 4 metres per second (m/s) and 25m/s (9-56 Layout 2 5 wind turbines Screening Opinion layout – location of turbines altered to take miles per hour (mph) or force 3 (gentle breeze) to 10 (gale) on the Beaufort Scale). At wind account of environmental constraints of noise (proximity to dwellings) and microwave links. speeds greater than 25m/s (56mph) the turbines would shut down for self-protection. A modern Layout 3 7 wind turbines Scoping and intermediate stage layout - this iteration assessed wind turbine produces electricity 70-85% of the time, but it generates different outputs different layouts, the aim being to maximize the sites energy yield dependent on wind speed. On average over a year, it will generate about 26.3% of the 1 and to take account of noise constraints. theoretical maximum output power. This is known as the capacity factor . Layout 4 6 wind turbines Final application layout - this layout assessed the site in more detail by identifying on-site environmental constraints such as underlying The turbines are computer controlled to ensure that at all times the turbine faces directly into geology, hydrology and archaeology, microwave links and taking the wind to ensure optimum efficiency. The rotors of all 6 turbines will rotate in the same account of these as much as possible. This layout was also designed direction. Table 3.2 below shows the candidate turbine specifications. to ensure full compliance with noise constraints at neighbouring properties and to reduce the visual impact on surrounding Table 3.2 Candidate Turbine Specifications settlements. Number of turbines 6 Anticipated turbine rated capacity (MW) 2 Site rated capacity (MW) 12 The combination of technical and environmental parameters has, through the iterative design Number of blades 3 process, resulted in the development of the site layout shown in Figure 3.1. This represents the Tower style Tapered Cylindrical Steel Maximum hub height (m) 80 “best environmental fit” within the technical and environmental constraints of the project. This Maximum rotor diameter (m) 90 process has included consultation with officers from Daventry District Council and Natural Maximum height to blade tip (m) 125 England, as well as other statutory and non-statutory groups. Revolutions per minute 8-19

The effects reported in this ES are those relating to the final layout of the windfarm. This layout Table 3.3 details the locations of the turbine bases. has evolved from the earlier layout iterations by avoiding, where possible, sensitive areas and developing appropriate mitigation measures for those areas where avoidance was not possible. Table 3.3 Proposed Turbine Locations Turbine No. OS Easting OS Northing Height of base AOD 3.4.2 Micro-siting (m) 1 474252 273180 92 In addition to the above, the continual refinement of the scheme will extend into the 2 474249 272730 87 construction phase. Therefore it is established practice to seek agreement for the micro-siting of 3 474481 273044 95 the turbines and other development infrastructure within 25m of the approved centre point in 4 474477 272556 90 order to avoid any poor localised ground conditions. 5 474897 272824 113 6 474917 272404 104 3.5 WIND TURBINES AND ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE AOD = Above Ordnance Datum

3.5.1 Wind Turbines 3.5.2 Turbine Power Outp

The windfarm will consist of 6, three-bladed horizontal-axis machines with a maximum height to When operating, the rotational speed of the blades is geared up through the gearbox, which blade tip of not more than 125m. Figure 3.2 shows such a machine, which is typical of a drives the generator. This produces a three-phase power output at 690 Volts (V), which is modern design, which has a hub height of 80m and a rotor diameter of 90m. The “candidate” transferred from the generatorut and Transformers to a transformer located either within the base of the tower or turbine model used for assessment purposes, which has these maximum dimensions, is the externally at ground level adjacent to each tower. Vestas V90. The final choice of turbine will be dependent on the technology available at the time of construction, project economics and the desired output from the windfarm. The turbine transformer converts the electrical output from the turbine at 690V to a higher voltage, such as 33 kiloVolts (kV) or 132kV, for grid connection purposes. The blades will be manufactured from fibre-reinforced epoxy and the towers will be of tapering 1 tubular steel construction. The nacelle houses the gearbox and generator. Subject to agreement www.bwea.com/ref/faq.html

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 3-2 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 3: Project Description

Stepping up the voltage helps to reduce electrical losses for transmission to the grid via the tracks will be allowed to re-vegetate following construction. All new tracks will be unpaved and underground site cable. constructed from local stone.

3.5.3 Wind Turbine Foundations 3.5.5.1 Track Layout Design

The turbines will be installed on foundations comprising both stone and steel-reinforced Various constraints have influenced the design of the site track layout, some of which are concrete. These typically measure 15-18m square or circular in plan with a concrete depth of generic and some of which are site specific: approximately 1-2m and stone overlay of 1m dressed back with topsoil to allow re-vegetation. Each foundation will require approximately 200-400m3 of concrete. The foundation will include a Track length is kept to a minimum to reduce environmental effects, construction time and circular steel support plinth to suit the base profile of the tower section. This plinth will contain material quantities; the base ring connection and several service ducts to allow electrical and communication cable Existing tracks have been used where available in appropriate locations; connections to be made. A concrete upstand will be cast on top of the concrete slab to which Gradients are to be kept to less then 8 degrees where possible to accommodate the the tower will be bolted. This foundation design minimises excavation requirements and visual requirements of delivery vehicles and to allow construction plant to move safely around the projection above the ground and allows re-establishment of surface vegetation following site; and construction. A typical turbine foundation is illustrated in Figure 3.3. Tracks are routed to avoid sensitive ecological, archaeological and hydrological features.

The final, detailed foundation design will depend on the results of detailed geotechnical The final track design shown in Figure 3.1 resulted from optimisation of these constraints. investigations, The ultimate size of the turbine foundations will depend on the turbines selected, imposed loadings, ground conditions and drainage designs. 3.5.5.2 Track Construction and Drainage

3.5.4 Crane Pads Tracks will be constructed by excavating through to weathered material where soil depths are shallow (less than 1m). During construction, vegetation, topsoil and subsoil will be placed to the Each turbine requires an area of hard-standing to be built adjacent to the turbine foundation. sides of the tracks. The substrata will be prepared to receive a geotextile separator which This provides a stable base on which to lay down the turbine components ready for assembly prolongs life and reduces mixing in the subgrade. A layer of stone will be compacted on top of and erection and to site the two cranes necessary to lift the three tower sections, nacelle and this to a thickness of around 500 millimetres (mm) dependent upon ground conditions. rotor into place. Drainage ditches will then be constructed (as described below). Surplus soil will be placed and dressed alongside the track to blend in with the surrounding landscape and finally topsoil will be The crane hard-standing will be left in place following construction in order to allow for use of placed on the track shoulders to re-vegetate naturally. similar plant should major components need replacing during the operational phase of the windfarm. Approximately one third of this area will be dressed back with topsoil and landscaped Track watercourse crossings have been avoided in the design of the site layout as far as into the surrounding area upon completion of turbine erection, and this area will be allowed to possible. However, if watercourse crossings are required for some windfarm components re-vegetate naturally. following micro-siting, a simple culvert type construction would be employed. The size of the culvert would depend on the location and would be based on Construction Industry Research The total area of hard-standing at each turbine location, including the turbine foundations and and Information Association (CIRIA) recommendations. Figure 3.6 shows typical culvert details. the crane pad will be approximately 968 square metres (m2) (assuming dimensions of 22m by Precise details would be submitted to the appropriate authorities for their prior agreement. 44m based on the experience of the Applicant’s design team). A typical crane hard-standing is illustrated in Figure 3.4. The tracks will have adequate crown or cross-slope to allow rainwater to be shed and, where gradients are present, lateral drainage will intercept flow. A drainage ditch will be formed on the 3.5.5 Site Access and upslope side of the track, dependent on a detailed drainage design. and Hydrogeology Site access will be taken from the A508 road as shown in Figure 3.1. An estimated 2.9km of Cross pipes will be laid as required in areas where the position of the site track could lead to new on-site accessOn-Site tracks will Access be required Tracks for the windfarm. Access tracks will be constructed to ponding on one side. As far as possible these will coincide with naturally occurring drainage access individual turbine locations, as shown in Figure 3.5. channels. Experience at other sites has shown that cross pipes simply placed at regular intervals are often ineffective and unnecessary. When the track slopes downhill, ‘waterbars’ will be The tracks will have a running width of 5m and will have passing places every 250m (or as placed to divert the flow into naturally occurring channels. The advice of the construction site required) with a total width of 10m (including the road width) and length of 15m in order to ecologist will be sought to ensure that the location and outfall of cross pipes and waterbars facilitate two-way traffic movement. At bends, the tracks will be widened as required depending minimise vegetation damage or change. Final track drainage design will be determined prior to on bend radius to a maximum of approximately 13m. Bends will also require a swept area for the commencement of construction of the relevant track section. Further details of measures traversing by long loads and all bends will be kept free from obstructions. The edges of the which will be taken to manage run-off and avoid erosion are provided in Chapter 9: Hydrology of this ES. Typical drainage details are shown in Figure 3.7.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 3-3 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 3: Project Description

3.5.6 Stone and Concrete Requirem required, would be either moorland green/brown or dark grey in order to blend with the existing landscape colours. Figure 3.9 provides an illustration of the substation building. It is estimated that approximately 26,000 tonnes of aggregate (stone and concrete) will be required during the construction of the access tracks, turbine bases and other infrastructure. 3.5.9 Meteorological Mast Stone is expected to be sourced from local quarries. These quarries will be selected prior to construction following a competitiveents tendering and Sourcing process . Importing stone for construction, while One meteorological mast will be erected to aid performance monitoring of the wind turbines increasing traffic for a short period, will prevent the additional visual and potentially polluting and to collect and store meteorological data throughout the operational lifetime of the effects of digging borrow pits onsite, and will provide some direct economic benefits to the local windfarm. The location of the mast is shown on Figure 3.1. The mast will be of lattice design quarries selected. and will have a maximum height of 80m. Instruments will be located at heights of 10m, 40m and 80m. Figure 3.10 shows a typical meteorological (anemometer) mast. Concrete for construction of the turbine foundations and substation control building will be imported ready-mixed. A concrete batching plant on site would introduce additional 3.5.10Site Accommodation and Temporary Works environmental effects in terms of visual effects and risks to hydrology and ecology. A batching plant would also require the use of further hard-standing areas for storage of materials which A temporary construction compound with approximate dimensions of 50m x 50m will be located may be extensive. These effects were deemed to be more harmful than the additional traffic as shown on Figure 3.1. Space will be provided for: generated by importing the concrete ready-mixed. A detailed breakdown of stone volumes and number of vehicle deliveries is outlined in Technical Appendix 3. Temporary portacabins needed for site offices and welfare facilities for contractors; Containers used for tool and equipment storage; 3.5.7 Cabling Portable site toilets with provision for sealed waste storage and removal; Parking for up to 20 vehicles; and Underground cabling will link the turbines to each other and to the on-site substation. Detailed Storage of components and materials. construction and trenching specifications will depend on ground conditions encountered. Typically cables would be laid in a trench 1m deep and 500mm wide. To minimise ground An indicative design is shown in Figure 3.11. The location has been selected to minimise disturbance cables will be routed along the side of the access tracks where practicable. Figure environmental impacts, particularly areas of ecological, archaeological and hydrological interest, 3.8 shows a typical cable trench. and on visibility grounds. The precise location and size of the compound within this area will be determined by the appointed construction contractor. A Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system will be installed to gather information from the individual wind turbines and provide the facility to control them from a The area will be stripped of topsoil, which will be stored separately for future re-instatement. central location. A fibre optic communications cable will run alongside the power cables to link The compound will be constructed using a geogrid base, or similar, in order to facilitate removal the turbines to the SCADA system. The wind turbines can be monitored remotely via a and reinstatement following the development becoming operational, then surfaced with stone. telephone link to the SCADA system. An area of the compound will be used for the storage of fuel and oils, and this will be contained 3.5.8 Grid Connection and On-Site Substation by a small bund constructed out of site arising material and lined with an impermeable membrane in order to prevent any contamination of the surrounding soils, vegetation and water The windfarm will be connected to the national grid. The grid connection is subject to a table. Any contaminated run-off within the bund would be disposed of at an appropriate waste separate consenting process under Section 37 of the Electricity Act 1989. For the purposes of management facility. Water for all construction activities will be supplied by water bowser. this assessment, it has been assumed that the grid connection will be made via an underground Temporary effluent disposal facilities will be provided by ‘Port-a-loo’ type facilities and emptied cable laid from the location of the on-site substation to the grid connection point at National as required. No connection to the mains sewers or water pipes is proposed. Grid Reference (NGR) 599746 269796, a distance of approximately 6.5km. A separate environmental assessment will accompany the Section 37 application as required. All portacabins, machinery and equipment will be removed and the area fully restored following the completion of construction in accordance with an approved method statement. Electrical power from the turbine transformers will be transferred to the electricity distribution system through a switchgear unit, housed in the on-site substation. Other temporary fenced areas may be established for storage on the turbine crane pads as appropriate for security in remote parts of the site. These will not require any additional hard- The on-site substation building will be located between Turbine 4 and Turbine 6 adjacent to the standing areas. access track, as shown on Figure 3.1. It will comprise a 6m by 5m single storey building with a pitched roof and will house switchgear and metering, protection and control equipment. Subject 3.6 CONSTRUCTION to requirements, the building will house a single toilet facility for visiting maintenance staff. Rainwater will be collected from the roof of the building via a gutter and inlet pipe to fill a It is estimated that construction will take approximately 9 to 15 months subject to the final header tank. Waste will be held in a closed system and pumped out at regular intervals. The design of the scheme, weather and ground conditions, with a following month for testing and building will be constructed in keeping with the local built environment. Associated fencing, if commissioning. The construction process will consist of the following principal activities:

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 3-4 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 3: Project Description

Site survey and preparation; 3.6.1 Waste management Construction of access tracks and passing places; Remedial works to lengths of the public highway to facilitate turbine delivery; As far as reasonably practicable, excavated stone or soil will be reused on-site, primarily for Construction of the contractors compound including temporary site office facilities; restoration of disturbed ground following construction. Any excess will be used by the Construction of the crane pads; landowners elsewhere or deposited at general collecting points which will be agreed with the Construction of the turbine foundations; planning authority prior to removal to a licensed waste disposal site in accordance with duty of Construction of the site substation control building; care procedures. Excavation of the cable trenches and cable laying; Delivery and erection of wind turbines and permanent meteorological mast; 3.6.2 Site specific safety and Testing and Commissioning of the wind turbines; and Site restoration. This will be initially addressed as part of the pre-tender process. Under the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 1994 the selected construction contractor is required to prepare Most of these operations will be carried out concurrently, although predominantly in the order a Construction Phase Healthemergency and Safety proceduresPlan. identified, in order to minimise the overall length of the construction programme. In addition, construction will be phased such that the civil engineering works will be continuing in some Access to the site may be temporarily restricted during construction for health and safety parts of the site whilst wind turbines are being erected elsewhere. Site restoration will be reasons. Alternative routes will be signposted. programmed and carried out to allow restoration of disturbed areas as early as possible and in a An Operation and Maintenance Manual for the design life of the windfarm will also be prepared progressive manner. which will also cover all operational and decommissioning safety related procedures. A detailed programme of works will be produced jointly with the appointed construction 3.7 OPERATION contractors and will be agreed with the local authority and any other relevant bodies prior to commencement of construction to ensure full compliance with planning conditions. Wind turbine operations will be overseen by suitably qualified local contractors who will visit the site regularly to carry out maintenance. The following turbine maintenance will be carried out Prior to the main construction works commencing on-site, enabling works will be required. along with any other maintenance required by the manufacturer’s specifications: These will be phased into the pre-construction period, and include: Initial service; Off-site access consultation with regulatory authorities; and Routine maintenance and servicing; Detailed site investigation works. Gearbox oils changes; and In order to ensure that all the mitigation measured outlined in this ES are carried out on site, Blade inspections. contractors will be provided with the following documents which must be adhered to throughout Routine servicing will take place twice per year with a main service at twelve monthly intervals. the construction process: Servicing will include the performance of tasks such as maintaining bolts to the required torque, Pollution prevention plan; adjustment of blades, inspection of blade tip brakes and inspection of welds in the tower. In Traffic management plan; addition, oil sampling and testing from the main gearbox will be required and oil and Habitat management plan; components replaced at regular intervals. In the event of any unexpected events on site, such Planning conditions; as the failure of a generator or gearbox, appropriate repair works will be carried out. Requirements of the Environment Agency, Natural England and other statutory bodies; and Ongoing track maintenance will generally be undertaken in the summer months when tracks are Any other relevant mitigation measures identified within this ES. dry. Safe access will be maintained all year round. The contractor will be required to maintain a clean and tidy site and manage the site area in 3.7.1 Site Signage accordance with best practice. The contractor will also ensure that no vehicular movements take place outside the approved working areas. The windfarm will have a series of signs to provide directions and also information on health and safety including a sign at the site entrance showing the operator’s name and the name of Selection of the construction contractor will be partly based on their record in dealing with the windfarm. environmental issues. An outline of environmental requirements for contractors is detailed in Technical Appendix 3. Each of the turbines will have a 600mm by 600mm sign indicating the turbine number, potential hazards and an emergency contact telephone number. Further signage (900mm by 900mm) will be erected at the control building with the operator’s name, health and safety information and an emergency telephone number.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 3-5 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 3: Project Description

The final location and design of the proposed signage will be agreed prior to the windfarm becoming operational.

3.8 DECOMMISSIONING

The windfarm has been designed to have an operational life of 25 years. At the end of this period the windfarm will either be decommissioned, or an application made for consent to extend its operational life.

Decommissioning will involve the removal of all above ground infrastructure. The upstand plinth and the top surface of the turbine foundation base will be broken out and removed to approximately 1m below ground level and all cabling will be cut out at the same depth. The area will then be reinstated with a final layer of topsoil over the foundation. Roads will either be left for use by the landowners or covered in topsoil. No stone will be removed from the site during decommissioning.

This approach is considered to be less environmentally damaging than seeking to remove all foundations, underground cables and roads entirely.

Demolition of the control building will involve the removal of the equipment followed by demolition of the building. All demolition waste will be removed to a licensed waste disposal site.

It is estimated that decommissioning a windfarm of this size will take approximately 6 to 12 months.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 3-6 Key

Proposed Turbine Locations 1 Anemometer

Substation/Control Building

Culverts

3 Track Layout Planning Application Boundary

Crane Hardstandings

Construction Compound

5

2

4

Turbine mE mN 1 474252 273180 2 474249 272730 3 474249 273044 4 474249 272556 6 5 474249 272824 6 474249 272404

1:5,000 Scale @ A3

0 125 250 m

Site Layout Figure 3.1

Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Reproduced under licence from Ordnance Survey digital map data. Crown Copyright.All rights reserved.

Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 4: Planning Policy

PPG16 Archaeology and Planning (1990) 4 PLANNING POLICY PPS22 Renewable Energy (2004) PPS23 Planning and Pollution Control (2004) 4.1 INTRODUCTION PPG24 Planning and Noise (1994) PPS25 Development and Flood Risk (2006) This Chapter of the Environmental Statement (ES) describes the national, regional and local planning policy framework and the various polices relevant to the Brixworth Windfarm proposal. Of the above PPG15, PPG16 and PPG24 predate PPS22. PPS1 is of relevance to all development The purpose of this chapter is to provide the policy context surrounding the proposed proposals. development and relate those policies to the individual topic areas set out within the chapters of this Environmental Statement. Planning Policy Statement, Planning and Climate Change: A Supplement to Planning Policy Statement 1 stresses that policies contained within the document may be material It is not the intention of this chapter to assess whether the proposed development complies considerations. The policies in this PPS should take precedence where existing PPSs place less with the identified policies. A separate Planning Statement has been prepared in addition to the emphasis on climate change, this also applies to Development Plan Policies which predates this ES to address various policy considerations and draw conclusions on the acceptability of the PPS. proposed development in planning terms. PPS1: In addition to the advice the PPS provides in relation to individual applications, there is 4.2 POLICY CONTEXT also clear guidance regarding the form and content of renewable energy policies in forthcoming Core Strategies that will ultimately form part of LDF. The PPS requires the Core Strategy to In England there is a hierarchical structure of guidance and plans covering national, regional promote and encourage renewable energy through policies designed to promote and not restrict and local planning. The Government is committed to the plan-led system of development renewable and low-carbon energy and supporting infrastructure. It states that planning management. This requires local authorities, as required by Section 70 of the Town and Country authorities should: Planning Act 1990, to determine development proposals in accordance with the policies within Paragraph Extract the development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The 2004 Planning and “not require applicants for energy development to demonstrate either the overall Compulsory Purchase Act provides that if there is a conflict between policies in the Regional need for renewable energy and its distribution, nor question the energy Paragraph 20 (i) Spatial Strategy or policies within the Development Plan, the most recent policy would take justification for why a proposal for such development must be sited in a particular precedence. location; Ensure any local approach to protecting landscape and townscape is consistent The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 also introduced a range of other changes to Paragraph 20 (ii) with PPS22 and does not preclude the supply of any type of renewable energy the planning system. One of the most important is the abolition of Structure Plans and the other than in the most exceptional circumstances; replacement of Local Plans with Local Development Frameworks (LDF) and the formulation of alongside any criteria-based policy developed in line with PPS22, consider Regional Spatial Strategies (RSS, which provide a strategic policy framework for the LDF). identifying suitable areas for renewable and low-carbon energy sources, and supporting infrastructure, where this would help secure the development of such Consequently the planning system is currently in a period of transition from the old to the new Paragraph 20 (iii) system. There is, therefore, a range of policy documents that inform decisions on planning sources, but in doing so take care to avoid stifling innovation including by rejecting proposals solely because they are outside areas identified for energy applications. generation;”

4.3 NATIONAL PLANNING POLICY GUIDANCE AND PLANNING POLICY STATEMENTS PPS22: The key guidance for the proposed development is contained within PPS22 which advises on Renewable Energy. The following extracts set out advice which appears to be of Planning Policy Guidance notes (PPGs) and their replacement Planning Policy Statements (PPSs) particular relevance to the proposed development: are prepared by the Government to explain statutory provisions and provide guidance to local authorities and others on planning policy and the operation of the planning system. They also Paragraph Extract explain the relationship between planning policies and other policies, which have an important Paragraph 1 (i) “ Renewable energy developments should be capable of being accommodated bearing on issues of development and land use. Local authorities must take their contents into throughout England in locations where the technology is viable and the account in preparing their development plans. The following documents are relevant to the environmental, economic, and social effects can be addressed satisfactorily. proposed development: Paragraph 1(ii) Regional Spatial Strategies and local development documents should contain policies designed to promote and encourage rather than restrict the development of PPS1 Delivering Sustainable Development (2005) renewable energy resources. PPS Planning and Climate Change: A Supplement to PPS 1 (December 2007) Paragraph 1 (iv) The wider environmental and economic benefits of all proposals for renewable PPS7 Sustainable Development in Rural Areas (2004) energy projects, whatever their scale, are material considerations that should be PPS9 Biodiversity & Geological Conservation (2005) given significant weight in determining whether proposals should be granted PPG15 Planning and the Historic Environment (1994) planning permission.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 4-1 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 4: Planning Policy

Paragraph 1 (v) Regional planning bodies and local planning bodies should not make assumptions Supplementary Planning Guidance. about the technical and commercial viability of renewable energy projects. Paragraph 1 (viii) Development proposals should demonstrate any environmental, economic and Since adopting the Local Plan, Daventry District Council has prepared and consulted upon a social benefits as well as how any environmental and social impacts have been series of formal alterations. These alterations have not been subject to public local inquiry and minimised through careful consideration of location, scale, design and other in accordance with the arrangement of the new planning system cannot be formally ‘saved’; measures. however the Council considers that the alterations remain relevant and will be retained as an Paragraph 2 – 3 The Regional Spatial Strategy should include the target for renewable energy important consideration in the determination of planning applications until withdrawn or capacity in the region… replaced by Development Plan Documents (DPDs) or Supplementary Planning Documents

Targets should be expressed as the minimum of installed capacity in the region, (SPDs). Consultation with the Senior Planning Officer in Daventry District Council has confirmed expressed in megawatts… Targets should be reviewed on a regular basis and that none of these alterations would be relevant to this wind development proposal. revised upwards (if they are met) subject to the region’s renewable energy resource potential… The fact that a target has been reached should not be used in 4.5 EMERGING POLICY itself as a reason for refusing planning permission for further renewable energy projects. The East Midlands Regional Plan (RSS8) is currently under review and underwent an Paragraph 14 Regional planning bodies and local planning authorities should not create “buffer Examination in Public during 2007. The Draft RSS provides a broad development strategy for zones” around international or nationally designated areas and apply policies to the East Midlands until 2026. It is expected that the revised RSS be adopted in Autumn 2008. these zones that prevent the development of renewable energy projects. Paragraph 15 Local landscape and local nature conservation designations should not be used in Daventry District Council released the final version of the Local Development Scheme to the themselves to refuse planning permission for renewable energy developments. Deputy Prime Minister to the Government Office for the East Midlands in March 2007. In Planning applications for renewable energy developments in such areas should be addition Daventry District, Northampton Borough and South Northamptonshire Council and assessed in criteria based policies set out in local development documents, Northamptonshire County Council have established the West Northamptonshire Joint Planning including any criteria that are specific to the type of area concerned. Unit (JPU) to prepare the Joint Development Plan Documents, including the Joint Core Strategy and the Joint Supplementary Planning Documents. Each Borough and District Council continues

to be responsible for preparing its own local development documents and addressing local 4.4 THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN FRAMEWORK matters. It is expected that the West Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy Development Plan Document will be adopted in December 2009. The development site is located within Daventry District Council. The relevant Development Plan document comprises: 4.6 SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING GUIDANCE

Regional Spatial Strategy for the East Midlands (RSS8) (March 2005); In March 2007 Daventry District Council Adopted the Supplementary Planning Document Energy The Northamptonshire Structure Plan 1996 -2016 (as amended by the High Court Order and Development. This Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) will form part of the Local 8 February 2002) Saved Policies; and Development Framework for both Daventry District and South Northamptonshire Councils. It Daventry District Local Plan (Adopted 1997) Saved Policies. should be noted that the Daventry District Local Plan (Adopted June 1997) does the not contain an energy policy. This SPD supplements the saved policies of the Northamptonshire County The Regional Spatial Strategy for the East Midlands (RSS8) was published in March 2005. The Structure Plan, namely GS5. Regional Spatial Strategy forms part of the development plan and sets out a broad development strategy for the East Midlands. 4.7 DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICIES

Under the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 the policies in the Daventry District Table 4.1 provides a summary of all relevant adopted and emerging policies contained within Local Plan (Adopted 1997) and the Northamptonshire Structure Plan (Amended 2002) were the development plan. saved for a period of 3 years from September 2004, i.e. until September 2007. Beyond September 2007 these policies ceased to form part of the development plan, unless the Secretary of State issued a direction to specifically extend their lifespan. The Secretary of State’s Saved Policies Direction, includes a list of policies that have been saved indefinitely and continue to form part of the development plan, until such time as they are replaced.

Other material considerations of planning policy will include:

Emerging Policy; National Planning Policy Guidelines (PPG) and Planning Policy Statements (PPS); and

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 4-2 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 4: Planning Policy

Table 4.1 Planning Policies Plan Policy Number Policy Renewable Energy Policies RSS 8 Policy 41 Regional Priorities for Renewable Energy Development Plans and future Local Development Frameworks, should include policies to promote and encourage the delivery of the indicative targets for renewable energy set out in Appendix 6. In making provision for new development policies should be supportive of renewable energy proposals in locations where environmental, economic and social impacts can be addressed satisfactorily.

In establishing criteria for onshore wind energy Development Plans and future Local Development Frameworks, should give particular consideration to:

landscape and visual impact, informed by local Landscape Character Assessments; the effect on the natural and cultural environment (including bio-diversity and the setting of historic assets); the effect on the built environment (including noise intrusion); the number and size of turbines proposed; the cumulative impact of wind generation projects, including intervisibility; the contribution of wind generation projects to the regional renewables target; and the contribution of wind generation projects to national and international environmental objectives on climate change.

In establishing criteria for new facilities required for other forms of renewable energy, Development Plans and future Local Development Frameworks should give particular consideration to:

the proximity to the renewable energy resource; the relationship with the existing natural and built environment; the availability of existing surplus industrial land in close proximity to the transport network; and the benefits of smaller scale grid and non grid connected generation. RSS8 Appendix 6 Renewable Energy Targets: Renewable Energy Northamptonshire Overall RSS Target for 2010 Technology Capacity (MWe) Electricity Capacity (MWe) Electricity (GWh/y) (GWh/y) Offshore Wind - - 400 1056 Onshore Wind 12 31 122 319 Biomass – Wet 0.6 5.3 5.1 41.7 Agric Wastes Biomass – Poultry 151 118.3Error! 15 118.3 Litter Bookmark not defined. Biomass Energy 10 75 46 344 Crops Hydro - - 10.6 39.1 Solar – PV 0.3 0.26 2 1.72 Landfill Gas 14 116 52.5 438 Anaerobic 3.6 20.5 18.4 137.3 Digestion Total 55.5 366.36 671.6 2495.12

Draft RSS Policy 39 Regional Priorities for Low Carbon Energy Generation Local Authorities, energy generators and other relevant public bodies should promote:

the development of a distributed energy network using local low carbon and renewable resources; Low carbon energy proposals in locations where environmental, economic and social impacts can be addressed satisfactorily should be supported. As a result, Local Planning Authorities should: support the development of distributed local energy generation networks; and develop policies and proposals to achieve the indicative regional targets for renewable energy set out in Appendix 5.

1 For poultry litter a scheme would generally need to be above 7MW, and so only one scheme is shown in the target. Although Northamptonshire has been given as a suitable location for a poultry litter plant, it is debatable in which county a scheme would be best sited.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 4-3 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 4: Planning Policy

Plan Policy Number Policy

In establishing criteria for onshore wind energy, Local Planning Authorities should give particular consideration to:

landscape and visual impact, informed by local Landscape Character Assessments; the effect on the natural and cultural environment (including biodiversity and historic assets and their settings); the effect on the built environment (including noise intrusion); the number and size of turbines proposed; the cumulative impact of wind generation projects, including ‘intervisibility’; the contribution of wind generation projects to the regional renewables target; and the contribution of wind generation projects to national and international environmental objectives on climate change. Draft RSS Appendix 5 Renewable Energy Targets Onshore Wind: Current Capacity (2006) MWe: 542 Target for 2010 MWe: 122 Target for 2020 MWe: 175 Indicative target for 2025 MWe: 175 Energy and Development Paragraph 5.12 General Planning Considerations SPD Development should maintain and improve the quality of ground and surface water. Development should not be located in flood risk areas and should not increase high flood risk. Development should be compatible with the local geology/soil. Development shall enhance and respect the character and setting of historic, cultural and archaeological assets. Any subsequent removal of energy installations from development involving such assets shall ensure that the character of such assets is retained. Development shall respect landscape character. Developers are advised to refer to relevant planning policies and consider the Northamptonshire Environmental Character and Green Infrastructure. Where development results in a loss of trees, this shall be mitigated against by planting an equivalent number of trees elsewhere on or off-site at a location to be agreed with the Council’s Planning Team. Developers are required to provide a net gain in habitats and/or species contained in the Northamptonshire Biodiversity Action Plan. Where renewable energy systems have a negative impact on Northamptonshire Biodiversity Action Plan species, developers will be required to provide mitigation. Planning permission will normally be required for the incorporation of renewable energy development in non-domestic buildings e.g. retail, industrial etc Planning conditions will normally be set in relation to planning applications to require removal of energy installations e.g. solar panels, turbines etc once their life has come to an end. General Environmental and Design Policies RSS Policy 1, part 8 Regional Core Objectives Development Plans, Local Development Frameworks, Local Transport Plans and Economic Development Strategies will seek: to promote the prudent use of resources, in particular through patterns of development and transport that make efficient and effective use of existing infrastructure, optimise waste minimisation, reduce overall energy use and maximise the role of renewable energy generation. RSS Policy 4, part 2 Promoting Better Design Local Authorities, regional bodies, utility providers and developers should work together to ensure standards of design and construction are constantly improved. This should be achieved by promoting:

design and construction that minimises energy use, improves water efficiency, reduces waste and pollution, incorporates renewable energy technologies and sustainably sourced materials wherever possible, and considers building orientation at the start of the design process. Draft RSS Policy 1, part h The Regional Core Objectives To secure the delivery of sustainable development within the East Midlands, the following Core Objectives should be met:

h) To reduce the causes of climate change by minimising emissions of CO2 through:

maximising ‘resource efficiency’ and the level of renewable energy generation; making best use of existing infrastructure; promoting sustainable design and construction; and encouraging patterns of new development that reduce the need to travel.

2 Includes 2 windfarms that are in construction but not yet commissioned

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 4-4 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 4: Planning Policy

Plan Policy Number Policy Draft RSS Policy 3 Promoting Better Design Parts 1, 2 and 10 The layout, design and construction of new development should be constantly improved by:

the use of design led approaches which take account of local natural and historic character; design and construction that minimises energy use, uses sensitive lighting, improves water efficiency, reduces waste and pollution, incorporates renewable energy technologies and sustainably sourced materials wherever possible, and considers building orientation at the start of the design process; approaches to design, layout and construction which take account of the need to develop ‘green infrastructure’ networks and provides for the enhancement of biodiversity and landscape quality. Northamptonshire County Policy GS5 In order to promote high quality design and sustainable development, all proposals will have regard to the following considerations: Structure Plan Saved Policy The visual appearance of the development in the context of the defining characteristics of the local area; The need to encourage mixed-use development and the relationships of different land-use with each other; The need for measures for planning out crime; and The need for conservation of energy, resources and the natural environment, and for developments and designs which give priority to means of transport other than the private car. Daventry Local Plan (Saved Policy GN1 The granting of planning permission for development will be guided by the need to: Policies) Safeguard the natural resources of the district; Protect and enhance the environment; Make proper use of disused or under utilised land and buildings; Concentrate development in or closely associated with the large and small towns; Limit development in the villages; Severely restrain development in the open countryside; and Ensure that it is accessible by public transport where appropriate. Daventry Local Plan (Saved Policy GN2 Under the proposals and policies of this local plan, planning permission will normally be granted for development provided it: Policies) Is of a type, scale and design in keeping with the locality and does not detract from its amenities; Has satisfactory means of access and has sufficient parking facilities; Will not have an adverse impact on the road network; Can be provided with the necessary infrastructure and public services and be served by public transport where appropriate; Will not adversely affect a conservation area or a building listed as being of architectural or historic interest and their setting; Will not adversely affect sites of nature conservation, geological or archaeological importance or the settings of archaeological sites; Will not adversely affect a special landscape area; Has full regard to the requirements of agriculture and the need to protect the best and most versatile agricultural land from development which is irreversible. Daventry Local Plan (Saved Policy GN3 Implementing Development Policies) Before planning permission for any development is granted, the council will require to be satisfied that the infrastructure, services and amenities made necessary by the development are in existence or will be provided by the developer or other agency. Daventry Local Plan (Saved Policy EN42 Design of development Policies) Planning permission will be granted for development provided that:

Designs promote or reinforce local distinctiveness and enhance their surroundings; and Designs take account of local building traditions and materials; and The scale, density, massing, height, landscape, layout and access of the proposal combine to ensure that the development blends well within the site and with its surroundings; and Crime prevention measures are incorporated in the site layout and building design; and Existing landscape attributes of the site are incorporated within the layout wherever practicable, and combine with proposed landscaping and open space to ensure that the developments environmental impact is minimised. Landscape Policies RSS Policy 30 Priorities for the Management and Enhancement of the Region’s Landscape Development Plans, future Local Development Frameworks, and other strategies of local authorities and agencies should:

continue to promote the highest level of landscape character protection for the region's nationally designated landscapes of the Peak District National Park and the Lincolnshire Wolds Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty; promote initiatives to protect and enhance the natural and heritage landscape assets, in particular the Sherwood, Charnwood and Rockingham Forests; and

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 4-5 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 4: Planning Policy

Plan Policy Number Policy be informed by landscape character assessments to underpin and act as key components of criteria-based policies for the consideration of development proposals in rural or urban fringe areas. Where not already in place, local authorities should work towards preparing comprehensive assessments of the character of their landscapes to coincide with the review of their local development documents. This should assess whether there are exceptional local circumstances that would require the retention of any local landscape designations and associated policies in local development frameworks. Draft RSS Policy 30 Priorities for the Management and Enhancement of the Region’s Landscape The Region’s natural and heritage landscapes should be protected and enhanced by:

the promotion of the highest level of protection for the nationally designated landscapes of the Peak District National Park and the Lincolnshire Wolds Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty; the promotion of initiatives to protect and enhance the particular character of the Sherwood, Charnwood and Rockingham Forests; the establishment of criteria-based policies in Local Development Frameworks to ensure that development proposals respect intrinsic landscape character in rural and urban fringe areas; and the identification in Local Development Frameworks of landscape and biodiversity protection and enhancement objectives through the integration of Landscape Character Assessments with historic and ecological assessments.

Where not already in place, Local Authorities should prepare Landscape Character Assessments to inform the preparation of Local Development Frameworks. These can also be used to develop Supplementary Planning Documents. Any local landscape designations should be based on Landscape Character Assessments and justified by exceptional local circumstances. Daventry Local Plan (Saved Policy EN1 Special Landscape Areas Policies) In recognition of their special environmental qualities, Certain areas are designated on the proposals map as special landscape areas. In these areas planning permission will normally be granted for development provided that:

It comprises agricultural, forestry, recreation or tourism development; or It relates to settlements within these areas. In assessing such proposals detailed design, materials, siting and in particular, landscaping, will be material considerations fundamental to the granting of planning permission; or It relates to the re-use or adaptation of rural buildings provided their finished form, bulk and general design are in keeping with their surroundings; It does not adversely affect the character of the local landscape. Daventry Local Plan (Saved Policy EN25 The granting of detailed planning permission for a proposal will be dependant on the submission of a comprehensive landscaping scheme. Such schemes should provide for Policies) the protection and incorporation of existing trees, hedges and other features of the site together with proposals for new planting, respect the unique distinctiveness of the site, be designed to soften and enhance the permitted development and have regard to the following provisions:

On industrial sites, in addition to the landscaping proposals, hedging or boundary planting not less than 2.0 metres wide should be provided; Bunding or mounding will be permitted only where it is appropriate to the development site or its surrounds; Block screening will be permitted only where it is appropriate to the development site or its surrounds. Tree and shrub planting should be varied both in height range and in species, which should be predominantly of native origin; Off site planting should be provided where possible and appropriate; Existing trees, hedgerows and woodlands should be retained where possible and measures for their protection should be incorporated in the scheme; Schemes should set out appropriate measures for the future maintenance of the planting. Daventry Local Plan (Saved Policy EN26 Where planning permission is granted, developers will be required to implement landscaping schemes no later than the planting season following the completion of the Policies) development or recognised phase of it. Natural Heritage and Cultural Heritage Policies RSS Policy 27 Protecting and Enhancing the Region’s Natural and Cultural Assets Sustainable development should ensure the protection, appropriate management and enhancement of the region’s natural and cultural assets (and their settings).

In the development and implementation of strategies and programmes in the region, local authorities and other bodies should apply the following principles: the promotion of the highest level of protection for the region’s nationally and internationally designated natural and cultural assets; damage to natural or cultural assets (and their settings) should be avoided wherever and as far as possible, recognising that such assets are usually irreplaceable; unavoidable damage must be clearly justified by a need for development in that location which outweighs the damage that would result and should be reduced to a minimum through mitigation measures; unavoidable damage which cannot be mitigated should be compensated for, preferably in a relevant local context and where possible in ways which also contribute to social and economic objectives; overall there should be no net loss of natural and cultural assets, and opportunities should be sought to achieve a net gain across the region; and protection of the region’s best and most versatile land.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 4-6 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 4: Planning Policy

Plan Policy Number Policy RSS Policy 28 Priorities for Enhancing the Region’s Biodiversity Local authorities, environmental agencies, developers and businesses should work together to promote a major step change increase in the level of the region’s biodiversity. This should be done by the:

• achievement of the East Midlands regional contribution towards the UK Biodiversity Action Plan targets; • establishment of large scale habitat creation projects in the priority areas of Lincolnshire, the region’s Strategic River Corridors and heathland areas; • establishment of a regional project to promote the recreation of key wildlife habitats in each Natural Area in the East Midlands; • establishment of a network of semi-natural green spaces in urban areas; • management of features of the landscape which act as corridors and “stepping stones”, essential for the migration and dispersal of wildlife; and development and implementation of mechanisms to ensure that development results in no net loss of BAP habitats and species and that net gain is achieved. RSS Policy 31 Regional Priorities for the Historic Environment Development Plans, future Local Development Frameworks, and other strategies should seek to understand, conserve and enhance the historic environment of the East Midlands, in recognition of its own intrinsic value, and its contribution to the region’s quality of life.

Across the region and particularly in areas where growth or regeneration is a priority, Development Plans, Local Development Frameworks and economic development strategies should pay particular attention to promoting the sensitive change of the historic environment, retaining local distinctiveness, by:

identifying and assessing the significance of specific historic and cultural assets (including their settings); using characterisation to understand their contribution to the landscape or townscape in areas of change; encouraging the refurbishment and re-use of disused or under-used buildings of some historic or architectural merit and incorporating them sensitively into the regeneration scheme; promoting the use of local building materials; and recognising the opportunities for enhancing existing tourism attractions and for developing the potential of other areas and sites of historic interest. Draft RSS Policy 26 Protecting and Enhancing the Region’s Natural and Cultural Heritage Sustainable development should ensure the protection, appropriate management and enhancement of the Region’s natural and cultural heritage. As a result the following principles should be applied:

the Region’s internationally and nationally designated natural and historic assets should receive the highest level of protection; damage to EU designated Natura 2000 sites will not be permitted; damage to other natural and historic assets or their settings should be avoided wherever and as far as possible, recognising that such assets are usually irreplaceable; unavoidable damage must be minimised and clearly justified by a need for development in that location which outweighs the damage that would result; unavoidable damage which cannot be mitigated should be compensated for, preferably in a relevant local context and where possible in ways which also contribute to social and economic objectives; there should be a net increase in the quality and active management of natural and historic assets across the Region in ways that promote adaptation to climate change, and an increase in the quantity of environmental assets generally; and the Region’s best and most versatile agricultural land should be protected from permanent loss or damage. Draft RSS Policy 27 Regional Priorities for Environmental and Green Infrastructure Local Authorities, statutory environmental bodies and developers should work with the voluntary sector, landowners and local communities to ensure the delivery, protection and enhancement of Environmental Infrastructure across the Region. Such infrastructure should contribute to a high quality natural and built environment and to the delivery of sustainable communities.

Local Authorities and those responsible for the planning and delivery of growth and environmental management across the Region should work together to:

assess the capacity of existing Environment Infrastructure to accommodate change in order to inform decisions on the scale, location and phasing of new development. account should be taken of current deficits and likely future demands, including those likely to result from climate change, to identify any further needs or constraints; select appropriate indicators and targets to monitor the condition of Environmental Infrastructure and to ensure that its capacity to accommodate change is not breached; ensure that the provision and design of new Environmental Infrastructure is considered and its delivery planned through environmental capacity analysis at the same time as other infrastructure requirements; develop ‘green infrastructure plans’ based on character assessments of existing natural, cultural and landscape assets and the identification of new assets required to meet the needs of existing and expanding communities; increase access to green space that can be used for formal and informal recreation, educational purposes and to promote healthy lifestyles; and identify delivery and funding mechanisms for the creation and future management of Green Infrastructure, including from the planning system and other funding

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 4-7 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 4: Planning Policy

Plan Policy Number Policy sources such as EU funded Environmental Stewardship Schemes. Draft RSS Policy 28 Priorities for Enhancing the Region’s Biodiversity Local Authorities, statutory environmental bodies and developers should work with the voluntary sector, landowners and local communities to implement the Regional Biodiversity Strategy, and to deliver a major step change increase in the level of biodiversity across the East Midlands. Measures should include the:

achievement of the East Midlands regional contribution towards the UK Biodiversity Action Plan targets; establishment of large scale habitat creation projects in the biodiversity conservation and enhancement areas illustrated in Diagram 4 [of the draft RSS]; establishment of a regional project to promote the re-creation of key wildlife habitats in each Natural Area in the East Midlands; creating, protecting and enhancing networks of semi-natural green spaces in urban areas; creating, protecting and enhancing features of the landscape which act as corridors and ‘stepping stones’, essential for the migration and dispersal of wildlife; development and implementation of mechanisms to ensure that development results in no net loss of BAP habitats and species, particularly for restricted habitats with special environmental requirements, and that net gain is achieved; and development and maintenance of appropriate data to monitor and report on regional targets, BAPs and BCAs/BEAs. Draft RSS Policy 31 Regional Priorities for the Historic Environment The historic environment should be understood, conserved and enhanced, in recognition of its own intrinsic value, and its contribution to the Region’s quality of life.

Across the Region and particularly in areas where growth or regeneration is a priority, development should promote sensitive change of the historic environment. To achieve this, Local planning Authorities should:

identify and assess the significance of specific historic assets and their settings; use characterisation to understand their contribution to the landscape or townscape in areas of change; encourage the refurbishment and re-use of disused or under-used buildings of some historic or architectural merit and incorporating them sensitively into regeneration schemes; promote the use of local building materials; and recognise the opportunities for enhancing existing tourism attractions and for developing the potential of other areas and sites of historic interest as part of Green Infrastructure. Other Relevant Policies RSS Policy 24 Regional Priorities for Rural Diversification Local Authorities and Sub-Regional Strategic Partnerships should work together to promote the continued diversification and further development of the rural economy, where this is consistent with a sustainable pattern of development and the environmentally sound management of the countryside. Particular consideration should be given to:

those areas that fall within the EU Objective 2 areas of north Lincolnshire and north Derbyshire; and those areas that fall within Rural Action Areas identified by SSPs. RSS Policy 33 Part 2 A Regional Approach to the Water Environment Development Plans, future Local Development Frameworks, and policies of the Environment Agency and other agencies should be co-ordinated to:

protect and improve water quality and reduce the risk of pollution especially to vulnerable groundwater. Draft RSS Policy 23 Regional Priorities for Rural Diversification Local Authorities, emda and Sub-Regional Strategic Partnerships should work together to promote the continued diversification and further development of the rural economy, where this is consistent with a sustainable pattern of development and the environmentally sound management of the countryside. Particular consideration should be given to:

‘economically lagging’ rural areas identified by the Government’s Rural Strategy, including the districts of East Lindsey, West Lindsey, South Holland, Bolsover, High Peak, and the more rural parts of Derbyshire Dales, Bassetlaw and Newark and Sherwood; and those areas that fall within Rural Action Areas identified by SSPs. Draft RSS Policy 32 Part 5 A Regional Approach to the Water Resources and Water Quality Local Authorities, developers, water companies, the Environment Agency and other relevant public bodies should work together to:

protect and improve water quality and reduce the risk of pollution especially to vulnerable groundwater.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 4-8 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 5: Socio-economics, Tourism, Recreation and Land-use

National Statistics online (www.statistics.gov.uk); 5. SOCIO-ECONOMICS, TOURISM, RECREATION & LAND- NOMIS Official Labour Market Statistics (www.nomisweb.co.uk); Daventry District Council (www.daventry.gov.uk); USE Explore Northamptonshire (www.explorenorthamptonshire.co.uk); Heritage Britain (www.heritagebritain.com); 5.1 INTRODUCTION Sustrans (www.sustrans.org.uk); and Multi-Agency Geographic Information for the Countryside (www.magic.gov.uk). This chapter of the Environmental Statement (ES) evaluates the effects of the proposed Brixworth Windfarm (“the windfarm”) on socio-economics, tourism, recreation and land-use. Baseline conditions have been established through desktop studies, consultation and a review of The chapter firstly examines the effect of the windfarm on the local economy of Daventry, information on local attractions. Information concerning the public’s perception of windfarms secondly it considers the effects on local tourist attractions and recreation facilities (excluding has been gathered from all parts of the United Kingdom. landscape and visual effects which are considered in Chapter 6), and lastly examines the land use within and surrounding the windfarm site. 5.2.3 Consultation

This chapter contains the following sections: As part of the scoping process relevant organisations were contacted with regard to the Assessment Methodology and Significance Criteria - describing the methods used in baseline proposal. Table 5.1 outlines the responses received surveys and in the assessment of the significance of effects; Baseline Description - a description of the development site and the surrounding area based Table 5.1 Consultation responses on the result of desk information and consultation; Consultation Response Potential Effects - identifying the ways in which socio-economics, recreation and land use British Horse Society No response could be affected by the proposed windfarm; Garden History Society No response Mitigation Measures – to enhance any beneficial effects and minimise any adverse effects; Ramblers Association No response Summary of Effects; and Sustrans No objection to the methodology or the proposal Statement of Significance. 5.2.4 Assessment Methodology 5.2 METHODOLOGY

The scale of significance described below has been used to assess the potential and residual The assessment of socio-economic, recreation, tourism and land-use effects identifies existing effects of the windfarm against baseline conditions. The assessment process aims to be conditions of the area surrounding the windfarm and predicts the likely impacts (both positive objective and quantifies effects as far as possible; however some effects can only be evaluated and adverse) arising from the proposed windfarm. and Significance Criteria on qualitative effects. 5.2.1 Guidance Effects associated with the construction phase of the windfarm are classified as temporary, short to medium-term effects. Effects associated with the operation phase of the proposed The following documents have been considered for the assessment of the potential impacts of windfarm are classified as long-term effects. the proposed windfarm on socio-economics, tourism and recreation: Effects are defined as: Guidelines for Environmental Impact Assessment (2004) Institute of Environmental “Positive” effects provide an advantageous or beneficial effect to an environmental resource 1 Management and Assessment ; and or receptor, the significance of which may be “not significant” or “significant”; 2 A Handbook for Environmental Impact Assessment (2005) Scottish Natural Heritage . “Negligible” effects have an imperceptible effect on an environmental resource or receptor; and 5.2.2 Baseline References “Negative” effects provide a disadvantageous or adverse effect to an environmental resource or receptor, the significance of which may be “not significant” or “significant”. The baseline description has been prepared after referencing a number of different sources and materials, including the following: In terms of socio-economic factors, effects would be significant if the windfarm resulted in any fundamental or material changes in population, structure of the local community, and local economic activity during the different construction, operation or decommissioning phases. 1Guidelines for Environmental Impact Assessment (2004) Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment - http://www.ieem.org.uk/ecia/introduction.html 2 A Handbook for Environmental Impact Assessment (2005) Scottish Natural Heritage - http://www.snh.org.uk/publications/on-line/heritagemanagement/EIA/

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 5-1 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 5: Socio-economics, Tourism, Recreation and Land-use

With respect to tourism and recreation, the assessment of effects was undertaken broadly The Economic Value of t following The Scottish National Heritage (SNH) ‘Guide to Outdoor Access Assessment’3 in the The Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) “Renewable Supply Chain Gap Analysis” report absence of more local guidance. Significant effects are those where the windfarm would lead to (January 2004)7 found that the total monetary value of the UK renewables industry adjusted for permanent or significant impacts on facilities or where the proposal would affect recreational he UK Renewables Industry imports, is approximately £290 million. It also noted that there were approximately 8,000 jobs resources that have more than local use or importance. sustained by the renewable industry at that time. It goes onto note that there are on average

10 jobs per Mega Watt (MW) under development, under construction and in operation. It It is important to note that the potential impact of the proposal on tourism and recreation is estimates that 17,000 to 35,000 jobs could be sustained by the industry by 2020 in order to closely related to public attitudes towards wind turbines in the landscape and a number of meet the Governments target of 20% of total generation from renewables in the UK. However, studies have been conducted on the subject. The relevant conclusions from the most recent in order to achieve the recent EU draft Renewable Energy Directive target of 15% of the total studies are discussed later in this chapter. energy consumed in the UK (electricity, heat and transport) to come from renewable sources by

2020 (see Chapter 1 of this ES) the number of jobs created in the renewables industry by 2020 The physical effects of the windfarm on existing land use are assessed by considering the is likely to much higher than this. possible effect of the windfarm on the current land use of the site. Significant effects would be those which resulted in a fundamental change in the predominant land use of the site. 5.4.1.1 Natio 5.3 BASELINE DESCRIPTION External costs are a financial representation of socio-environmental costs (such as global warming, humannal External health, Costs occupational of Electricity he Productionalth or building material damage) of electricity 5.3.1 Socio Economics production and supply that are not included in the market price of electricity, and are therefore “external” to decision-making factors relating to electricity generation and supply. External costs District Level Popula are unintended and result from there being no property rights or markets for these environmental effects. The lower these costs, the lower the economic burden of electricity The windfarm site is situated in Daventry District, approximately 1.7km north of Brixworth town production on society. and 1.1km south of Hangingtion and EconomyHoughton, in Northamptonshire. There are several ways of taking account of the cost to the environment and health i.e. for 4 Population statistics have been identified from Nomis . In 2006, the population of Daventry internalising external costs. One solution is using eco-taxes i.e. taxing damaging fuels and District was 78,200 which, represents a 7.8% increase since 2001. The district is largely rural technologies according to the external costs caused. For example if the external cost of with about 27% of the population living within the Daventry town and has an average density of producing electricity from coal were factored into electricity bills between 2 and 7 Eurocents per population of 108 people per square kilometre. kWh would have to be added to the current price of electricity in the majority of EU Member States8. Another solution would be to encourage or subsidise cleaner technologies such as wind The district’s economy is based on the manufacturing, wholesale and retail trade and business energy thus avoiding socio-environmental costs. By valuing external costs these values can be services that accounts for the largest proportion (60%) of the employment sectors. The district included in the design of policy to correct for the present lack of incorporation of damages also employs a high proportion of people in the hotels, restaurants (7.9%) and educational caused in the price of electricity. (8.7%) sectors. However, the employment sector in the health and social work sectors (8.5%) are comparatively low to the rest of the Northamptonshire County (13%). The European Union “ExternE” project was developed to measure the value of external costs associated with electricity production. Table 5.2 sets out the external costs of electricity Unemployment in the district is relatively low to about 3.7% compared to the rest of the UK production in the EU from a range of sources in Euro-cent per kWh. This shows that in the UK, (5.2%). Compared to the Northamptonshire County (36%), Daventry has a significantly higher the lowest costs are associated with wind generation. proportion of managerial and professional occupations at (43.5%). However, the district has a significantly low level of skilled occupational service (10.6%) compared to the rest of the county (13%)5. Therefore, the district aims to encourage the diversification of the economy by expanding the Daventry town, encouraging rural businesses and promoting local tourism. It is also seeking to capitalise its economy by offering specialised skills training6.

3 Scottish National Heritage, “Guide to Outdoor Access Assessment” (http://www.snh.org.uk/publications/on- line/heritagemanagement/EIA/appendix5.shtml) 4 ONS, “Nomis 2007, Labour Market Statistics”, 2007. (https://www.nomisweb.co.uk/reports/lmp/la/2038431998/report.aspx) 7DTI, “Renewable Energy Supply Chain Gap Analysis”, 2004. 5 Northamptonshire Observatory, “ Daventry District, a baseline profile”, July 2005. 8 http://www.externe.info/ 6 Daventry District, “Economic Development Strategy 2003-2006”.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 5-2 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 5: Socio-economics, Tourism, Recreation and Land-use

Table 5.2 External Costs of Electricity Production (in EUR-cent per kWh**)9 Northampton Sailing Club), walking and cycling around the 7.5 mile trail around the Pitsford Country Coal & Peat Oil Gas Nuclear Bio- Hydro PV Wind Lake. Lignite mass AUT 1-3 2-3 0.1 Two reservoirs, Hollowell and Ravensthorpe, are approximately 6km west of the proposed BE 4-15 1-2 0.5 windfarm. Although smaller than Pitsford reservoir, Hollowell has an active sailing club and DE 3-6 5-8 1-2 0.2 3 0.6 0.05 coarse fishing, while Ravensthorpe offers high quality trout fishing. DK 4-7 2-3 1 0.1 ES 5-8 1-2 3-5* 0.2 There are several recreational routes around the site. The Brampton Valley Way is a 22.5km FI 2-4 2-5 1 long distance walking and cycling route from to Northampton that is used FR 7-10 8-11 2-4 0.3 1 1 by locals. It passes 250m to the west of the site boundary. The trail is also a part of the GR 5-8 3-5 1 0-0.8 1 0.25 Midshires Way, a 360km route that links the National Trail Ridgeway to the Trans-Penine Trail. IE 6-8 3-4 IT 3-6 2-3 0.3 The Macmillan Way (section Cross – Cotswold Pathway), which is used as for walking, cycling NL 3-4 1-2 0.7 0.5 and as a bridleway, runs from the east coast to the west coast of England (from Boston to NO 1-2 0.2 0.2 0-0.25 Abbotsbury) for 464km, and passes the site at a distance of approximately 2.1 km. It is also PT 4-7 1-2 1-2 0.03 linked to the Brampton Valley Way. SE 2-4 0.3 0-0.7 UK 4-7 3-5 1-2 0.25 1 0.15 Other historic attractions that are situated within the wider area are: * Biomass co-fired with lignites Coton Manor Gardens is a ten acre garden that is an extension of a 17th century manor **Sub-total of quantifiable externalities (such as global warming, public health, occupational health, material damage) house. It is approximately 7km west from the site boundary. Holdenby House was built in the 16th century by Sir Christopher Hatton, Chancellor to Queen A more recent study, in 2005, showed that hydroelectrical power and wind power have the Elizabeth I. Presently, little remains of the original house and it is now famous for its 20 acre lowest external costs of electricity production compared to all other forms of energy production. of Grade I listed garden which are set in stately lawns and hedges and has several special Current fossil electricity systems exhibit the highest external costs being a factor of 10-20 times features. It is approximately 6.5km south-west from the site boundary. greater than wind energy10. Boughton House (situated near Northampton city) was built in 1690s is the Northamptonshire home of the Dukes of Buccleuch and Queensberry. The house is only 5.3.2 Recreation and Tourism open to the public for one month each year. It is approximately 17km north east of the site boundary. Cottesbrooke Hall and Gardens dates from 1702. It has won the Christie’s ‘Garden of the The Daventry District is situated in the Northampton Uplands which has a settled agricultural Year’ Award. It is approximately 3km west from the site boundary. landscape with several scattered towns and villages. The windfarm is close to the village of

Brixworth, which was a 19th century ironstone mining centre and has recently been developed The nearest National Cycle Network route (no. 6) passes approximately 250m from the nearest as a residential and industrial development. It is designated as a ‘Special Landscape Area’ to the proposed turbine. This cycle route mainly follows the Brampton Valley Path. north, west and south of the village. The main attraction within the village is the All Saints Church (a Grade I Listed Building) which is the, only surviving Anglo-Saxon Church in UK 5.3.3 Public Attitudes Towards Windfarms constructed in the 6th–7th Century A.D and is an important architectural monument11.

The major tourist attraction in the area is Brixworth Country Park that surrounds the Pitsford In the United Kingdom there have been numerous surveys to assess the public’s attitudes to Reservoir (a County Wildlife Site, Nature Reserve and SSSI12) and is located 4km from the windfarms. This section examines a number of these studies in chronological order, as a means proposed windfarm site. The Country Park is a popular family destination and has won the of predicting the public’s response to the proposed windfarm. ‘Tourism for All’ Award from the Heart of England Tourist Board13 and is the winner of the “2007 Green Flag Award”14. Leisure activities within the park include fly-fishing, sailing (with the A MORI poll was commissioned by the Scottish Renewables Forum and the British Wind Energy Association in 2002 to determine public attitudes towards windfarms in Argyll, which has the highest concentration of such developments in Scotland. The survey, which was based on 9 EU, “ExternE – Externalities of Energy A research project of the European Commission”, 1995. (http://www.externe.info) detailed interviews with some 300 visitors over two September weekends, found that over 90% 10 ExterneE-Pol Externalities of Energy Extension of Accounting Framework and Policy Applications New Energy Technologies of visitors would return to Scotland for a holiday whether or not there were windfarms in the final report http://www.externe.info/expolwp6.pdf (July 2005). area. Of those that had actually seen windfarms whilst on holiday only 8% had come away with 11 Brixworth Village Design Statement (http://www.brixworthonline.com/vds/) a negative impression. 12 Brixworth Village Design Statement (http://www.brixworthonline.com/vds/) 13 Anglian Water, “Pitsford Reservoir”, (http://www.anglianwater.co.uk/index.php?sectionid=46&parentid=31), 2008 14 Northamptonshire County Council, “Brixworth Country Park”,2008 (http://www.northamptonshire.gov.uk/Leisure/Countryside/brixworth.htm)

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 5-3 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 5: Socio-economics, Tourism, Recreation and Land-use

Eight out of ten said that they would go to a windfarm visitor or information centre during their Renewable energy sources featured highly when consumers were asked which source of stay15. The conclusions that may be drawn from the research are that there is no evidence that energy would be best for society. Most popular was wind power cited by 19.9% of windfarms detract from the tourist experience of an area. consumers, second was solar at 17.9%, third most popular was nuclear at 10.5%(not a renewable source); A MORI survey commissioned in 2003 by the Scottish Executive which examined the views of Wind power was believed to be the best energy source for society because there is plenty of locals living within 20km of Scotland’s ten largest windfarms16 revealed that: wind in the UK, wind is considered to be a clean and natural source of energy, better for the environment, will not run out like fossil fuels and is cost efficient in the long-term; 20% of the residents felt that their local windfarm has a broadly positive effect on the area, Consumers perceived windfarms as a good solution to benefit the environment. 18% compared to just 7% who said it was negative, while 73% felt it had neither a positive or thoughts windfarms were aesthetically pleasing versus 6.4% who viewed windfarms as an negative effect or expressed no opinion; and eyesore. For a number of respondents the benefits of wind energy outweighed the visual When asked what the shortcomings of the area in which they lived most commonly impact and respondents were unsympathetic about other consumers complaints regarding mentioned lack of amenities (20%) and poor public transport (18%), whilst only 0.3% of the visual impact of windfarms; people specifically mentioned windfarms as a negative aspect of their area. Many consumers believed wind turbines should be used more widely to produce clean energy and they generally responded positively to wind turbines in their local area; The 2003 study also found that people living closest to windfarms tend to be more positive 70.1% of respondents stated that they would be happy to have a windfarm located close by, about them (44% of those living 5km say that a windfarm has had a positive effect compared to compared with 17.3% who would not; 16% of those living 10-20km away). People living closest to windfarms are also more supportive 85.9% of respondents who had wind turbines in their local area expressed positive feedback. of expansion of the sites (65% of those within the 5km zone support 50% expansion compared Only 5.3% were opposed; with 53% of those in the 10-20km zone). The same study also found that before construction Most consumers in UK (47.8%) favoured large–scale renewable such as wind energy as their 27% of people surveyed thought that adverse landscape impacts might occur as a result of most preferred source. windfarm development. Following construction only 12% indicated that the landscape had been

spoiled. Overall, sixty separate surveys have been conducted over a 15 year period and results have

shown consistently high levels of support for the development of windfarms...both in principle, In July 2003 a poll of 2,500 participants found that 74% were in favour of the Government's and also in practice, amongst residents living near a windfarm20: ambition to generate 20% of the UK's electricity from renewable power sources by 2020 and of increasing the use of wind power throughout the UK17. Direct experience provokes a more positive attitude; Closer proximity results in a higher level of support; and In July 2006 the Wind Tracker survey of public opinion to wind energy in Great Britain18 showed Results of `before and after’ surveys have shown a shift in attitudes towards positive and the that: fears of potential adverse effects are unfounded. 76% of people agreed windfarms are necessary to help us meet current and future energy 5.3.4 Land Use needs; 52% disagreed that windfarms are ugly or would be a blot on the landscape with 21% having no strong view; Elevation at the site ranges from approximately 120m in the south to 90m in the north. 60% of people think what they look like is unimportant because windfarms are necessary; and The site is currently used for arable farming and is occupied by two local landowners. The land in the vicinity of the site is of moderate agricultural quality, with Agricultural Land Classification 56% said they would be happy to have a windfarm in their local area with 21% having no 21 strong view. (ALC) Grade 3 .

In March 2007 Allegra Strategies undertook a comprehensive study into UK consumer views on There are no SSSIs, or other national or European level conservation designations or public Energy Efficiency and Alternative Energy Sources19. Key findings in relation to wind energy were rights of way within the site boundary. as follows: 5.4 INFORMATION GAPS

No gaps in information have been identified during the course of this assessment. 15 MORI Scotland, “Tourist Attitudes towards Wind Farms”, 2002. Sample: 307 Tourists. 16 Scottish Executive, MORI, “Public Attitudes to Wind Farms: A survey of Local Residents in Scotland”, 2003. Sample: 1, 800 residents. 17 Conducted by leading independent research company GfK NOP and governed by MRS Codes of Conduct. BWEA Press Release, (http://www.bwea.com/media/news/round2.html), July 2003 18 BWEA Press Release, 22nd August 2006. (http://www.bwea.com/media/news/060822.html) 20 BWEA, “BWEA Briefing Sheet: Public Attitudes to Wind Energy in the UK”, November 2004. 19 Allegra Strategies, “UK Attitudes to Energy Efficiency & Alternative Energy Sources”, 2007. 21 www.magic.gov.uk

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 5-4 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 5: Socio-economics, Tourism, Recreation and Land-use

5.5 ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL EFFECTS fundamental or long term changes in population, structure of the local community, local services or employment. Consequently, construction-related socio-economic effects are considered to be 5.5.1 Socio-economic Effects not significant.

5.4.1.2 Operation District Level Population Once operational, periodic maintenance would be required from a specialist maintenance team. The investment in this project has the potential to generate a range of economic and social This may have a minor benefit to the community. The Developer is committed to maximising effects and opportunities for local businesses, most notably employment opportunities and local opportunities for local employment and services during the operation of the wind turbines. spending. It will also result in contract opportunities for local and regional contractors both for and Economy This will help in diversification of the economy by creating opportunities for specialised skills construction activities themselves and throughout the supply chain. training representing long-term, positive effect acting at a local or regional level. And it is considered to be non-significant, based on the significance criteria outlined in Section 5.2.4. Social and economic effects can be divided into: Direct effects: for example employment opportunities in the construction, operation and 5.4.1.3 Community Fund maintenance and decommissioning of the windfarm; A community fund to support sustainable/environmental projects will be set up throughout the Indirect effects: such as employment opportunities created down the supply chain by those operational life of the windfarm. The vehicle for administering this community fund will be companies providing services to the proposed windfarm during construction, operation and established and agreed with Daventry District Council and relevant Parish and/or Town Councils. de-commissioning; and This vehicle will help to determine the scope of projects to be funded and a mechanism for Induced effects: for instance employment created by the additional spend of wages into the granting awards. This represents as long-term positive effect acting at a local scale. It is local economy and the purchasing of basic materials, equipment and office space for staff. considered to be not significant, based on the significance criteria outlined in Section 5.2.4, as it would not represent a fundamental or material change in population, structure of the local 5.4.1.1 Construction community of local economic activity.

The windfarm will place significant contracts for services and materials during construction and 5.4.1.4 Decommissioning local sourcing will be preferred where possible. De-commissioning effects are anticipated to be of a similar nature but lesser scale as construction effects, with employment opportunities arising during this process, thereby Based on experience of other windfarm developments of a similar scale, it is estimated that the representing a short term positive effect acting at a local and regional level. proposed windfarm will generate a number of short-term construction jobs during the 9-15 month construction period. This represents short term, positive effect acting at a local and 5.4.1.5 National External Costs of Electricity Production regional level. Research undertaken by the EU indicates that the external costs of electricity generated by wind Manufacture of the bulk of the turbines will be by an established turbine manufacturer. Local power are significantly lower than other sources of electricity generation in the UK, as set out in sourcing of equipment and the turbines themselves is preferred whenever possible but it is Section 5.3.1 of this chapter. The windfarm will therefore help to minimise the external costs of constrained to some extent by the specialist nature of the equipment. electricity generation. The effect associated with the windfarm is not considered to be significant, however the cumulative effect with all windfarms (present and future), which could 22 Examples of direct opportunities for local contractors will include: represent up to 27% of electricity supply in the UK by 2020 , is considered likely to have a material effect and is considered to be a significant positive effect. Haulage; Turbine base and access track construction; 5.5.2 Recreational and The supply of building materials (e.g. fencing, concrete, cement, stone, etc.); and

Mechanical, electrical and supervisory services. Potential tourism and recreational effects of the proposed windfarm are categorised as;

Tourism Effects All stone and ready mixed cement used for the construction of the project will be sourced from Direct physical effects: for example construction activities interfering with rights of access; local quarries providing an additional, indirect economic benefit to the area. and Indirect effects: such as the effects of noise and changes in view on tourists and recreational Construction workers not living locally will stay in local accommodation during the construction land users. period. This will bring about an induced, temporary, positive benefit to the local economy by providing an economic opportunity for local accommodation and other local services.

Overall, construction of the windfarm will bring about a short term, temporary beneficial effect through increase in employment and business opportunities, but this will not result in any 22 Global Wind Energy Council (2008). “Global Wind 2007 Report”

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 5-5 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 5: Socio-economics, Tourism, Recreation and Land-use

5.4.2.1 Construction 5.4.3.2 Operation There are no public rights of way situated on the site. The nearest public right of way is situated 250m to the west of the site. There will be no direct effects on recreational routes around the The only land that will be directly affected by the windfarm will be the land used for the wind site during the construction phase. During construction there may be indirect intermittent turbines, access tracks, control building and compound and hard standings. No other land within effects on noise levels and air quality, however these will be minimised through the application the windfarm site will be affected during operation. of good practice guidance as described in Chapter 11: Noise and 13: Other Issues of this ES. No significant effects are predicted based on the significance criteria outlined in section 5.2.4. The windfarm will provide diversification of land use, by allowing agriculture to continue largely unaffected whilst adding the windfarm. 5.4.2.2 Operation Studies undertaken by a range of professional bodies have shown that the majority of the public 5.4.3.3 De-commissioning are in favour of generating energy from renewable sources and although local people can be The proposed windfarm will be temporary; after its 25 year operational life, it will be removed concerned about windfarm proposals in their area, these fears are generally allayed when the and the windfarm site restored, or the life of the project extended subject to the granting of windfarm becomes operational. further planning permission and related consents. There are no significant land-use effects associated with decommissioning. This is borne out by experience elsewhere in the UK and indeed at the existing Burton Wold Wind Farm that has been shortlisted as an outstanding renewable energy development by the 5.6 MITIGATON Renewable Energy Association. So far, more than 400 school children and 200 adults have been given an educational tour of the windfarm23. Mitigation of negative effects and enhancement of positive effects, identified in this assessment have been embedded within the design of the windfarm and the construction process. No Consequently, the windfarm is considered not to lead to any long-term significant direct adverse further mitigation has been considered. effects on any recreational or tourist resource. 5.7 RESIDUAL EFFECTS 5.4.2.3 De-commissioning Decommissioning effects will be similar to but less than construction effects, as described Given the lack of additional mitigation, beyond that embedded within the windfarm design, the above. The windfarm will be a temporary feature that, after its 25 year operational life, will be significance of residual effects is the same as the significance identified for the potential effects removed and the site restored. No significant effects are predicted. and described above, in Section 5.5.

5.5.3 Land Use 5.8 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS

5.4.3.1 Construction The total area within the planning application boundary is 17.6ha. It is estimated that the total Cumulative visual effects on outdoor recreational facilities such as rights of way and cycle paths land take of the windfarm, made up of the wind turbine foundations, access tracks, compound, are assessed in Chapter 6: Landscape and Visu of this ES. extension to control building and hard-standing areas, will be approximately 2.7ha or 15% of the total planning application area. However some of these areas, such as the construction al Impact Assessment compound, will be reinstated following construction whilst turbine foundations and crane pads will be covered with subsoil and topsoil and allowed to naturally re-vegetate.

The majority of the windfarm site consists of arable land and impacts have been avoided through iterative design to reduce land-take.

Construction of the windfarm will be conducted in such a way as that on-going activities are not impeded, as far as reasonably practicable.

This loss of Grade 3 agricultural land (in this context arable land) is limited and is considered to be a negative effect that is not significant.

23 Burton Wold Windfarm Newsletter, 2006 (www.burtonwoldwindfarm.com/Downloads/BW%20newsletter%20June%2006.pdf)

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 5-6 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 5: Socio-economics, Tourism, Recreation and Land-use

5.9 SUMMARY OF EFFECTS Table 5.2 Summary of Effects Socio-economic Tourism and Land Use Effects effects Recreation Effects Construction 1) Opportunities for 1) Short-term minor 1) Limited loss of local contractors. impact during the arable land in context 2) Stone and cement construction months to to the land available sourced locally. the existing public rights within Daventry 3) A number of Full of way in the vicinity of District. Time Employment the windfarm. equivalent construction jobs and a number of short term construction jobs. Operation 1) Maintenance jobs. 1) No direct adverse 1) No change to land 2) Community fund effect on tourism and ownership. feeding into the local recreation facilities. 2) Agricultural economy. activities resumed on restored land.

Decommissioning 1) Employment and 1) Minor impact on the 1) Turbines removed Contracting recreation facilities and infrastructural opportunities. during decommissioning areas of site restored of the windfarm. to be used for agriculture.

5.10 STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE

The development of Brixworth Windfarm will result in a short term economic benefit due to the creation of jobs and through tendering opportunities for local and regional companies directly for construction and through the supply chain. Socio-economic effects will be short-term and will occur at a local and regional level. They are considered to be not significant in terms of the EIA regulations.

Effects on tourism and recreation are considered to be not significant. The loss of arable land is assessed as being not significant in the context of the similar land available locally.

The operational phase of the Development is considered to lead to significant positive effects in cumulation with other wind farms in the UK associated with reducing external costs of electricity production within the UK. This is a long-term effect that operates at a national scale.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 5-7

Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 6: Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

Assessment of Effects on Viewpoints: an assessment of the potential residual effects 6 LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT on visual amenity arising from the proposed windfarm from a number of representative viewpoints; 6.1 INTRODUCTION Assessment of Cumulative Effects on Landscape Receptors and Perception of the Landscape Resource: an assessment of the potential effects arising from the proposed This chapter of the Environmental Statement (ES) addresses the likely impacts of the windfarm windfarm in conjunction with built/consented windfarms within the study area and those at on the landscape and visual resource of the study area. The proposed windfarm comprises six planning application stage; wind turbines, located on land to the north west of Northampton, near Brixworth, Assessment of Cumulative Effects on Viewpoints: an assessment of the potential Northamptonshire. effects on visual amenity arising from the proposed windfarm in conjunction with other windfarms in the region at built/consented or planning application stage on selected Circle Design Consultants undertook this assessment which has included an initial desk representative viewpoints; based analysis including theoretical design modelling and a designation constraints Assessment of Effects at Decommissioning Stage: an assessment of the potential review. This was followed by a site investigation to verify desk-based findings. effects arising from the decommissioning phase; and Conclusion. This Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) concentrates on the key landscape and visual issues likely to be encountered which are: The baseline assessment is illustrated in Figure 6.1 (Site Area), Figure 6.2 (Landscape Designations) and Figures 6.3 and 6.4 (Landscape Character Areas). The assessment of Effects on the landscape or resources; landscape and visual effects of the proposed windfarm is illustrated by use of Zone of Effects on perception of the landscape; and Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) map in Figure 6.5 and in viewpoint photomontages and Effects on visual amenity. wireframes in Figures 6.9 to 6.26. The cumulative assessment is illustrated with cumulative ZTVs in Figures 6.6 to 6.8. The impact of the windfarm is assessed through landscape, visual and cumulative effects. Landscape effects are changes in the landscape and its character, and differ 6.2 METHODOLOGY from visual effects which relate to the appearance of these changes and the resulting effect on visual amenity. The cumulative effects are the changes to the landscape or 6.2.1 Relevant Guidance visual resource caused by the windfarm in association with other windfarm This assessment has been based on the guidelines provided in the following developments. The site location is shown in Figure 1.1. publications: The assessment concentrates on the construction, operational and decommissioning Landscape Character Assessment: Guidance for England and Scotland (The Countryside phases of the proposed windfarm, which is described in Chapter 3: Project Description of Agency and Scottish Natural Heritage, 2002); this ES and accompanying drawings provided in Figures 3.2 to 3.11. Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (Landscape Institute and Institute of Environmental Assessment 1995 and 2nd Edition 2002); Guidelines on the Environmental Impacts of Wind Farms and Small Scale Hydroelectric The Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment is organised into the following main sections: Schemes (Scottish Natural Heritage 2001); Introduction; Visual Assessment of Wind Farms Best Practice, University of Newcastle (2002). Scottish Scope and Method of Assessment: an explanation of how the assessment has been Natural Heritage Commissioned Report; carried out, with reference to a methodology developed by Circle Design Consultants and Visual Analysis of Wind Farms Good Practice Guidance, Scottish Natural Heritage (Draft other recommended methodologies and guidelines; 2005); Existing Landscape and Visual Resources: a review of the existing landscape and Guidance, Cumulative Effect of Windfarms, Scottish Natural Heritage, (Version 2 revised visual resources of the site and broader study area; 13.04.05); and Layout and Design Optimisation: a description of the layout design in response to The Countryside Agency Landscape Character Initiative1. landscape/visual matters; Assessment of Effects at Construction Stage: an assessment of the potential effects This assessment also takes into account of the following national policy: arising from the construction stage; Assessment of Effects upon the Landscape Resource: a detailed assessment of the Planning Policy Statement 1: Delivering Sustainable Development May 2006; potential effects of the proposed windfarm upon both the landscape resource and the Planning Policy Statement 7: Sustainable Development in Rural Areas 2004; perception of the landscape resource, landscape character areas and designated landscapes Planning Policy Statement 22: Renewable Energy May 2006; within the study area; Planning for Renewable Energy: A Companion Guide to PPS22 2004; and

1 http://www.countryside.gov.uk/LAR/Landscape/CC/index.asp

Bolsterstone August 2008 6-1 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 6: Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

Consultation: Planning Policy Statement: Planning and Climate Change May 2006. of radius 20km, centred on the proposed windfarm. The assessment of the baseline landscape and visual resource has three elements: 6.2.2 Assessment Methodology Overview The assessment is based on information provided in the Scoping Report and from Description – a systematic review and digest of existing information and policy relating to subsequent consultations with Daventry District Council, particularly in regard to the existing landscape and visual resource; viewpoint selection. The general approach to the LVIA includes the following key tasks: Classification – analysis of the data to subdivide the landscape resource into discrete areas of similar and identifiable character; and Desk study and preliminary site survey; Evaluation – Use of professional judgement to apply a value to a landscape or visual Baseline assessment of landscape and visual resources (consisting of desk study, field resource with reference to specified criteria. survey and reporting; Layout and design optimisation; The baseline assessment is undertaken in three stages as follows. Assessment of residual landscape and visual effects; and Assessment of residual cumulative landscape and visual effects. 6.2.5 Desk Based Data Review

6.2.3 Scope of the LVIA Existing mapping, legislation, policy documents and other written, graphic and digital data relating to the proposal and broader study area was reviewed. This included the A formal scoping study has been carried out for this proposal by Arcus Renewable following documents; Energy Consulting Ltd (Arcus) and was submitted in April 2008. This scoping report suggested a study area of 30km radius from the site for the LVIA, a 30km radius study Daventry District Council Local Plan; area for cumulative assessment, and identified a list of six possible viewpoints. Corby District Council Local Plan; Harborough District Council Local Plan; Preliminary examination of the site and study area demonstrated that actual visibility of District Council Local Plan; the proposed turbines, would be limited by a combination of undulating landform, Wellingborough District Council Local Plan; vegetation and the proliferation of manmade structures including settlements, roads South Northamptonshire District Council Local Plan; and motorways, and successive mature hedgerows and mature tree planting. North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy; Correspondingly, any landscape or visual effects with significance above negligible or Northampton Borough Council Local Plan; none are likely to be within 20km of the proposed turbines. Therefore the study area Northamptonshire County Plan; has been reduced to a 20km circle of radius. In addition, the list of viewpoints East Midlands Regional Spatial Strategy; representing the key receptors has been increased from six to eighteen, following East Midlands Energy Strategy; discussions with Daventry District Council (DDC). Regional Planning Guidance for the East Midlands (RPG8); Daventry District Council and South Northamptonshire District Council (2007) Energy & The study area for the cumulative assessment has been maintained as a 30km circle of Development SPD; and radius from the proposed turbines. Within this study area, three other wind Digital sources of mapping and aerial photography. developments are identified; one existing and two consented. A cumulative assessment of predicted effects of these three other wind developments in relation to the proposed The desk study also defined the baseline visual resources of the 20km radius study windfarm was undertaken. area and established the main users of the area, key viewpoints and key features. The potential visual receptors were identified and classified according to their associated The landscape and visual impact assessment (LVIA) has been based on fieldwork and use (settlements, footpaths, roads etc). The aim of the baseline assessment of visual background research provided by Arcus; fieldwork carried out by Circle Design resources was to ensure that an appropriate range of viewpoints is included in the Consultants and informal discussions between Circle Design Consultants and Daventry visual assessment. The potential extent of visibility of the proposed windfarm was District Council. This LVIA seeks to address the main issues identified. identified by reference to a preliminary Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) map, and the potential visual receptors were identified. The viewpoints included in this 6.2.4 Baseline Assessment assessment were discussed with Daventry District Council and are representative of the range of receptors found in the study area. The initial stage of this assessment reviewed the existing landscape and visual characteristics of the study area with reference to its key features, perceived value and The desk study informed subsequent site work, with field analysis, and allowed the sensitivity to development of the nature proposed. The data gained from the review of confirmation of LCA boundaries within the ZTV. It enabled the identification of the existing landscape and visual resource provides this assessment with the baseline landscape character types within the 20km study area, defined the zone of theoretical against which to assess the magnitude and significance of potential impacts arising influence and allowed the identification of key receptors and viewpoint locations. from the proposed windfarm. The baseline review was undertaken within a study area

Bolsterstone August 2008 6-2 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 6: Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

6.2.6 On Site Survey A more detailed explanation of the design iteration is contained in the introductory chapters to this ES, though it is important to recognise that the reduction in turbine The baseline landscape assessment included field survey work carried out to verify and numbers is as a direct reflection of the ecological and landscape constraints on the refine the landscape character types identified within the study area and gain a full proposed location. appreciation of the relationship between the proposed windfarm, and the landscape. 6.2.9 Assessment of Landscape The baseline visual assessment included survey work in order to verify the validity of the list of original viewpoints used in the LVIA. This involved checking initial viewpoint The impact assessment aims to: grid references on the ground to review potential visibility of the proposed windfarm identify all the potential landscape, visual and cumulative impacts of the development from these locations. Since the ZTV is based on a 1:50,000 digital terrain model, it taking account of any proposed mitigation measures; does not capture local landform, vegetation or buildings. It may be that on the ground, predict their magnitude; and and Visual Effects a viewpoint selected from analysis of the ZTV does not actually have any views to the assess their significance in a logical and well-reasoned fashion. proposed windfarm. In some instances, this can be remedied by slight adjustments of the grid references, although the location must remain relevant to the particular The assessment describes the changes in the character and of the landscape and visual receptor(s) for which the viewpoint was selected. It is also important to ensure that resources that are expected to result from the development. It covers both landscape the viewpoints remain a representative selection of views. Wireframes supported the impacts (changes in the fabric, character and key defining characteristics of the fieldwork, and observations were recorded with photographs. landscape) and visual impacts (changes in available views of the landscape and the significance of those changes on people). 6.2.7 Data Analysis

Analysis and reporting of the baseline assessment took place after the completion of Table 6.1 identifies potential landscape and visual effects. Potential effects are those the desk and field surveys. The baseline landscape assessment provided a description, that could result from the construction and operation of a windfarm, according to the classification and evaluation of the landscape of the study area, from which to assess project, site and receptor characteristics and their interactions, though their inclusion the potential landscape effects of the proposed windfarm. The baseline assessment of in Table 6.1 does not imply that they will occur, or be significant. The assessment is visual resources presents the final agreed list of viewpoints for the viewpoint based upon an assessment of the potential effects, in order to identify predicted assessment, with initial commentary on viewpoint grid reference, distance from the effects. proposed windfarm, receptors and rationale for selection.

The baseline assessment provided a robust description of the landscape and visual resource from which to assess the landscape and visual effects of the proposed windfarm in the Assessment of Residual Landscape and Visual Effects and advise, in landscape and visual terms, on the development's acceptability in principle and its preferred siting, layout and design.

6.2.8 Layout Ref The site layout has been refined and altered during ongoing discussions between the developers, inementlandowners and and Optimisation statutory consultee s. This represents the mitigation of the landscape and visual effects and is known as “embedded mitigation”. The assessment reported here was of effects of the windfarm following implementation of this embedded mitigation. The layout has been reviewed against technical and environmental constraints and the number of proposed turbines has been reduced from an original seven turbines to the currently proposed six turbines in order to minimise the impact on the landscape resource and visual amenity of the study area and to ‘fit’ the development with the receiving landscape. The optimised layout and proposed mitigation techniques provide the basis for the assessment of residual landscape and visual effects discussed below.

Bolsterstone August 2008 6-3 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 6: Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

Table 6.1 Potential Landscape and Visual Effects A visibility assessment has been carried out using the ZTV to describe the visibility Activity Specific Potential Effects Potential Sensitive Receptors pattern of the proposal within the study area. The visibility assessment concentrated Element upon accessible locations including roads, footpaths, residential areas and popular Construction Construction Temporary impacts Landscapes character types recreation sites. plant, on landscape fabric Designated landscapes. temporary Temporary impacts Historic gardens and designed The viewpoint analysis was carried out to identify and evaluate the potential effects on construction on visual amenity landscapes compound, Visual receptors including: Residents, landscape and visual amenity arising from the proposal at specific representative vehicle visitors, tourists, road users, walkers, locations in the study area. The viewpoints in the assessment are considered to be movements cyclists representative of the range of receptors in the study area and are located at different distances, directions and heights relative to the proposed windfarm.

The viewpoint assessment was informed using a computer generated visibility analysis carried out using Ordnance Survey Digital Terrain Model (DTM) data and a 3D model of the six turbines, based on 125m blade tip height machines located at the turbine positions shown in the site layout plan in Figure 3.1.

Operation Presence of Long term but Landscapes character types The assessment has involved the production of computer generated wireframes to tracks, reversible impacts on Designated landscapes. predict and illustrate views of the proposed turbines from each of the representative turbines, landscape fabric. Historic gardens and designed viewpoints. Photomontages of some of these viewpoints have also been prepared. permanent site Long term but landscapes These are shown in Figures 6.9 to 6.26. compound and reversible impacts on Visual receptors including: Residents, substation visual amenity visitors, tourists, road users, walkers, 6.2.10 Assessment Criteria Cumulative impacts cyclists with other wind The aim of the environmental assessment is to identify and evaluate potential farms significant effects arising from a proposed windfarm. Wherever possible identified Decommissioning Construction Temporary impacts N.A. effects are quantified, however the nature of LVIA requires interpretation by plant, on landscape fabric. professional judgement. In order to provide a level of consistency to the assessment, temporary Temporary impacts criteria for the prediction of magnitude and assessment of significance of the residual compound, on visual amenity landscape and visual effects have been defined. vehicle movements 6.2.11 Landscape Sensitivity The sensitivity of the landscape resource is variable according to the existing Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) mapping was produced to identify the potential landscape, its relationship to the proposed windfarm, the nature of the development visibility pattern of the proposed windfarm within the study area. The ZTV was being assessed and the type of change being considered. The determination of the modelled using a computer based visibility analysis package compiled using Ordnance landscape’s sensitivity andto changes Magnitude associated of Change with the proposal is defined as high, Survey digital height data, and a three dimensional digital model of the proposal. medium, low or negligible. This is based on the professional interpretation of the key The ZTV of the proposal is illustrated in Figure 6.5 and is based on the visibility to the landscape characteristics; the scale of the landscape; the nature of views and blade tips of the rotor blades on the turbines. perceived landscape value, as reflected by landscape designations.

ZTVs are digital models and they assume a “worst case visibility scenario” in that they In general, the sensitivity of the landscape receptors that have a high sensitivity to assume a bare land surface and take no account of vegetation, local variations in windfarm developments are those which: topography or the presence of walls, buildings, hedgerows etc which can substantially are contained within small scale landscapes; reduce visibility from that predicted by the ZTV. The ZTV does not account for are visible in the medium and short distance, and/or; atmospheric conditions such as haze, fog, rain, and duration of sunlight hours, which are of high landscape value i.e. designated landscapes. may substantially reduce visibility for extended periods. The assessment has been

based on a blade tip ZTV which means that they indicate all parts of the study area

where some part of one or more turbines may be visible. Visibility has been separated

into bands of two turbines. Where the ZTV indicates that there is no visibility of

turbines, this may be considered accurate.

Bolsterstone August 2008 6-4 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 6: Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

Landscape receptors that have a low sensitivity tend: Table 6.3 Definition of Receptor Visual Sensitivity High to be large scale; Users of outdoor recreational facilities including strategic recreational footpaths, cycle routes or rights have views towards the receiving landscape which are panoramic, open and long distance, of way, whose attention may be focused on the landscape; important landscape features with physical, and/or; cultural or historic attributes; views from principal settlements; visitors to beauty spots and picnic to be where the landscape value is low, i.e. industrial landscapes. areas. Medium As would be expected therefore, medium sensitivity landscapes are usually those Other footpaths; people travelling through or past the landscape on roads, train lines or other which: transport routes; views from passenger ferries and cruisers, views from minor settlements. Low are of medium scale; People engaged in outdoor sports or recreation (other than appreciation of the landscape), those have open, medium distance views, and/or; whose attention may be focused on their work or activity rather than the wider landscape. fall into the medium landscape value i.e. have no formal landscape designation. Negligible Views from heavily industrialised areas. As every proposed windfarm and its interaction with the landscape is unique, there will be situations where predefined criteria will not accurately reflect the potential residual The magnitude of visual change arising from the development is described as high, effects. In such cases, professional judgement takes precedence. medium, low or negligible based on the overall extent of visibility. For individual viewpoints it will depend upon: The criteria used for understanding the magnitude of landscape change are summarised in Table 6.2: the distance of the viewpoint from the development; the duration of effect; Table 6.2 Definitions of Magnitude of Change on the Landscape Resource the angle of view in relation to main receptor activity; Level of Definition of Magnitude the proportion of the field of view occupied by the development; Magnitude the background to the development; and High Total loss or major alteration to key elements, features or characteristics of the the extent of other built development visible, particularly vertical, elements. baseline landscape so that the post development character and composition of the baseline landscape resource will be fundamentally changed. The significance of any identified landscape or visual effect has been assessed as Medium Partial loss or alteration to one or more key elements, features or characteristics of major, moderate, minor or negligible effect. These categories have been determined by the baseline landscape so that the post development character and composition of consideration of viewpoint or landscape sensitivity and predicted magnitude of change the baseline landscape resource will be partially, but noticeably changed. as described above, with the following table is used as a guide to correlating sensitivity Low Minor loss of or to one or more key elements, features or characteristics of the and magnitude to determine significance of effects. It should be noted that this is a baseline landscape so that the post development character and composition of the guide only, and there will be times when the combination of sensitivity and magnitude baseline landscape resource will be noticeably changed but the underlying character yield a slightly different result from that predicted by the table. Where this discrepancy of the baseline landscape will be similar to the pre-development character. leads to prediction of significant effect, it is explained in the text. Negligible Very minor loss or alteration to one or more key elements, features or characteristics of the baseline landscape. Change to the landscape character will be barely distinguishable. 6.2.13 Significance of Effects on L Table 6.4 Correlation of Sensitivity and Magnitude of Effect to Determine the Significance of 6.2.12 Visual Receptor Sensiti Effects Magnitude of Change/Effect The sensitivity of visual receptors depends upon: andscape and Visual Receptors the location of the viewpoint; Landscape High Medium Low Negligible and Visual the context of the view; vity and Magnitude of Change Sensitivity the activity of the receptor; and High Major Major Moderate Moderate/minor the frequency and duration of the view. /moderate Medium Major/moderate Moderate Moderate/minor Minor Visual receptor sensitivity is defined as high, medium, low or negligible as Low Moderate Moderate Minor Minor/none demonstrated in table 6.3. /minor Negligible Moderate/minor Minor Minor/none None

Bolsterstone August 2008 6-5 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 6: Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

Where the landscape or visual effect has been identified as being major or Furthermore, the selected viewpoints are drawn from the receptors considered as being major/moderate, then this is considered to be a significant effect referred to in potentially most sensitive to the anticipated change arising from the development. For the Schedule 3 of the EIA Regulations2. Significant effects may in some circumstances not purposes of assessing the effects on visual amenity the sensitivity of the receptors is as defined be unacceptable or necessarily negative and may be reversible. on Table 6.11, “Definition of Visual receptor Sensitivity”. Visual receptor sensitivity to change in visual amenity is defined as being high, medium, low or negligible depending upon the activity This matrix (Table 6.4) is not used as a prescriptive tool, and the methodology and of the receptor. analysis of potential effects at any particular location must take account of professional judgement, therefore in some situations the analysis may not reflect the effects 6.2.14 Assessment of Cumulative Landscape predicted by the grid. This section comprises the assessment of the potential landscape and visual effects arising from the proposed windfarm in conjunction with other built/consented and In order to confirm the appropriateness of the viewpoint selection, field survey verification was application stage windfarm developments. The assessment reviews effects within a carried out. This involved checking the viewpoint grid references on the ground, to ensure that 30km study area of the proposed windfarm. Figures 6.6 to 6.8 highlight the there would be the potential for views of the development from the selected locations. The ZTV existing/potential zone of theoretical visibility to each windfarm identified and the is based on a 1:50,000 digital terrain model, therefore it does not allow for local landforms degree of change brought about by the imandplementation Visual Effects of this development. which may screen the proposed windfarm. Neither is vegetation, buildings or any other intervening structure accounted for in the theoretical visibility indicated on the ZTV. Viewpoint 6.2.15 Cumulative Assessment Methodology selection is predominantly a desk based operation that is agreed with the local authority, and it sometimes transpires that on site, a viewpoint selected from analysis of the ZTV, does not Although a Guide to Assessing the Cumulative Effects of Wind Energy Development has actually have any views to the proposed windfarm. In some instances, this can be remedied by been produced (DTI Final Consultation Draft December 1999), there are as yet no slight adjustments of the grid references, although the viewpoint should remain representative formalised guidelines in Great Britain defining an approved methodology for the and relevant to the particular receptor(s) for which the viewpoint was selected and have a assessment of cumulative effects on landscape and visual amenity that have been representative view, i.e. that it does have the maximum potential visibility of the proposed approved and endorsed by the Landscape Institute. The approach used is therefore windfarm for the receptor(s). based on draft guidance notes on cumulative landscape and visual impact assessment of windfarm developments produced by SNH (2005) and the Guidelines for Landscape Illustrative tools and Visual Impact Assessment (GLVIA) LI-IEMA 2002. The viewpoint analysis is illustrated by a range of tools including photographs, wireframes and 6.2.16 Scope of Cumulative Assessment photomontages. The photographs used to construct the photomontages have been taken using a 50mm lens on a digital SLR camera, which is endorsed by the Landscape Institute (Guideline The scoping study for the proposed windfarm set out the criteria for other wind for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment, 2nd Edition 2002) and SNH (Visual Assessment of developments that would be included in the Cumulative Landscape and Visual Impact Wind Farms – Best Practice 2002) for photomontage production. The wireframes have been Assessment (CLVIA). All windfarm or wind turbines that are in the ‘public domian’ and generated on the same OS digital data used to generate the ZTVs, and therefore illustrate a are located within a 30km radius of the proposed turbines would be considered in the scenario of maximum theoretical visibility, because they do not take account of the screening CLVIA. effect of small scale variations in landform or vegetation. The photomontages have been prepared by combining a wireframe of the view with the photograph of the existing view and These include: rendering the image using a model of the proposed wind turbines, also generated electronically. any constructed windfarm; The resulting images should be viewed at a distance as recommended on each montage to most any consented windfarm proposal; and closely replicate the view that will be obtained from the viewpoint. any windfarm proposal that has been lodged as a planning application (not refused).

It should be noted that photography is only a tool to assist in the visualisation process, and The current guidance from SNH suggests listing all windfarms within a radius of 60km cannot be expected to replicate the actual view or predicted view that will be attained on the from the proposed windfarm to be included in the cumulative assessment. This ground. distance is based on the conditions in Scotland; the worst case being views from the top of a sensitive munro such as Ben Nevis, on a clear day over relatively undeveloped It should also be noted that the assessment of potential landscape or visual effects at any countryside. As there are no such peaks within 60km of the proposed windfarm, and as viewpoint cannot be extended to conclude the same effects on the whole of the landscape the development is located within a heavily settled part of the country, it is considered character area within which the viewpoint occurs. that a radius of 30km for CLVIA is sufficient.

For the proposed windfarm, the relevant windfarms are listed in section 6.4.

2 The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 1999 - http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si1999/19990293.htm

Bolsterstone August 2008 6-6 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 6: Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

6.2.17 Types of Cumulative Effect Receptor 1 is likely to be major. In terms of a cumulative effect on this receptor, Windfarm 2 may be visible, but if it is located, for example, 25km from the receptor, Cumulative effects are those that occur, or may occur, as a result of more than one the magnitude of cumulative change is likely to be low (Windfarm 2 will be of limited windfarm project being constructed. Potential cumulative landscape and visual effects visibility at 25km) and the cumulative effect is therefore minor. arise from the combined effects of additional windfarm developments. Combined

effects relate to the following: A significant cumulative effect is likely to only occur if both Windfarm 1 and Windfarm extending visibility of wind turbines over parts of the study area from where there are 2 are both fully visible, at close distances from the receptor, possibly in the same currently existing windfarms visible, which give rise to extended combined visibility of wind direction of view and forming a large developed proportion of the skyline. turbines at particular locations in the landscape, which may be simultaneous or successive in nature; On the basis of professional interpretation of the above parameters, the magnitude of extending visibility of wind turbines over parts of the study area from where there are cumulative change arising at both landscape and visual receptors from each of the currently no wind turbines visible, which may give rise to an extended sequential visibility of existing windfarms and the development, both individually and in combination with wind turbines across the landscape; and each other, has been evaluated for the proposed windfarm. both simultaneous and sequential visibility of wind turbines. 6.2.19 Significance of Cumulative Effects In relation to simultaneous visibility, cumulative effects occur where more than one SNH guidance on cumulative assessment describes the need for understanding whether windfarm is visible in the same direction from a particular place, as well as where the development crosses the threshold of acceptability for the total number of windfarms become visible in more than one direction from that place, i.e. successive windfarms in an area. As no existing methodology exists for identifying when a visibility. In relation to the sequential visibility, cumulative effects occur where the landscape has reached its capacity in terms of windfarms, it is necessary to revert back observer has to move to another viewpoint to see the second windfarm, so they appear to SNH and Local Authority Guidance which seeks to identify the landscape objectives in sequence, depending on speed of travel and distance between the viewpoints. and policies for the area.

The assessment of potential cumulative landscape and visual effects is carried out in The significance of any identified cumulative landscape or visual effect has been assessed as the same generic way as that of non-cumulative effects. Professional judgements are major, moderate, minor or negligible, in relation to the sensitivity of the receptor and the made in relation to the magnitude of change caused by the windfarm to the existing predicted magnitude of change as outlined above. As in the case of non-cumulative effects, the landscape and visual baseline. matrix shown in Table 6.4 is used to bring together receptor sensitivity and magnitude of change. 6.2.18 Magnitude of Cumulative Change Cumulative landscape and visual effects may result from additional changes to the 6.3 BASELINE DESCRIPTION baseline landscape or visual amenity caused by the proposed windfarm in conjunction with other windfarm developments. The emphasis of the assessment is on the changes 6.3.1 Local and Regional Context the proposal would bring to the existing landscape, which incorporates windfarm The proposed site is located near to the A508 north of Brixworth, near Northampton, in developments as part of its baseline landscape character and visual amenity. The Northamptonshire, East Midlands. The site is approximately 0.6km north of Brixworth assessment therefore identifies the cumulative magnitude of change relative to existing and approximately 7km north of the periphery of Northampton. visual impacts of windfarms rather than the combined impact of all the windfarms visible. The magnitude of cumulative change arising from the proposed windfarm is The proposed site sits in an area of gently rolling hills, within the Northamptonshire Uplands. assessed as high, medium, low or negligible, based on interpretation of the following The site itself predominately occupies the lower reaches of clay plateau that rises towards the largely quantifiable parameters, to take account of cumulative change: A508 in the east and Clint Hill to the north. There is a small stream alongside the field the number of existing and developments and wind turbines visible; boundaries. the distance to existing and developments; the direction and distribution of existing and developments; and The site consists of a number of arable fields, with associated hedge and ditch the landscape setting, context and degree of visual coalescence of existing and boundaries, which include several clumps of hedgerow trees. Just outside of the site developments. boundary lie two small wooded areas, which consist of a covert and a copse, and along much of the southern boundary of the site there is a substantial hedge with associated The principle of magnitude of cumulative change makes it possible for the development copse. to have a major effect on a particular receptor while having only a minor cumulative effect. There is only one farmstead in the immediate vicinity of the site, Lodge Farm, which is situated For example, if the magnitude of change of Windfarm 1 on Receptor 1 is high (for on the eastern side of the A508. example, if it is 1km from the proposed windfarm) the effect of Windfarm 1 on

Bolsterstone August 2008 6-7 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 6: Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

The proposed site is situated adjacent to the A508 (known as Harborough Road), a part of Brixworth; which forms the eastern boundary of the site area. This road links Northampton with the A14 Cottesbrooke; and Market Harborough. The A14 is also in close proximity, at approximately 5km at its closest Creaton; point to the development site. There are a network of local roads and lanes near to the site. Draughton; Hanging Houghton; 6.3.2 Study Area Holcot; The study area for the landscape and visual assessment is defined by a 20km radius circle Lamport; centred on the development, as shown in Figure 6.1. A 20km radius study area is considered as Maidwell; an appropriate size of study area based on long range visibility being limited by the undulating Old; nature of the receiving landscape and the large number of man-made structures associated with Pitsford; roads and settlements, within the general area. Scaldwell; Spratton; and The study area of 20km covers a large section of the Midlands, primarily in Northamptonshire, Walgrave. but also includes parts of . The study area encompasses the local planning The general settlement pattern is of small villages and hamlets, usually of a linear authorities of Corby, Daventry, Harborough, Kettering, Northampton, South Northamptonshire nature along roadways, with scattered, isolated farmsteads, punctuated by the larger and Wellingborough. urban areas. The larger towns exhibit substantial urban sprawl and often have associated edge of town industrial estates. The key features of the study area landscape are as follows: Transport Routes Landform and Hydrology Roads The proposed site sits within a relatively rolling landscape which is underlain by Ironstone, There are many ‘A’ class or above roads within the study area, including: Limestone and Lias Clay. Adjacent to the proposed site, there is an area of clay plateau to the east, and an area of river valley floodplain to the west. Throughout the study there is a mixture The M1, on a broadly north to south alignment; of plateaus, ridges, slopes and river valley floodplain. The landform is generally a mix of The A5, north-west to south-east alignment; rounded upland hills with long ridgelines in the west and gentle ridges and valleys in the central The A6, which links Market Harborough and the A14; and eastern area. The A14, on a east-west alignment, passing through Kettering, and joining the M1 at Junction 19; The River Nene and the Grand Union Canal are the dominant hydrological features in the south The A43, joining Northampton and Kettering; and west of the study area with the River Welland and River Ise in the north and east The A45, connecting Wellingborough and Northampton, and via the M1, Northampton and respectively. There are numerous small lakes and streams throughout the valleys, and the more Daventry; substantial , within Brixworth Country Park, to the south of Brixworth. The A361, which links Daventry and Kilsby; The A427, which links Market Harborough and Corby; Landcover, Landuse and Landscape Elements The A428, which links Bedford, Northampton and Rugby; The A4500, which links Wellingborough, Northampton and the M1; The landuse within the study area is predominately arable, with areas of improved and neutral The A508 which links Market Harborough and Northampton; grassland, and small pockets of woodland. The arable areas are of an open character, whilst the The A509, which links with Wellingborough and Kettering; and areas of pasture are enclosed by high hedges with frequent hedgerow trees. This gives the The A5199 is on a broadly north west alignment, from Northampton to Leicester. impression of a well-wooded landscape although actual areas of woodland are generally sparse,

and tend to be prominently situated on the higher ground. Throughout the study area, there are prominent parkland landscapes, many of which are on the Register of Historic Parks and Rail There are two railway lines within the area, the main line from London to Rugby and beyond, Gardens. Despite the largely rural aspect of the area, the landscape is dominated by and a branch line which diverges at to carry on to Northampton and Long Buckby, before Northampton, and to a lesser degree, the towns of Corby, Daventry, Market Harborough, rejoining the main line at Rugby. The rail links are to the large towns only, with bus links to the Kettering, and Wellingborough. surrounding areas. Settlement Long Distance Footpaths and Cycle Routes The study area of 20km includes several large towns, namely Corby, Daventry, Market There are several long distance footpaths in the study area, and the Grand Union Canal. Many Harborough, Kettering, Northampton and Wellingborough, with Rugby situated on the of the long distance footpaths have areas of ‘cross over’ (i.e. join along part of their routes). edge of the 20km zone. Within a 5km radius of the proposed site there are several The routes within 20km are: small villages and hamlets, including:

Bolsterstone August 2008 6-8 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 6: Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

The Brampton Valley Way; a linear country park and national footpath along a disused Unspoilt rural landscapes free from urban intrusion, with a sense of remoteness and railway line between Northampton and Market Harborough. This is a multi-user, off road tranquillity; and route that is also part of National Cycle Network Route 6; Landscapes particularly representative of a type, having a fragile condition or scarcity value, The Macmillan Way; forms a network of linked routes; or with ancient landscape characteristics. The Midshires Way; a multi user route, and in parts follows the same route as the Brampton Special Landscape Areas are further defined at district level. Outlined below are these areas, Valley Way, and the Grand Union Canal Walk, which are discussed below as part of the separated into the district within which they are located. effects upon the Grand Union Canal; The Nene Way; follows the course of the River Nene; and Daventry The Jurassic Way; follows the Jurassic Limestone Ridge. Daventry (from Haselbech to Brington north to south, from A508 to Yelvertoft east to west). The Grand Union Canal Kettering The Grand Union Canal winds throughout the western side of the study area, and diverges in several places. Its current uses are mainly recreational, including use by traditional narrow Braybrooke; boats, and a national footpath which follows the route. Harrington; Boughton Park, Geddington Chase, Old Hood Wood and Grafton Park wood Area; and 6.3.3 Proposed and Existing Windfar Dingley Wood, Hermitage Wood, Brampton Wood and Gaultney Wood Area. There are three built or consented wind developments within the study area. These are South Northamptonshire as follows: The Hemplow Hills, Cottesbrooke and Brington Area; and Burton Wold Wind Farm, near Kettering (built). The and Castle Ashby Area. Burton Wold Wind Farm Extension,ms in the near Study Kettering Area (consented). Single turbine development, Tesco Distribution Centre, near Crick (consented). Sensitivity of SLAs All local designations are considered to have a medium sensitivity to change given that these 6.3.4 Landscape Designations areas do not merit national designation status, yet are important to the local area. There are no national landscape designations within the study area or the wider, 30km study area for the CLVIA. However, there are locally designated areas within the 20km radius study Locally Important Lands area. These are outlined below. Within the Northampton Borough Council (NBC) area, there are no Special Landscape Value designations. NBC does however, have a local designation of Locally Important Landscape Areas Local Landscape Designations (LILA). These are areascape ‘which Areas make (LILA) an important contribution to its local character and Northamptonshire County Council states that the Environmental Character Study, which appearance’. Following is a list of LILAs within the study area along with a brief description of contains a description of all the landscape in the county and development guidelines, should each LILA: take precedence as planning guidance, so that all areas are valued. However, currently district Abington Park; the largest park in Northampton; authorities are still in process of changing from Local Plans to Local Development Framework, Becketts Park; the most central park in Northampton, adjacent to the River Nene; and as such many of the local plan policies are still relevant. Therefore, an outline of Special Brackmills; contains and important area of ridge and furrow; Landscape Areas and Locally Important Landscape Areas is given below. Collingtree Park; a golf course that provides a buffer for Collingtree village; Dallington Park; parkland landscape with abbey and formal gardens; Wellingborough and Harborough District Councils have no relevant local landscape designations, Delapre Park; 223 acres of parkland and gardens, containing Queen Eleanor’s Cross, an and the Special Landscape Areas within the Corby district are outside of the 20km radius study ancient monument; area. Eastfield Park; parkland landscape bordered by housing developments; Golf Course; golf course within a dense residential area; Special Landscape Areas (SLA) Kingsthorpe Park; park containing the listed Thornton Hall and its gardens; Special landscape areas are those that have particularly high landscape value, and are Mansfield Hospital Grounds; contains formal gardens with terraced lawn and avenue of designated as such by the County Council. trees; Northamptonshire County Structure Plan contains Policy AR1, which defines Special Landscape Northampton Golf Course- Bradlaugh Fields; former golf course; Areas as areas ‘that are distinctive in terms of their special character’. It further defines the The Racecourse; provides important open space within a built up area; criteria for selecting these areas, namely: St Andrews Hospital Grounds; parkland and gardens, with a golf course within the parkland; St Crispin Hospital Grounds; gardens and grounds associated with hospital, including Scenic quality; woodland; Sense of place including local character and setting of buildings and settlements;

Bolsterstone August 2008 6-9 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 6: Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

Upton Park; historic landscape with remains of a deserted medieval village, fishponds and Joint Character Areas ridge and furrow; Countryside Agency: Countryside Character Volume 4: East Midlands identifies six regional Victoria Park; small open space, one of the oldest designated parks in Northampton; and character areas within the study area. The proposed windfarm is located within the following: Wooton Hall Park; mixture of paddock, sports fields and mature trees. JCA 95: Northamptonshire Uplands, with JCA 89: Northamptonshire Vales to the east of the Sensitivity of LILAs study area; Locally Important Landscape Areas are those areas ‘which make an important contribution to its JCA 92: Rockingham Forest to the north-east and adjacent to JCA 89; local character and appearance’, but are not suitable for inclusion within Special Landscape Small areas of JCA 94: Leicestershire Vales to the north-west; Areas. Therefore the sensitivity to the LILAs is considered to be Medium to Low. JCA 93: High Leicestershire to the north; and JCA 91: Yardley- Whittlewood Ridge to the south-east of the study area. All local designations are considered to have a medium sensitivity to change given that these areas do not merit national designation status, yet are important to the local area. These areas N.B. JCA 89: Northamptonshire Vales and JCA 94: Leicestershire Vales are amalgamated by the are shown in figure 6.2. Countryside agency into one document, and are therefore presented together here.

6.3.5 Historic Parks and Gardens JCA 95: Northamptonshire Uplands There are twelve sites on the Register of Historic Parks and Gardens that fall within the 20km study area. The following list identifies the sites by name, district and approximate distance This long range of clay hills extends from the Cotswolds and Cherwell valley in the south west to from the proposed site. the low ground of Leicestershire Vales around Market Harborough. In the west it abuts the low ground of the Feldon and to the east subsides towards the Nene Valley within the Lamport Hall, Daventry, 1.8km north; Northamptonshire Vales. It is part of the Wolds landscapes that include the dip slope of the Cottesbrooke Park, Daventry, 3.1km north-west; Cotswolds and extend to High Leicestershire and the Leicestershire and Nottinghamshire Wolds, Boughton Hall, Daventry 5.9km south; but without the strong sense of identity of these areas, not least because it is very varied. Holdenby House, Daventry, 7.5km south-west; Harrington Manor House, Kettering, 7.5km north, north-east; Key Characteristics Althorp, Daventry, 9.4km south west; Great Harrowden, Wellingborough, 12km east; Rounded, undulating hills with many long, low ridgelines; Wickstead Park, Kettering, 13.5km north-east; Abundant and prominent ridge and furrow with frequent deserted and shrunken Ruston Hall, Kettering, 14km north-east; settlements; Stanford Hall, Harborough/Daventry, 16.5km north-west; Sparse settlement of nucleated villages on hilltops or valley heads; Boughton Park, Kettering, 17km north-east; Mixed farming: open arable contrasts with pasture enclosed by good hedges with frequent Ashby St Ledgers Manor, Daventry, 17.5km west-south-west; hedgerow trees; Castle Ashby, South Northamptonshire, 17.5km south-east; and Wide views from the edges and across the ridge tops; Straight, wide enclosure roads, often following ridges; , Northampton, 18.75km south. JCALittle 89: woodland, Northamptonshire but prominent Vales/ coverts JCA on higher ground; All parks and gardens on the Register are considered to have a high sensitivity to change. Ironstone and limestone older buildings with a transition across the area. Brick buildings in some villages; Great variety of landform with distinctive local features like the Hemplow Hills; and 6.3.6 Regional Landscape Character Assessment Large and nationally important historic parks. 94: Leicestershire Vales General This section outlines the landscape character assessments carried out at a regional level, for this area. These are the Joint Character Areas (JCA). This large, complex and heterogeneous area comprises low-lying clay vales and river valleys The Countryside Commission (now Natural England) compiled English Natures Natural Areas extending between Wold landscapes and other areas of higher ground, including the area and the former Countryside Commissions Countryside Character Areas into Joint Character referred to as High Cross Plateau in Warwickshire. In the north, the Leicestershire and South Areas (JCA). These provide a spatial framework for England and form the basis for the local Derbyshire Coalfield and Charnwood rise quite steeply from the low-lying land west of Leicester. Landscape Character Assessments. The local Landscape Character Assessments are described in To the north-west there is a more gradual transition to the flat, glacial till dominated, edge of the following section, paragraph 6.1.38. the Mease/Sence Lowlands, while to the south of this there is a an equally gradual transition to Dunsmore and Feldon. The Vales narrow south eastwards, with the Northamptonshire Clay Uplands located to the south, and the High Leicestershire area to the north.

Bolsterstone August 2008 6-10 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 6: Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

The Welland valley extends north eastwards as part of the area while, to the south, the Vales existed across the area from the 11th to 19th centuries. The Forest’s modern extent is defined by sweep between the Northamptonshire Uplands and Rockingham Forest to the Nene Valley, a combination of these former legal boundaries and its physical characteristics. The Soke of which is sharply defined on its southern bank by the Cambridge and Bedfordshire Claylands. Peterborough was also a distinct administrative area for many centuries and this title is conveniently used her to define the physically distinctive countryside to the west of Key Characteristics Peterborough.

Gentle clay ridges and valleys with little woodland and strong patterns of Tudor and parliamentary enclosure; Key Characteristics Distinctive river valleys of Soar, Welland and Nene with flat floodplains and gravel terraces; Undulating landform rising to prominent scarp along edge of Welland Valley in Rockingham Large towns of Leicester and Northampton dominate much of the landscape; Forest; Frequent small towns and large villages, often characterised by red brick buildings; Large woodlands on higher ground enclose the landscape; Prominent parks and country houses; High historic and nature-conservation interest in woodlands; Frequent imposing, spired churches; Remnants of unimproved grassland throughout, with limestone heaths and fragments of Attractive stone buildings in older village centres and eastern towns and villages; and acid bogs in the Soke of Peterborough; Great diversity of landscape and settlement pattern with many sub units, e.g. Nene Valley Foreground views are occupied by large arable fields with low hedges; and Welland Valley. Large mature landscape parks and country houses;

Dry stone walls around villages, becoming more common in open countryside in Soke of JCA 93: High Leicestershire Peterborough; Nucleated villages often in sheltered streamside locations; High Leicestershire rises out of the clay of the Leicestershire and Northamptonshire Vales on its Distinctive buildings constructed in local stone: ironstone in the west, limestone in the east; western and southern sides. To the north and east, it abuts the Leicestershire and Undisturbed, deeply rural quality despite nearby towns and adjoining trunk roads; Nottinghamshire Wolds, rising steeply out of the Wreake Valley, but with a more gradual Prominent, disused ironstone quarries (gullets) and abandoned Second World War airfields; transition to the Vale of Catmose and Rutland Water. It is a remote, rural landscape of small and villages and scattered farms with a well-treed character in many places, at odds with its A sharp transition between the countryside and the major towns of Kettering, Corby and elevation and in contrast to the Wolds to the north. This has been created by the long tradition Peterborough (lying just outside the area) which have developed rapidly in recent years. of hedgerow management as part of hunting country, by the frequent hedgerow trees and

copses and by the spinneys and farm woodlands on the ridges. Where the many winding roads JCA 91: Yardley- Whittlewood Ridge dip down into the sheltered valleys, the wooded character is enhanced by overgrown hedges

and small fields, as well as frequent parks and attractive country houses. The Ridge rises steadily up from the Bedfordshire and Cambridgeshire Claylands (which here extend in to north Buckinghamshire) to the south and east. In the north the land drops down to Key Characteristics the Nene Valley, the southernmost of the Northamptonshire Vales. Thus, although only reaching Broad rolling ridges and varied often steep-sided valleys; elevations of some 150m in the west and slowly dipping down to 80m in the east, it is physically Well-treed character from hedgerows, hedgerow trees, copses, spinneys and small distinct from the adjacent low-lying vales and forms a noticeable broad plateau. woodlands, the last sited on ridges; Mixed farming, but with arable mainly on the ridge tops and wide valley bottoms; The area is predominantly agricultural in character, with a mix arable, mixed and pastoral Sparse settlement of small villages with little modern development; farming. Pastoral farming is predominant in the west, giving way to a more open, arable Ironstone and limestone churches and vernacular buildings, but also abundant brick; landscape as the land dips slightly to the east. However, the thin and variable soils have Frequent and very prominent ridge and furrow and many deserted settlements; and historically constrained agricultural development so that much of the area is wooded and has Green lanes, quiet country and a remote, rural, often empty character. been so since at the 13th century. The landscape elements form simple combinations, of stretches of arable alternating with pasture, with a backdrop of large, dark, woodland blocks. JCA 92: Rockingham Forest Woods such as Salcey Forest are extensive and have a network of rides and occasional open grasslands contained with the woodland- the ‘lawns’ which provided hay and pasture for The area is defined in the north-west by a steep scarp which overlooks the Welland valley and commoners cattle. decreases to much more gentle landforms around the northern edge of the Soke of Peterborough. To the south-east, it is bordered by the Nene valley and, to the east, by the Key Characteristics urban edge of Peterborough. In the south-west it ends against the open clay vales of Northamptonshire and the town of Kettering. It comprises two culturally distinct sub-units the Broad plateau with shallow soils elevated above adjacent vales; Rockingham Forest and Soke of Peterborough, which nevertheless share many similar physical A strong historic landscape character, largely due to the continued presence of extensive characteristics. The Rockingham Forest area takes its title from the royal hunting forest that areas of ancient woodland; Mixed uses of pasture, arable and woodland;

Bolsterstone August 2008 6-11 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 6: Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

Generally medium sized fields with full hedges and hedgerow trees, mainly oak; and Landcover, Landuse and Landscape Elements Low density of settlement and consequently few local roads; cut through by major north- The area mainly consists of fields for cereal production, often with uncultivated field margins south canal, rail and road routes. next to hedgerows. Pasture fields are more common near settlements and farmsteads. Some areas of set aside are visible. Several country parks managed for wildlife conservation are also 6.3.7 Local Character Assessments located in the character type. Prominent man-made features include Neolithic Barrows and Landscape Character Assessments of the region have been carried out by the relevant County Landscape Parks. Settlement is mostly at road junctions, small, compact and not widely visible, Councils and other associated organisations. These assessments provide a detailed assessment although church spires and new housing developments are often visible. of the Landscape Character of the area, they consider the likely pressures and opportunities for change in the landscape assess the sensitivity of the landscape to change and include guidelines Scale of Landscape indicating how landscape character may be observed, enhanced or restructured as appropriate. The scale of the landscape is generally medium in scale, although it varies due to its landform (i.e. small and intimate in lower valley areas, medium to large on valley sides). For the purposes of this LVIA, the landscape receptors within the 20km radius study area correspond to the Landscape Character Areas (LCA) identified in the following documents: Nature of Views Views are open and wide from the elevated valley sides, more intimate in the lower valley areas Northamptonshire’s Current Landscape Character Assessment (2005); due to woodland and hedgerows. Northamptonshire Landscape Character Strategy and Guidance (2005); and Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland Landscape and Woodland Strategy (February 2001). Landscape Features Arable and pasture fields, hedgerows and woodland, streams, villages and hamlets combine to These LCA’s where chosen out of a range of LCA guidance available on the area, as being the create a busy, settled, productive agricultural landscape. Ridges and hills in the area have most recent and therefore most relevant to the LVIA study area. distinctive profiles, but are not of sufficient height to be termed landmarks.

Fifteen LCAs are identified within the LVIA area (see Figure 6.4 for details). Twelve LCAs are Receptors from the Northamptonshire Current Landscape Character Assessment and two LCAs are from Receptors include inhabitants, recreational users (including walkers, tourists and golfers) and the Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland Landscape and Woodland Strategy. The fifteen LCAs road users (from the network of ‘A’ roads). are described in the following paragraphs, and their key landscape characteristics identified in order to provide a baseline against which the potential impact of the development on the Sensitivity to Change landscape and visual amenity of the area can be assessed. The Northamptonshire Current Landscape Char (2006), produced by the Northamptonshire County Council, refers to the development pressures on the entire The development is located within the Rolling Ironstone Valley Slopes, and in close proximity to character area which are due to the proximity of the many urban areas within this LCA. For this the Clay Plateau. These, with the other character areas, are described below, in approximate reason the document suggests that the landscape immediately surrounding settlements is order of their vicinity to the site. Refer to Figure 6.4 for location of LCA within the study area. particularly sensitive to change, and elsewhere, the sensitivity to change is reduced.

(i) Rolling Ironstone Valley Slopes acter Strategy and Guidelines This LCA is considered to be of a transitional nature, sloping down from the clay plateau to Key Characteristics meet other LCAs. In general, this suggests a medium scale landscape. The proposed wind Broad valley slopes cut through with frequent tributary streams; development is located on the mid to upper slopes of this LCA, close to the clay plateau, therefore the sensitivity of this LCA to wind turbine development is considered to be medium. Mixture of arable farmland, on elevated ground, and pasture, located next to streams;

Several water bodies, including Northamptonshires largest reservoir; Topography (ii) Clay Plateau Numerous villages exhibit some vernacular architecture and use of local stone (Ironstone); and Small to medium size woodland dotted throughout the landscape, in conjunction with Key Characteristics hedged field boundaries and hedgerow trees. Plateau landscape with rolling slopes; Largely arable landuse; Some steeper landform found on slopes bordering streams; The valley slopes are dissected by frequent tributary streams, which have eroded some areas. Small number of villages and scattered farmsteads; and Areas of broad elevated ridges and hills are underlain by hard caps of Ironstone and Limestone, Contains areas of a ‘vacant’ and remote quality. the highest of these reaching 140m ASL. Most of the valleys are narrow and steep sided.

Bolsterstone August 2008 6-12 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 6: Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

Topography Topography The landform is underlain with glacial deposits, forming a smooth, undulating landscape. There The landform is area has varying widths of flood plain, with slight undulations, but is are limited wide, flat areas, although there are shelves of land that continue on to form predominately flat, with slight undulations. Shallow valley slopes rise gently into the surrounding undulating slopes in conjunction with the steeper valley slopes surrounding the clay plateau. landscape types. The floodplains vary in width.

Landcover, Landuse and Landscape Elements Landcover, Landuse and Landscape Elements This area consists mainly of arable fields for cereal production, although around the settlement There is an equal mix of pastoral and arable fields through most of the character area. Closer to areas improved and unimproved pastures are evident, with more irregular field pattern than the urban areas, ‘horsiculture’ usages are apparent. In small, infrequent areas, river meadow arable fields. Woodland is sparsely scattered throughout this area, although it can appear systems with pollarded willows occur. Settlement is sparse, small and mostly located either at dominant due to its presence on slopes and higher ground. Settlement is small in number and bridging points of the rivers or on higher areas of land beyond the floodplain. Tree planting is consists of villages (with a mixture of nucleated and linear patterns), and scattered farmsteads. generally considered to be sparse in this LCA, though, field work verified a greater presence of mature vegetation along the course of the Brampton Valley component of this LCA. Scale of Landscape This is a medium scale landscape, with a mix of large scale views from the plateau and more Scale of Landscape contained views along river courses. Overall scale of the area is generally small, due to the containment provided by the adjacent mature tree planting, urban areas. Nature of Views Views are panoramic from the higher ground of the plateau, seeming remote and open from Nature of Views localised parts of this LCA. Views are open across the floodplain, though adjacent urban areas and valley sides can confine the view. Landscape Features Large to medium arable fields dominate the higher ground, with smaller pasture fields around Landscape Features settlement areas. Low hedges highlight the undulating landform. The landscape is largely flat and open, with occasional vertical features provided by trees and hedgerows, and by Church spires at the edges of the floodplain. Landscape parks form a Receptors prominent feature at the edges of the floodplain, and these often have remnant remains of Sensitive receptors users include residents, recreational users (including fishermen, walkers and ridge and furrow. The landscape pattern created by field size and boundaries can appear visitors to Naseby Field battle site) and road users. fragmented where hedgerows are not consistent.

Sensitivity to Change Receptors The Northamptonshire Current Landscape Char (2006), produced Receptors include residents, walkers and users of the tourist railway (Lamport and Northampton by the Northamptonshire County Council, suggests that any new development or change in this Steam Diesel Railway). LCA should respect the simple composition of this LCA. Sensitivity to Change The sensitivity of this LCA to the proposed wind development is considered to be medium given The Northamptonshire Current Landscape Char (2006), produced that at a county level the landscape is generallyacter unremark Strategyable, and although Guidelines at a local scale, the by the Northamptonshire County Council, states that any new development that impinges on open remote quality of the landscape is important. this LCA should be integrated into the existing landscape pattern.

(iii) River Valley Floodplain In general, the small scale nature of views from this LCA gives rise to a medium sensitivity to change. acter Strategy and Guidelines Key Characteristics Flat river valley floodplains with surrounding valley sides; (iv) Undulating Hills and Valleys Mixture of arable and pastoral landuse; Sparse coverage of hedgerows and woodl;and Key Characteristics Field boundaries a mixture of post and wire, remnant hedges and open boundaries; Undulating rural landscape of a unified character, with mixed arable and pasture farmland; Limited settlement within the floodplain; and Watercourses, reservoirs, artificial lakes and canals are important landscape feature; Surrounding large urban settlements influential on floodplain. Numerous villages linked by country lanes; and Frequent small woodlands and hedgerow trees.

Bolsterstone August 2008 6-13 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 6: Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

Topography Topography The landscape is a mixture of high, steep sided hills, lower gentler hills and valleys. Streams and The landform consists of broad, undulating ridges, gentle slopes and ‘saddles’ between some rivers in the area are responsible for interlocking, undulating hills. elevated areas. Some steeper slopes are present where streams have eroded valleys.

Landcover, Landuse and Landscape Elements Landcover, Landuse and Landscape Elements Mixed farming predominates in the area, with arable and pasture equally distributed. On steeper Arable farmland is the dominant landuse, with smaller areas of improved and unimproved slopes, pasture is more evident, with gentler slopes used for cereal and arable production. Field grassland. Hedges and hedgerow trees form most of the tree cover, as woodland is sparse and boundaries are mostly medium to tall hedgerows, with frequent hedgerow trees. Settlement is restricted to spinneys and coverts on sloping land and along watercourses. Settlement is small mostly rural and can be either compact or linear and varies in size, generally larger in the south in number, although often containing some Ironstone and Cob buildings, and is either nucleated and smaller in the north of the character area, often containing many Cob buildings. around primary routes, or restricted to isolated farmsteads off-route. Settlements are linked by a network of winding lanes. Two urban settlements, Daventry and Brackley, are within the area, and Northampton is also visible. Scale of Landscape Landscape scale is generally small to medium, with the ridge areas larger in scale, and the Scale of Landscape sloping areas smaller and more intimate in scale. The landscape is small to medium in scale due to enclosure created by the landform, woodland and frequent villages and churches. Nature of Views The views are mainly intimate in scale, due to the undulating landform. In general the views are Nature of Views inward-looking, though some expansive views are possible, but these are infrequent. Views are mostly small and intimate, with the perceived scale of the landscape reduced by human settlement, woodland and the farming landscape. Some wider views are available from Landscape Features higher ground. Rolling, undulating mainly arable landscape of medium to large fields, with low, clipped hedges. Smaller pasture fields conspicuous, often bounded by post and wire or post and rail fencing. Landscape Features Predominately a rural character landscape of undulating mixed farmland, small villages and Receptors remote farmsteads. Receptors include inhabitants and walkers.

Receptors Sensitivity to Change Receptors include residents, recreational users (including walkers and bird watchers) and road The Northamptonshire Current Landscape Char (2006), produced users (from the M1 and ‘A’ roads). by the Northamptonshire County Council, states the need to respect the historic features such as the Cob and Ironstone buildings. Given the intimate scale associated with this LCA, it is Sensitivity to Change considered that the sensitivity to change is medium to high. The Northamptonshire Current Landscape (2006), produced by the Northamptonshire County Council, states the need to respect the pattern of the robust (vi) Wooded Clay Plateau acter Strategy and Guidelines hedgerows which contain and direct views. Due to its landform, landuse and the recent urban expansion on the urban fringe, which has affected the character of the area, sensitivity to Key Characteristics change should generally be considered medium to low. Elevated undulating landform of broad plateau, cut through by numerous valleys; Character Strategy and Guidelines Wooded character created by large woodlands on elevated ground and mature landscape (v) Ironstone Uplands Topographyparks; Hedgerows low and clipped with intermittent hedgerow trees Key Characteristics Medium and large scale arable farmland on the higher ground, with smaller pasture fields Elevated undulating, ridged upland landform with predominately gentle slopes; next to watercourses and villages; and Mostly arable farmland, with areas of sheep pasture on sloping landform; Settlement pattern very mixed: sparse in central areas, varying to stone villages in sheltered Little woodland, with low hedgerows and hedgerow trees providing most of the tree cover; areas and larger settlements at the edges of the plateau. Few streams present, occasional springs; and Settlement mostly along principal routes, with scattered farmsteads off-route. A plateau landscape; smooth, elevated and gently undulating with areas of steep valley. Some isolated flatter areas of elevated plateau.

Bolsterstone August 2008 6-14 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 6: Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

Landcover, Landuse and Landscape Elements Landcover, Landuse and Landscape Elements The dominant landuses are arable and horticultural, which are often intensive. There is very Landuse on the scarp slopes often reflects landform conditions. Permanent pasture and little pasture, mainly occurring next to watercourses and settlements. Blocks of woodland, woodland tend to be located on the steeper areas of the slope, and arable farmland located on joining with hedgerows, copses and coverts make woodland a strong feature of the plateau, and the gentler, lower areas of the slope. Woodland along the steeper parts of the slopes, combined are important as remnants of royal hunting forest. Watercourses are small and often concealed with neighbouring plateau woodland increases the perceived height of the scarp. Hedgerows are by the landform. Settlement is largest at the fringes of the plateau, whilst smaller and linear important where present, as they further emphasise the landform. Settlement is very limited, within the plateau, with numerous scattered farmsteads. with a small number of villages, farmsteads and dwellings located within the area. Castles and fortified sites, located on elevated land, are prominent features within this character type. Scale of Landscape The scale is extensive with regard to size, though it is confined visually by woodland and tree Scale of Landscape cover. The area itself is small, but it due to its prominent scarp landform, is visually dominant from neighbouring areas, and therefore visually appears to be medium in scale. Nature of Views Small and intimate where woodland cover is extensive, open and extensive in less wooded Nature of Views LandscapeReceptors Features areas. Views from the upper slopes are wide and panoramic, encompassing visually prominent buildings in neighbouring areas. Landscape Features A combination of ancient woodland, historic forest villages and arable farmland are the dominant landscape features. Other landscape features include parkland, medieval deer parks The mix of landuses and prominent woodland combine within the topography to form a and WWII airfields. dramatic, prominent landscape enforced further by the presence of medieval fortified sites. Ridge and furrow is also a prominent feature within permanent pasture. Receptors Receptors consist of residents and recreational users (including walkers, cyclists and horse riders). Receptors include residents and walkers.

Sensitivity to Change Sensitivity to Change The Northamptonshire Current Landscape (2006), produced The Northamptonshire Current Landscape Char (2006), produced by the Northamptonshire County Council, emphasises the need to respect local variations and by the Northamptonshire County Council emphasises the ‘wide’ views from the escarpments. the richness of the landscape. Due to historic character, the LCA can be considered to have a The lack of settlement and rural character of this area combine to create a medium to high medium to high sensitivity to change. sensitivity to change.

Character Strategy and Guidelines (vii) Farmed Scarp Slopes (viii) Broad River Valley Floodplains acter Strategy and Guidelines

Key Characteristics Key Characteristics Relatively steep elevated northwest facing scarp slope; Broad, flat and mostly wide floodplain, surrounded by rising ground; TopographyElevation allows for panoramic views; Watercourses slow flowing and with limited bank vegetation; Landuse often defined by the topography with steeper areas of slope containing pasture and Mostly pasture, with some arable fields, primarily near the western section of the River woodland, gentler areas containing arable farml;and Nene; Defined transition between the slopes and neighbouring character areas. Settlement limited within the floodplain, villages mostly found on the lower valley slopes Limited settlement, mostly on the fringes of the area; along the western section of the Nene, although scattered farmsteads are more widely Widespread areas of ridge and furrow; and distributed; Castles sited to exploit strategic positions overlooking the vale. Large urban areas and associated roads located at the edges of the floodplain visually intrusive; Mostly minor roads cross the floodplain; and Landform consists of steep, abrupt scarp, which are with the steeper portions located at the top Riparian character of the landscape further enforced by lakes and wetlands created after of the slope, becoming gentler on the lower slopes. Slope profiles are generally smooth. gravel extraction, although some areas are incompletely restored.

Bolsterstone August 2008 6-15 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 6: Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment Topography

Topography Landcover,Scale of Landscape Landuse and Landscape Elements The area consists of a flat, broad, low-lying floodplain, which in some sections is only 20m ASL. The landform is mostly smooth, broad and flat, with some undulation near the bordering rising Nature of Views In the northeast, the floodplain is open and expansive, in other areas, narrower where it is ground, which provides a backdrop. confined by the surrounding rising landform.

Landcover, Landuse and Landscape Elements Much of the landscape has an equal mixture of grazed pasture and arable land. Both settlement The main landuse is pasture, mostly unimproved, with some small areas of neutral and and tree cover are sparse. Remnants of deserted villages are also a key feature. Tree cover in improved pasture. There are scattered arable fields, chiefly near the western section of the bordering character areas is visible, as are the adjacent large urban areas. Nene. In the central Nene Valley, a series of lakes and wetlands, the product of restoration following gravel extraction, are a dominant feature. Tree cover is sparse, restricted to small copses, riverside trees, hedgerows and hedgerow trees. Settlement mostly consists of scattered The landscape is of medium to large scale, due to its broad, flat, open, unwooded nature. farmsteads and dwellings, with some occasional small settlements. Larger settlements occur at the edges of the floodplain. Views are generally wide, open and expansive, over a simple and unified landscape. Scale of Landscape The landscape is of small to medium scale, with a smaller scale prevalent in the agricultural Landscape Features Sensitivity to Change areas, due to overgrown hedgerows, of a medium scale in the riparian areas where more The mixture of arable and pastoral uses, combined with the scarcity of settlement, create an expansive views are possible. open, flat and unified landscape. Remnants of deserted villages and of ridge and furrow are important features where they occur. Nature of Views Along the river channel, panoramic views are possible, elsewhere views are more intimate. Receptors Receptors include residents, walkers, fishermen and road users. Landscape Features Pasture and arable fields, overgrown hedgerows, meandering rivers, streams, lakes and wetlands all combine to form a strong landscape pattern, with a sense of continuity. The fringes The Northamptonshire Current Landscape Char (2006), produced of the floodplain are dominated by the larger urban areas. Gravel workings are also a prominent by the Northamptonshire County Council advises on the need to retain the ‘quiet and simple feature, both in the form of current workings, and restored areas. open rural character’ of the LCA. The sensitivity to change can be considered low to medium as the landscape at a county scale is generally unremarkable and views into the rest of Receptors Northamptonshire are limited by the rising landform and vegetation of the surrounding Receptors include residents, recreational users (which include walkers, fisherman, water-skiers landscape types. acter Strategy and Guidelines & other watersport participants) and road users. (x) Limestone Valley Slopes Sensitivity to Change The Northamptonshire Current Landscape Char (2006), produced Key Characteristics by the Northamptonshire County Council refers to the legacy of the sand and gravel workings in Transitional landscape, between the low, flat pastoral areas and more elevated areas; this LCA and the manner in which this LCA has and continues to change. The sensitivity to Sloping, undulating agricultural landscape, mostly arable land with scattered areas of change is therefore considered to be medium to low. pasture and set-aside land; Little woodland, occasional shelter belts, hedges and hedgerow trees account for most of (ix) Broad Unwooded Vale acter Strategy and Guidelines the tree cover; and TopographyWell settled, with numerous villages and hamlets, although larger urban areas have Key Characteristics impacted upon the area. Generally broad and flat landscape, with minor undulations; Equal mix of arable and pastoral farmland; Tree cover very sparse, with low hedgerows and hedgerow trees providing most of the tree The topography is gently undulating, transitional, broad valley landscape, bordering the cover; floodplains and the rising ground to the east and west. The height varies from 10m ASL, rising Some scattered areas of ridge and furrow; to a maximum height of 100m ASL. Sparsely settled, mostly small villages and scattered farmsteads and dwellings; and Large urban areas, ‘A’ roads and infrastructure visually intrusive in some areas.

Bolsterstone August 2008 6-16 Scale of Landscape

Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 6: Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

Landcover, Landuse and Landscape Elements villages and isolated farmsteads. Historic features are prominent throughout the area, including; Arable farming dominates the area, with large fields, although scattered pockets of small a barrow; Roman road; historic parks and gardens; and disused railways. Nature of Views pasture fields border the villages. Tree cover is sparse and restricted to infrequent shelter belts, low hedges and hedgerow trees. There are numerous villages and hamlets, many with historic cores. Ridge and furrow more common than in the other character areas within the LVIA study Although within the LVIA study area the Undulating Claylands are only a small component area. feature, the nature of the landform and landuse make this a medium scale landscape.

Scale of Landscape NatureLandscape of Views Features Receptors The scale of the landscape is small to medium, dependant on elevation. The views are of an open panoramic nature on higher ground, more intimate where views are limited by surrounding character types. Landscape Features Receptors The views are open and expansive on elevated areas, though generally enclosed, intimate and of human scale on lower-lying areas. The character of the landscape is strongly influenced by both the landform and the predominant agriculturalSensitivity usage,to Change although the historic landscape features also contribute. The landscape strongly exhibits the continuity of human occupation. The landscape characteristics derive from the undulating, productive landscape. The historic coresSensitivity of villages to Change and Castle Ashby House and Landscape Park are also important features Receptors include residents, walkers and tourists.

Residents, recreational users and tourists The Northamptonshire Current Landscape Char (2006), produced by the Northamptonshire County Council refers to the ‘generally quiet and settled rural The Northamptonshire Current Landscape Char (2006), produced landscape’ which should be respected by any new development within this LCA. Due to the by the Northamptonshire County Council recognises the pressure for development in this LCA undulating landscape, combined with the impact of the new infrastructure elements (i.e. the given its proximity to urban areas. Due to the variable condition of the landscape the sensitivity M1, water towers etc.) the sensitivity of the landscape to change can be considered low to is considered to be low. medium. acter Strategy and Guidelines

(xi) Undulating Claylands acter Strategy and Guidelines (xii) Low Wooded Clay Ridge

Key Characteristics Key Characteristics Broad, elevated undulating landscape; Landcover,Broad, elevated Landuse plateau and Landscape adjacent to Elements lowland landscapes; Equal mix of arable and pastoral farming, with larger arable fields and smaller pasture fields; Mixed of arable and pasture landuses, with medium size fields bounded by hedgerows with Tree cover is sparse, mostly confined to small woodlands around designed parklands, numerous hedgerow trees; Topographyhedgerows and scattered hedgerow trees; Ancient woodland and Forest villages give the area a strong historic character; and Numerous villages throughout the landscape, with scattered farmsteads and isolated Dispersed farmsteads, few in number, and settlements small and located at the edges of the dwellings near to roads; and ridges. Wide distribution of historic features, including ridge and furrow, moated sites, rural villages, Topography historic parklands, disused railways and canals. A relatively prominent landform from surrounding areas, despite only reaching 150m ASL, which is due to a backdrop of deciduous woodland and the situation between two river catchments. Narrow valleys formed by rivers and streams visually combine to form a series of interlocking undulations of varying scale. Within the LVIA area, arable land is more common, although landuse is a mixture of arable and Landcover, Landuse and Landscape Elements pasture, particularly horse paddocks on the edges of settlements. Woodland cover is high, with A roughly equal mix of arable and pastoral land use occurs throughout the area, though woodlands irregular in shape, and hedged boundaries are mainly sprawling, species rich, and improved and semi-improved pasture are generally found in the narrow valley floodplains and with frequent hedgerow trees. Settlement is sparse, small, with villages located at the edges of arable mainly occurs on the higher ground. The landscape is well settled, with numerous ridges, and farmsteads are few and dispersed.

Bolsterstone August 2008 6-17 Nature of Views

Brixworth Windfarm Sensitivity to Change Environmental Statement Chapter 6: Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

Scale of Landscape Landscape Features The landscape is mostly small to medium, due to enclosure by woodland cover. The landscape is characterised by the combination of the rolling landform, pastoral landuse and remains of ridge and furrow.

Views are predominately intimate and human scale, although wider views are possible from Receptors higher ground. Receptors include residents and recreational users (including walkers, tourists and canal users).

Landscape Features The interplay of woodland and agricultural uses are the defining components of the landscape. The Laughton Hills are of medium to low sensitivity generally, particularly with view to the radio masts visible within the landscape. Receptors Receptors include residents, users of Silverstone Circuit and recreational users of the woodland (xiv) Welland Valley areas. Topography Sensitivity to Change Key Characteristics Wide, shallow river valley, linking to the area of Broad River Valley Floodplain in The Northamptonshire Current Landscape Char (2006), produced Northamptonshire; by the Northamptonshire County Council recognises importance of the ‘simplicity and boldness’ Mix of pasture and arable uses, with medium size fields; which characterise this LCA. The Low Wooded Clay Ridge LCA has a medium sensitivity to Hedgerows, hedgerow trees, occasional field corner stands and pollarded waterside willows change due to the strong historic character. are the primary tree cover. In places hedgerows have been removed to form larger fields; Large settlement of Market Harborough locally dominant in the south-west of the area; and (xiii) Laughton Hills acter Strategy and Guidelines Settlements generally small in scale and situated at the edge of the floodplain. Key Characteristics Landcover,High, rolling Landuse landscape, and Landscape although the Elements southern area is lower and flatter; The topography is similar to the Broad River Valley Floodplain, with a wide river floodplain TopographyRural character, with pasture the dominant landuse over arable, and medium size fields; surrounded by rising ground. Some ridge and furrow evident; Settlement generally smaller in the north, larger in the south, with considerable recent Landcover, Landuse and Landscape Elements growth; Pasture is dominant on the valley floodplain, with arable dominant on the valley sides. Major roads have most impact in the south western corner of the area; and Settlements are generally small, with exception of Market Harborough, which also has a Rugby Radio Station masts visible within the landscape. congregation of ‘A’ roads. Several historic features are prominent including village churches, the Welland Viaduct, an abandoned railway line and a canal branch.

Upland, rolling landscape that connects to adjacent upland areas within Northamptonshire. ScaleLandscape of Landscape Features Nature of Views TheNature landscape of Views scale is large, although it is bounded by adjoining ridgelines, which can reduce the scale in some areas. The landuse is predominantly pastoral, with medium size fields bordered by hedgerows with hedgerow trees. Further tree cover is provided by limited small woods, and landscape parkland. Settlement generally consists of villages, though these vary in size. Other elements include the Open and expansive, with views to surrounding ridgelines. Grand Union Canal, reservoirs and Foxton Locks Country Park (containing a staircase of Locks).

The defining features are the wide river floodplain landform and the open, agricultural landuse. Scale of Landscape Small in size, although the landscape is open and rolling, which lends a larger sense of scale. Receptors Receptors include residents and recreational users.

Views are generally open and wide. Sensitivity to Change Overall, sensitivity to change is low to medium, given the dominance of Market Harborough within part of the landscape, and the large scale of the landscape.

Bolsterstone August 2008 6-18 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 6: Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

Table 6.5 Summary of Landscape Character Assessment visibility from about 10km distance. In reality, the mature hedgerows, mature tree planting and Receptors Sensitivity to Change built form of the settlements will further limit the areas from which the development is visible. Rolling Ironstone Valley Slopes Medium Clay Plateau Medium It is considered that, overall, a medium magnitude of change is generated throughout the SLA, River Valley Floodplain Medium with some localised areas on the eastern edge of the SLA, in close proximity to the proposed Undulating Hills and Valleys Medium to Low site, experiencing a high magnitude of change. The sensitivity of this designation is medium, Ironstone Uplands High to Medium therefore the predicted effect of the proposed windfarm on the SLA generally, is assessed as Wooded Clay Plateau Medium/ High Moderate and Not Significant, rising to a Major and Significant effect along the eastern edge of Broad River Valley Floodplains Medium/ High the SLA within 5km of the development. Farmed Scarp Slopes Medium / Low Broad Unwooded Vale Low/ Medium Braybrooke Limestone Valley Slopes Medium Braybrooke SLA is located within the Kettering district, to the north-west of Desborough and to Farmed Scarp Slopes Low/ Medium the south-east of Market Harborough. The SLA is centred on the settlement of Braybrooke, with Undulating Claylands Medium the A6 forming the northern, and part of the eastern, boundary; the Midshires Way the Low Wooded Clay Ridge Medium/Low southern; and; the A508 the western. Theoretical visibility of the development is confined to Laughton Hills Low/ Medium select areas adjacent to the northern, eastern and southern fringes of the SLA. In reality, Welland Valley High to Medium visibility will be further reduced by intervening vegetation and structures.

6.4 ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS ON LANDSCAPE RECEPTORS Magnitude of change is assessed to be low to negligible, due to the distance from the proposed This section examines the significance of the residual landscape effects arising from windfarm, and the limited visibility. The sensitivity of this designation is medium, therefore the the proposed windfarm. The landscape effects can either be direct or indirect. Direct level of effect is predicted to be Minor, and Not Significant. Significant effects occur where changes to the fabric of the landscape arise as the result of physical disturbance, for example the loss of landscape elements such as woodland. Harrington Indirect effects on landscape character are consequential changes that are separate Harrington SLA is within the Kettering district, to the south of the Braybrooke SLA. The SLA’s from the source of the change in a temporal or spatial manner. These are discussed western boundary is defined by the district boundary, with the southern and eastern boundaries below. running adjacent to the settlements of Harrington and Thorpe Underwood. Theoretical visibility is restricted to the southern fringes of the SLA. The landform and planting associated with the Significant effects upon Landscape Character will be restricted to those parts of the A14 is likely to restrict visibility further. LCA’s where the development will be physically located and from areas where the proposed windfarm will be visible. Where significant effects are predicted it should be Magnitude of change is considered to be low to negligible, due to the visual disturbance from noted that in each case these effects would be localised and the majority of all the A14, the distance from the proposed site and the limited visibility. The sensitivity of the character areas will experience negligible or no effects. designation is medium. The level of effect generated is therefore assessed as Minor, and Not . 6.4.1 Assessment of Effects Boughton Park, Geddington Chase, Old Ho This SLA consists of the landscape areas of Boughton Park, Geddington Chase, Old Hood Wood SpecialSpecial Landscape Landscape Areas are those defined as being ‘distinctive in terms of their special and Grafton Park Area, and is located within the Kettering district, to the north-east of Kettering. character’. This is a local ondesign Landscapeation with Designations medium sensitivity to change. Figure 6.2 shows the This SLA is located some eighteen kilometres from the proposed turbines. The areas of location of the Special Landscape Areas (SLA). theoretical visibility within this SLA, as demonstrated by the ZTV, will be severely limited by the mature woodland and mature parkland treeod planting.Wood and The Grafton magnitude Park Areaof change for this area is Daventry considered to be negligible due to the restricted visibility and distance from the development. The Daventry SLA covers a large proportion of the Daventry district, and runs from Haselbech to The sensitivity of this designation is medium. The resulting level of effect is assessed as Minor Brington north to south, and from the A508 to Yelvertoft east to west. and Not Significant.

The proposed turbines are located on the eastern edge of the SLA, adjacent to the A508. The Dingley Wood, Hermitage Wood, ZTV demonstrates that the theoretical visibility of these turbines within this SLA is dappled with This SLA consists of the above named landscape areas, and is located within the Kettering the turbines moving in and out of visibility. In general, there is more consistent visibility along district, to the north of Desborough. The ZTV demonstrates that there is limited theorectical the eastern edge of the SLA, within 5km of the development, fading out to large areas of no visibility at the southern boundary of this SLA. Brampton Wood and Ga

ultney Wood Area Bolsterstone August 2008 6-19 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 6: Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

In reality, the mature woodland in this area, is likely to obscure any possible visibility of the The Racecourse; turbines from this SLA. The Magnitude of change is predicted to be negligible to none. The St Andrews Hospital Grounds; sensitivity of this designation is medium. The level of effect is therefore assessed as St Crispin Hospital Grounds; Minor/None, and Not Significant. Victoria Park; and Wooton Hall Park. The Hemplow Hills, Cottesbro The SLA is within the South Northamptonshire district Local Plan, and crosses over into Table 6.6 summarises the effects on designation receptors. Daventry District merging with the Daventry Special Landscape Area. The section of the SLA Table 6.6: Summary of Landscape Effects on Designation Receptors within South Northamptonshireoke andDistrict Brington is has Area little theoretical visibility of the proposed windfarm. In addition, this part of the SLA is over 11km from distance from the nearest turbine. Landscape Receptors Landscape Magnitude Level of Effect Significance Sensitivity of Change Nature of The predicted magnitude of change is low to negligible given the distance from the development Effect and the severely restricted visibility. The sensitivity of this designation is medium. The level of Local Landscape Designations: Special Landscape Areas effect on this landscape receptor is assessed as Minor and Not Significant. Daventry Medium Generally Generally Moderate; Generally; Not Medium; rising to Major in Significant. The Yardley Chase and Castle Ashby Area rising to High localised areas of Some areas in The theoretical visibility of the proposed windfarm from Yardley Chase and Castle Ashby area is in localised close proximity to the close proximity fragmented and the distance from this SLA to the nearest turbine is over 18km. Some 4-5km areas of site to the site rising north of the SLA, there is a transmission line of steel lattice pylons which form the middle close to Significant ground to any views north-westwards towards the proposed windfarm. proximity to the site The magnitude of change is considered to be low to negligible due to the distance from the Braybrooke Medium Medium Minor Not Significant proposed site and the intervening structures. The sensitivity of this designation is medium. Harrington Medium Low to Minor Not Significant Therefore the level of effect is predicted to be Minor and Not Significant. negligible Boughton Park, Geddington Medium Low Minor Not Significant Locally Important Lands Chase, Old Hood Wood and Six of the areas listed as Locally Important Landscape Areas have no predicted visibility, so Grafton Park wood Area therefore will have no magnitude of change resulting. Sensitivity of the LILAs is medium to low. Dingley Wood, Hermitage Medium Low Minor/None Not Significant The predicted level of effectcape forAreas the (LILA)following LILAs is Minor/None and Not Significant: Wood, Brampton Wood and Gaultney Wood Area The Hemplow Hills, Becketts Park; Medium Low to Minor Not Significant Cottesbrooke and Brington Collingtree Park; Medium in Area areas close Kingsthorpe Golf Course; to the site Kingsthorpe Park; The Yardley Chase and Northampton Golf Course- Bradlaugh Fields; and Medium Low to Minor Not Significant Castle Ashby Area medium Upton Park. Local Landscape Designations: Locally Important Landscape Areas The remaining LILAs are within the urban area of Northampton, and as such views of the Abington Park Medium to Low Moderate/Minor Not Significant proposed turbines are likely to be severely restricted by urban form. In addition, these areas are low approximately 10km or more from the development site. For these reasons, it is considered that Brackmills Medium to Low Moderate/Minor Not Significant the magnitude of change will be low. The sensitivity is medium to low. Therefore the predicted low effect on the following LILAs is assessed to be Moderate/Minor and Not Significant: Collingtree Park Medium to Low Moderate/Minor Not Significant low Abington Park; Dallington Park Medium to Low Moderate/Minor Not Significant Brackmills; low Dallington Park; Eastfield Park Delapre Park; Medium to Low Moderate/Minor Not Significant low Eastfield Park; Mansfield Hospital Grounds; Mansfield Hospital Grounds Medium to Low Moderate/Minor Not Significant

Bolsterstone August 2008 6-20 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 6: Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

low The magnitude of change is considered to be low given that the views within the grounds are The Racecourse Medium to Low Moderate/Minor Not Significant carefully controlled and oblique to the development. The sensitivity of the receptor is high. low Therefore the level of effect is assessed to be Moderate and Not Significant St Andrews Hospital Medium to Low Moderate/Minor Not Significant Grounds low Boughton Hall St Crispin Hospital Grounds Boughton Hall is located 5.9km to the south-west of the proposed site, is Grade II listed and Medium to Low Moderate/Minor Not Significant th low contains 17 Century formal gardens. The boundaries are heavily planted with mature trees which will screen any views to the proposed turbines. Victoria Park Medium to Low Moderate/Minor Not Significant

low Boughton Hall has a predicted visibility of 5-6 turbines. However, the tips of the turbines will be Wooton Hall Park Medium to Low Moderate/Minor Not Significant barely visible over the horizon. In addition, the A508 runs adjacent to the grounds and low therefore, combined with the distance from the proposed site, a magnitude of change of negligible is generated. The level of landscape effect is assessed to be moderate to minor and Historic Parks and Gardens therefore Not Significant. As noted in the baseline, the Register of Historic Parks and Gardens have a low capacity for change and therefore are considered to have high landscape sensitivity. Holdenby House Holdenby House, 7.5km to the south west of the proposed site is Grade I listed, and contains an Analysis of the ZTV shows that, of the 14 gardens on the Register of Historic Parks and Elizabethan Rose Garden, Victorian Greenhouses, and Kitchen Gardens. Gardens that fall within the 20km study area, 4 of these will have no visibility of the proposed windfarm. Therefore the magnitude of change will be none and the Analysis of the ZTV shows that the theoretical visibility is intermittent, with some potential views corresponding effect on these landscape receptors will be None and Not Significant. of 5-6 turbines, though most of the site has no visibility. Due to screening provided by mature These are: boundary parkland planting, in reality most views will be obscured. This, combined with the Harrington Manor House; distance from the proposed site, results in a low to negligible magnitude of change. The Wickstead Park; sensitivity of the receptor is high. Therefore the level of effect is assessed to be Moderate/Minor Stanford Hall; and and Not Significant. Ashby St Ledgers Manor. Althorp Effects on the Historic Parks and Gardens that theoretically receive views are outlined Althorp is Grade I listed parkland and gardens located approximately 9.4km to the south-west of below: the proposed site.

Lamport Hall The ZTV demonstrates that the theoretical visibility of turbines is intermittent throughout the Lamport Hall is located within the hamlet of Lamport, 1.8km north of the proposed site. It grounds, with some areas of visibility of 5-6 turbines or less and some areas of no visibility. consists of parkland and gardens. There is substantial mature planting on the boundaries of the Visibility in reality is predicted to be extremely low, with vegetation and landform screening grounds. views. Althorp is in relatively close proximity to both Northampton and the railway line. Given the distance, the screening effect of the parkland vegetation and local landform, it is considered Although the ZTV demonstrates theoretical visibility of the proposed turbines from the gardens, that the magnitude of change will be negligible. The sensitivity of the receptor is high, therefore in reality views are likely to be obscured by the mature parkland vegetation. Therefore, the the effect is assessed as being Moderate/Minor and Not Significant. magnitude of change is low. The sensitivity is high and the resulting level of effect is therefore assessed to be Moderate and Not Significant. Great Harrowden Great Harrowden is Grade II listed, and contains some early formal gardens and parkland, Cottesbrooke Park though much of this is now used as a golf course. It is located 12km east of the proposed site. Cottesbrooke Park is an 18th Century Landscape Park, 3.1km north-west of the proposed site, There is a degree of mature boundary planting along the south and western boundaries with and is Grade II listed. some open views towards the north-east, away from the proposed windfarm. There is substantial mature boundary planting and mature deciduous tree planting within the grounds, directing long distance views from the house to south-eastwards towards the lake. The theoretical visibility demonstrated by the ZTV is of views of 3-4 turbines or less. Given the From the house, the mature parkland planting within the grounds is likely to screen views to boundary planting and the orientation of the views to the north-east, the magnitude is proposed turbines. There may be some glimpsed views from within the grounds themselves. considered to be low. The sensitivity and of the receptor is high. Therefore the predicted level of effect is Moderate and Not Significant.

Bolsterstone August 2008 6-21 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 6: Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

Rushton Hall Table 6.7: Summary of Landscape Effects on Historic Gardens and Designed Rushton Hall contains parkland and gardens, including a courtyard garden. It also contains a Landscapes notable folly, the Triangular Lodge. It is located 14km north-east of the proposed windfarm. Landscape Receptors Landscape Magnitude Level of Significance Sensitivity of Change Effect Nature of Effect The ZTV demonstrates that there are only small areas of theoretical visibility of 3-4 turbines or Lamport Hall High Low Moderate Not Significant less. Given the mature planting along the boundaries and within the grounds of the Hall, it is Cottesbrooke Park High Low to Moderate Not Significant considered that the magnitude of change will be negligible to none. The sensitivity is high, negligible therefore the effect is predicted to be Minor and Not Significant. Boughton Park High Negligible Moderate to Not Significant minor Boughton Park Holdenby House th th High Low to Moderate Not Significant Boughton Park is Grade I listed, of 17 and 18 Century design and important features include negligible parterres, lakes and avenues. The park also incorporates Geddington Chase within its listing. It Althorp is 17km to the north-east of the proposed windfarm. High Negligible Minor Not Significant Great Harrowden High Low Moderate Not Significant The theory the development is visible in many parts of the grounds, however, given the mature Ruston Hall High Negligible- Minor Not Significant tree planting associated with the gardens and the woodland that is Geddington Chase, it is None considered that there is unlikely to be actual visibility of the turbines. The predicted visibility and Broughton Park High Low to Moderate to Not Significant distance from the site combine to create a low to negligible magnitude of change. The negligible Minor sensitivity is high and the predicted effect is assessed to be Moderate/Minor and Not Significant. Castle Ashby High Negligible- Minor Not Significant None Castle Ashby Courteenhall High Low to Moderate to Not Significant Caste Ashby contains extensive parkland designed by Capability Brown, a mile long avenue, and negligible minor Victorian terrace gardens amongst other features. It is located approximately 17.5km south-east of the proposed site. Assessment of Effects on Lands

Analysis of the ZTV shows that there is intermittent visibility of 5-6 turbines, mostly confined to Landscape character areas likely to be affected, to some degree, by the proposed the southern section of the parkland, with large areas of the parkland containing no views of the windfarm of the development have been identified by analysis of the ZTV data. Where inter-visibility exists between the proposed windfarm and a character area it is proposed windfarm. In reality visibility will be lower still due to the screening effect of the cape Character Areas parkland landscape. The magnitude of change is considered to be negligible to none; the assumed that an indirect effect may occur. sensitivity is high and the effect of the proposed windfarm on this landsdcape resource is assessed to be Minor and Not Significant. The tip height ZTV is illustrated in Figure 6.5.

Courteenhall ZTV models are based on bare ground data and do not take account of vegetation, local variations to topography, or buildings and therefore presents a theoretical and Courteenhall is a landscape park, laid out by Humphrey Repton. It is located 18.5km south of worst-case visibility pattern. The assessment has been based on the blade tip ZTV the proposed site. (Figure 6.5), which means that all parts of the study area, where any part of one or

more turbines may be visible, have been assessed. The 30km cumulative landscape and The ZTV demonstrates that there are theoretically views of 5-6 turbines throughout much of the visual impact assessment radius study area is considered to represent the outer limits landscape park. In reality, the mature parkland planting is likely to screen most of the potential of potential effects of the development and has been selected after discussion with views. It is notable that the M1 motorway passes to within 0.5km of the north-eastern boundary Daventry District Council. Visibility has been separated into bands of numbers of of the park. The landform associated with the motorway is likely to further reduce screen views turbines as follows: of the turbines. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be low to negligible. The sensitivity is high and the level of effect of the proposed turbines on this landscape resource is 1-2 turbine; predicted to be Moderate/Minor and Not Significant. 3-4 turbines; and 5-6 turbines.

Each area is assessed in terms of sensitivity, magnitude of change and resulting level of effect. For character areas outside of the proposed site, there will be no direct effects upon them, therefore only indirect effects will be discussed for these character areas.

Bolsterstone August 2008 6-22 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 6: Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

The areas assessed below are those defined within the local landscape character assessments. Although the Joint Character Areas (JCAs) were included as part of the baseline landscape The effects of the proposed windfarm on this LCA is assessed to be Moderate/Minor with character assessment, these are not assessed here. The local landscape character areas which localised pockets of Moderate effect within 5km of the turbines, and Not Significant. are of smaller scale and more detailed are assessed in this LVIA. This approach has been adopted to maintain clarity and avoid assessing the same area twice. The assessments are (iii) River Valley Floodplain described below, and are summarised in Table 6.8. The River Valley Floodplain LCA is found in two locations within the study area; the Brampton (i) Rolling Ironstone Valley Slopes Valley Floodplain, and River Ise Floodplains. Sensitivity to change is regarded as medium.

The proposed windfarm falls within the Rolling Ironstone Valley Slopes landscape character area As identified within the ZTV, visibility is limited to the Brampton Valley Floodplain and there is (LCA). no potential for visibility within the River Ise Floodplain. In reality, visibility within the Brampton Valley Floodplain will be greatly reduced by the groups of mature trees and shrubs along the Theoretical visibility is intermittent in the five component areas of the LCA between 10 and length of the Brampton Valley Way footpath. 20km from the site, ranging from no visibility in some lower slope areas, to potential visibility of all 6 turbines on some of the higher ground. Magnitude of change is limited to the Brampton Valley Floodplain where it is considered to be generally medium. The proposed windfarm is located within the Hanging Houghton sub-section of this LCA, and in localised parts of this LCA, i.e. within 5km of the proposed windfarm, the ZTV shown in Figure The level of effect of the proposed windfarm on the Brampton Valley Floodplain component of 6.5 indicates that there is potential for visibility of all 6 turbines. Local landform, vegetation and this LCA is assessed to be Moderate and Not Significant. man-made structures will reduce the visibility, nonetheless, it is anticipated that the scale of the proposed turbines will jarr with the human-scale of the receiving landscape. Therefore the (iv) Undulating Hills and Valleys magnitude of change experienced by the parts of the LCA within 5km is considered to be medium to high. The Undulating Hills and Valleys LCA is an extensive character area, occupying much of the western section of the study area. The area is considered to be of medium to low sensitivity to The remaining parts of the Rolling Ironstone Valley Slopes LCA within the study area will be change. subject to reduced theoretical visibility which will be further reduced by the screening effect of intervening objects and distance. Thus the corresponding magnitude of change for the LCA The ZTV indicates that the majority of this LCA will have no visibility, with small intermittent generally is considered to be Medium to Low. areas of visibility of 5-6 turbines or less. Theoretically, the Cottesbrooke and Arthingworth component has greater visibility, though the numerous woodland blocks and high hedgerows The level of effect of the proposed windfarm on the Rolling Ironstone Valley Slopes in is are likely to restrict this greatly. assessed to be Moderate and Not Significant generally, and Major/Moderate and Significant in localised parts of the LCA within 5km of the proposed windfarm. Predominantly the Undulating Hills and Valleys LCA will experience a low magnitude of change, due to the distance from the proposed site and the screening effects of intervening structures (ii) Clay Plateau and vegetation. The local landform associated with road corridors including: the M1; A508, and A14 also reduce visibility within this LCA. The part of the LCA within 5km of the proposed The Clay Plateau landscape type is represented by three main areas, centred on Naseby, Sywell windfarm, namely around Cottesbrooke will have a medium magnitude of change, due to the and Burton Wold. This LCA is generally of medium sensitivity to change, as at county scale, the proximity to the proposed turbines. landscape is generally considered unremarkable. The effect of the proposed windfarm on this LCA is assessed to be Moderate/Minor in general The ZTV indicates that the Burton Wold and Naseby Plateau sub-components predominantly and Moderate within 5km of the proposed turbines, and Not Significant. have no visibility, although some small areas of higher ground may have restricted visibility. The Sywell Plateau component of the LCA, located to immediate the east of the proposed site may (v) Ironstone Uplands have some clear views of the proposal from within approximately 5km of the proposed turbines. Further than 5km from the proposed windfarm, views are likely to be limited by local landform, The Ironstone Uplands LCA is found in two closely situated areas, surrounded by Undulating vegetation and other structures. Hills and Valleys. Sensitivity to change is generally high to medium due to the historic nature of features within the LCA. Magnitude of change within the Burton Wold and Naseby Plateau sub sections of this LCA is considered to be low. Magnitude of change within the Sywell Plateau sub section of the LCA is The ZTV illustrates a degree of theoretical visibility which will be greatly reduced by the considered to be a medium to low. hedgerow planting, local landforms and the inward-looking nature of the views generally.

Bolsterstone August 2008 6-23 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 6: Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

Magnitude of change is considered to be low given the restricted visibility. (ix) Broad Unwooded Vale

The level of effect is assessed to be Moderate and Not Significant for this LCA. The Broad Unwooded Vale LCA occurs in two areas within the study area. The area is of low to medium sensitivity to change, as the landscape is generally considered to be unremarkable, (vi) Wooded Clay Plateau with views limited by the landform and vegetation of neighbouring character types.

The only component of the Wooded Clay Plateau LCA that occurs within the study area is The ZTV indicates that the Broad Wooded Vale has no visibility; therefore there is no magnitude Geddington Chase which is located in the north east of the study area. This LCA is characterised of change, and consequently no effect. by wooded, elevated, undulating area of broad plateau, with numerous valleys. The large woodlandsSignificant on the elevated ground give way to predominantly arable farmland, although pasture (x)Significant Limestone Valley Slopes is also prevalent. Settlement is sparse in central areas, larger and more frequent at the fringes of the area. Sensitivity to change in this LCA is considered to be medium to high. The Limestone Valley Slopes LCA occurs once, towards the edge of the study area, in a component known as Wollaston to Irchester. The Limestone Valley Slopes have medium The ZTV demonstrates that theoretical visibility within the Geddington Chase component of this sensitivity. LCA is intermittent, with areas of higher ground containing views of 5-6 turbines, whilst lower areas have limited or no visibility. Actual visibility will be greatly reduced given the wooded The ZTV shows that the Wollaston to Irchester component has potentially intermittent visibility. nature of the Chase, intervening man-made structures, and the distance from the proposed Given that this LCA is 18-20km from the nearest turbine, and that the intervening landforms and turbines. Therefore magnitude of change for this LCA is low. structures will restrict visibility, it is considered that magnitude of change is negligible.

The effect of the development on this LCA is assessed to be Moderate/Minor and Not The level of effect for the Limestone Valley Slopes LCA is assessed to be Minor and Not . .

(vii) Farmed Scarp Slopes (xi) Undulating Claylands

The Farmed Scarp Slopes LCA is found in one location within the study area, to the north-north The Undulating Claylands LCA is found in two areas within the study area, both located near the -east of the proposed site, in a component known as the Hothorpe Hills to . The 20km border, in the south (the Hackelton Claylands) and the southeast (the Bozeat Claylands). LCA is considered to be of medium to high sensitivity to change. Sensitivity to change is considered to be low to medium.

The ZTV reveals that there will be no potential visibility throughout most of the Hothorpe Hills to The ZTV reveals that visibility throughout the two components is intermittent. Local landform of Great Oxendon component of the LCA. Small areas of potential limited visibility are indicated at the MI and other intervening structures and mature vegetation are likely to severely restrict Long Spinney. In reality, intervening landforms, vegetation and man-made features are likely to actual visibility. Therefore the LCA is considered to have a predominantly low magnitude of screen any potential visibility. Therefore the magnitude of change is considered to be none, and change. consequently there is no effect. The level of effect for the Undulating Claylands LCA is assessed to be Minor, and Not Significant. (viii) Broad River Valley Floodplains (xii) Low Wooded Clay Ridge The Broad River Valley Floodplains in the study area consists of the Nene valley floodplains. Sensitivity to change is medium to low. The Low Wooded Clay Ridge LCA occurs in one location in the study area, in the south east bordering the 20km zone, known as the Salcey Forest and Yardley Chase. Only a small section The ZTV indicates that throughout most of the Broad River Valley Floodplains character areas of the LCA sits within the 20km zone. The LCA is generally of a medium sensitivity to change. contained within the study area, there is no visibility. Theoretically, there are small sections of potential visibility of the proposed turbines. However, the intervening structures and local Analysis of the ZTV shows that visibility there are two theoretical areas of visibility within the landform are likely to restrict this potential visibility greatly. The magnitude of change is 20km study area, with views of 5-6 turbines possible throughout a proportion of the LCA. The therefore considered to be negligible. largest area of visibility is at Yardley Chase, with views of 5-6 turbines predominant, although areas of lower or no visibility occur in places. There are no turbines visible around the Yardley Effect of the development on this LCA is assessed to be Minor, and Not Significant. Hastings area, although views of 5-6 turbines are available east from Yardley Hastings to Gold Oak Copse. Magnitude of change is low to negligible due to the distance from the proposed windfarm, and the intermittent visibility.

Bolsterstone August 2008 6-24 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 6: Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

proposed windfarm; Within 5km of the Indirect effects for the Low Wooded Clay Ridge are assessed to be moderate to minor, and as Medium proposed windfarm; such, Not Significant. Moderate; Not Significant (xiii) Laughton Hills Ironstone Uplands High to Medium Low Moderate; Not Significant Significant Wooded Clay Plateau Medium/ High Low Moderate/Minor; Not The Laughton Hills LCA is located adjacent to the north-western edge of the 20km zone. The Significant area is of medium to low sensitivity. Farmed Scarp Slopes Medium/ High None No effect Broad River Valley Medium / Low Negligible Minor; Not Significant The ZTV shows that the Laughton Hills LCA has intermittent visibility, with the majority of the Floodplains area having no turbine visibility. In reality, visibility is only likely from the highest land around Broad Unwooded Vale Low/ Medium No visibility, therefore no No effect the Laughton Hills and Mowsley Hills. Considering the distance to the proposed site and the magnitude panoramic nature of views from the hills, it is considered that the magnitude of change on this Limestone Valley Slopes Medium Negligible Minor; Not Significant LCA will be negligible. Undulating Claylands Low/ Medium Low Minor/Moderate; Not Significant The level of effect of the proposed windfarm on this LCA is assessed to be Minor and Not Low Wooded Clay Ridge Medium Low to Negligible Moderate/Minor; Not . Significant Laughton Hills Medium/Low Negligible Minor; Not Significant Welland Valley Low/ Medium Negligible Minor; Not Significant (xiv) Welland Valley

The Welland Valley LCA is found at the northern edge of the study area, adjacent to an area of Broad River Valley Floodplain. Sensitivity to change is to be low to medium. 6.5 ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS ON VISUAL RECEPTORS

The ZTV demonstrates that most of the LCA has no visibility of the proposed turbines. Small The ZTV (Figure 6.5) has been used as a guide to understanding the likely visual areas of potential visibility exist only on areas of higher ground. This combined with the distance effects of the proposed turbines. The ZTV responds to the undulations of the landscape at which turbines might be seen, and the panoramic nature of the views from the higher and clearly demonstrates how these limit visibility. As described earlier in this text, the elevations ensures that magnitude of change brought about by the proposed windfarm is ZTV does not take account of local landform, built form or vegetation. For this reason, negligible. it is purely theoretical and is accurate in so far as it is definite about where there will be no visibility at all. Where potential visibility is indicated, the local landform The predicted effect of the development on this LCA is assessed to be Minor and Not Significant. associated with the roads and the motorway corridor; the urban form within towns and cities; and the vegetation cover and blocks of woodland and trees in the landscape will Table 6.8: Summary of Effects on Landscape Character Types reduce the visibility of the proposed turbines even further. The assessment of effects Landscape Character Landscape Magnitude of Change Predicted Effect and on visual receptors takes cognisance of this below, and summarised in Table 6.9. Type Sensitivity Significance on Landscape Character 6.5.1 Residential Settlements Rolling Ironstone Valley Medium Generally; Low to Medium Generally; Slopes Within 5km of the Moderate/Minor, As there are numerous settlements within the study area, this LVIA considers those settlements proposed windfarm; Not Significant that are within 5km3 of the site in detail as these are more likely to experience significant Medium to High Within 5km of the effects. Given the compact nature of these predominantly small settlements, with properties proposed windfarm; Major/Moderate facing inwards onto the minor roads, views are likely to be contained, and it is likely that only Significant those homes at the fringes are likely to have direct views. The effects on the settlements are Clay Plateau Medium Burton Wold & Naseby sub Burton Wold & Naseby; discussed below. components; Low, Sywell Moderate to Minor Plateau sub component; Sywell Plateau; Brixworth Medium to Low Moderate Brixworth is a large village, 0.6km south from the site. The ZTV shows that there is theoretical Not Significant visibility of 5-6 turbines throughout Brixworth. However, the village has sizeable areas of River Valley Floodplain Medium Medium Moderate; Not boundary and roadside planting which will screen views. Significant Undulating Hills and Medium to Low Generally; Low Generally; Moderate to Valleys Within 5km of the Minor; Not Significant 3 Distances given are from the nearest turbine, to the nearest point of the settlement and are approximate.

Bolsterstone August 2008 6-25 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 6: Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

Significant The ‘micro’ or local landform of the ridge between Brixworth and the site area also reduces the Views of the proposed windfarm will therefore be largely screened. Any views there are will be effect of the turbines (this is demonstrated in Viewpoint 1, Figure 6.9). At the northern edge of oblique. The sensitivity is medium and magnitude of change low. The level of effect is the village there is an industrial estate and the ground level drops from the northern edge of the Moderate/Minor and Not Significant. village towards the south. The housing along the northern boundary of the village is largely bungalow style, single storey with heavy boundary planting. It is anticipated that the wind Lamport turbines may be glimpsed but not visible in their entirety from this housing. Elsewhere in the Lamport is a small hamlet, located 1.8km to the north-east of the proposed site. Theoretical village views are likely to be limited by the intervening buildings and landform. Sensitivity to visibility is of 5-6 turbines throughout the hamlet. However, there is substantial intervening change is assessed to be medium, and magnitude of change is considered to be medium, planting associated with Lamport Hall. This, along with the planting along the A508, will resulting in a Moderate and Not Significant level of effect. severely limit views of the proposed turbines. The sensitivity to change is medium and magnitude of change low. The level of effect is assessed to be Moderate/Minor and Not Cottesbrooke . Cottesbrooke, a small hamlet, is located 2.5km west of the site. The ZTV indicates that there is theoretical visibility throughout Cottesbrooke of 5-6 turbines, however tree planting within the Maidwell hamlet, and intervening small spinney’s and coverts, will filter or screen views much of this. The Maidwell, a small village, is situated 3.7km due north of the proposed site. The ZTV shows that houses predominantly face towards the minor road, and mostly views from properties will be theoretical visibility is of 5-6 turbines throughout the village. Properties face in towards the A508 oblique. Sensitivity to change is considered to be medium as any views will be oblique, and the and minor roads and as such, any possible views from houses will be oblique. Tree cover magnitude of change medium. The level of effect is assessed as Moderate, and Not Significant. associated with the A508, and the mature parkland planting on the southern boundary of the village will severely restrict views of the proposed turbines. As the proposed windfarm will be Creaton oblique to any views from the settlement, the sensitivity is medium and the magnitude of Creaton is a small village, 3km west of the site. The ZTV indicates that theoretically, most of the change is medium. The level of effect is Moderate and Not Significant village will contain views of 5-6 turbines. However, the intervening mature vegetation along minor roads, small spinney’s and coverts will filter views, and buildings on the edge of the Old settlement will screen views. Properties may experience some filtered, oblique views of tips and Old is a small village situated 3.5km east of the proposed site. The ZTV indicates that views of hubs. Sensitivity to change is considered to be medium as any views will be oblique, and the 5-6 turbines are theoretically possible throughout the village. However, high hedges and magnitude of change medium. The level of effect is assessed as Moderate, and Not Significant. frequent hedgerow trees associated with the minor roads, and hedged field boundaries will screen views. In addition, properties are inward facing, towards the minor roads. Any views to Draughton the development are therefore likely to be glimpses of tips from the upper storey of houses. Draughton is a small hamlet, 4km north-east of the site. Theoretical visibility is of 5-6 turbines Sensitivity to change is medium, and magnitude of change medium to low. The level of effect is throughout the hamlet. The A508, to the west of Draughton, has intermittent tree and therefore Moderate /Minor and Not Significant. hedgerow planting, which in combination with small copses and woodland will screen views of the turbines. In addition, local landform associated with the ridge to the south of the hamlet is Pitsford likely to further reduce visibility. The sensitivity is medium as views to the turbines will be The village of Pitsford is located 4km south of the proposed site. The ZTV indicates that views of oblique. Magnitude of change is medium; therefore the level of effect of the proposed windfarm 5-6 turbines are theoretically possible throughout the settlement. However, the orientation of on this receptor is Moderate and Not Significant. many of the houses within the village is such that views to the development are unlikley. There are some views possible from the backs of houses on the north-western edge of the village. Hanging Houghton Mature vegetation lines much of the A508, and this in combination with vegetation within Hanging Houghton is a small village located 0.8km north of the proposed site. The ZTV indicates Brixworth Country Park, and local landform, is likely to filter and substantially reduce the that the village will theoretically have views of 5-6 turbines. In reality, views will be mainly potential visibility of the proposed turbines. Sensitivity to change is medium, and magnitude of experienced by houses on the southern edge of the village. Properties predominantly face in change medium. The level of effect is Moderate, and Not Significant. towards the minor road. The properties along the southern edge of the village may have direct or oblique views towards the proposed turbines, as illustrated in Viewpoint 2, Figure 6.10. Scaldwell Sensitivity to change is regarded as high, and magnitude of change of high, and the level of Scaldwell, a small village, is located 2km east of the proposed site. Theoretical visibility is of 5-6 effect is Major and Significant. turbines throughout the village. However, due to the landform and high hedgerows adjacent to the local roads, actual visibility is likely to be severely reduced. Views from the settlement are Holcot likely to be mostly oblique and from the first floor of houses. Holcot, a small village, is 4.2km south-east of the proposed site. The ZTV indicates that the Sensitivity to change is medium and magnitude of change medium, and the level of effect will village will predominantly have views of 5-6 turbines. However, properties are clustered around therefore be Moderate and Not Significant. the roads that converge at Holcot, and are inward facing. There are also sizeable areas of woodland surrounding Pitsford Water, 0.5km from Holcot.

Bolsterstone August 2008 6-26 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 6: Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

Spratton The A43, joining Northampton and Kettering; Spratton village is 3.4km south-west of the proposed site. The ZTV indicates visibility is The A45, connecting Wellingborough and Northampton, and via the M1, Northampton and predominantly of 5-6 turbines. However, fringes of the village have sizeable areas of boundary Daventry; planting, and there are roadside high hedges, which will screen visibility. Views, where possible, The A361, which links Daventry and Kilsby; will be predominantly oblique and from the upper levels of houses. Sensitivity is medium; The A427, which links Market Harborough and Corby; magnitude to change is medium to low and therefore the level of effect is Moderate/Minor and The A428, which links Bedford, Northampton and Rugby; Not Significant. The A4500, which links Wellingborough, Northampton and the M1; The A508 which links Market Harborough and Northampton; Walgrave The A509, which links Milton Keynes with Wellingborough and Kettering; and The village of Walgrave is 5km east of the proposed site. Theoretical visibility is of 5-6 turbines The A5199 is on a broadly north west alignment, from Northampton to Leicester. at the fringes of the village, dropping to areas of no visibility at the centre. The houses on the western edge of the village may experience some oblique views from upper levels. From the Within 5km of the Site ground floor of houses, views to the turbines are likely to be screened by the large high hedges along the roads converging on Walgrave, hedged field boundaries, areas of intervening Of the above noted ‘A’ class and above roads within the study area, only the A508 and A5199 woodland and the village of Scaldwell skylined on the horizon. Sensitivity to change is medium come within 5km of the proposed turbines. and magnitude of change low, resulting in a Moderate/Minor and Not Significant level of effect. The ZTV indicates that users of the A508 may potentially have visibility of 5-6 turbines over Table 6.9 Summary of Effects on Residential Settlements most the stretch within 5km of the proposed windfarm. However, actual visibility will be limited Settlement Sensitivity Magnitude of Predicted Effect and by the hedgerows, hedgerow trees and small woodlands which line the road, and only Change Significance on Settlement occasional clear views to the surrounding countryside, are available. Where views are available, Brixworth Medium Low to Medium Moderate; Not Significant at this distance turbines are likely to be register as strong features within the view (see Cottesbrooke High Low Moderate; Not Significant Viewpoint 4, Figure 6.12, from near Lamport). There is a short section of the A508 which runs Creaton High Low Moderate; Not Significant adjacent to the site boundary (for a length of approximately 2km) which is likely to experience Draughton High Low Moderate; Not Significant direct open views. The wind turbines will be experienced at close range in this stretch of road. Hanging Houghton High High Major; Significant Holcot High Low Moderate; Not Significant The A5199 has theoretical visibility of 5-6 turbines. Once again, roadside hedges and hedgerow Lamport Medium Low Moderate/Minor; Not Significant trees are likely to screen views, in conjunction with prominent mature vegetation around the Maidwell Medium Medium Moderate; Not Significant fringes of the adjacent settlements. At its nearest point to the proposed windfarm, this road is Old Medium Medium/Low Moderate/Minor; Not Significant situated approximately 3.5km south-west. Pitsford Medium Low Moderate; Not Significant Scaldwell Medium Medium Moderate; Not Significant The magnitude of change brought about by the proposed windfarm on the routes within 5km is Spratton Medium Negligible Minor; Not Significant considered to be medium generally and high for a localised stretch of the A508 where it bounds Walgrave Medium Low Moderate/Minor; Not Significant the site area. The overall effect on these receptors is recorded in Table 6.10.

6.5.2 Transport Routes 5 to 10km of the Site

In addition to the two roads stated above, the A14, A428 and A43 come within 10km of the Principal Road Routes proposed turbines. The principal road running within the study area is the M1, though the A14 and the A508 run

closer to the proposed site. The study area is intersected by numerous ‘A’ class and minor The A508 within 5 to 10km of the site is predicted to experience some intermittent views of roads. Main routes linking towns and villages, and of class ‘A’ and above will be considered turbines, which will be screened or filtered by roadside vegetation, reducing the potential below. All of these routes are considered to be of medium sensitivity. visibility demonstrated on the ZTV considerably.

The roads within 20km of the site are: The A5199 within 10km has potential views of turbines which will be greatly reduced by the The M1, on a broadly north to south alignment; roadside hedges, hedgerow trees and mature boundary planting and the built form associated The A5, north-west to south-east alignment; with settlements. Views to the development from this road will be oblique. The A6, which links Market Harborough and the A14; The A14, on a east-west alignment, passing through Kettering, and joining the M1 at Junction 19;

Bolsterstone August 2008 6-27 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 6: Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

The A14, within 10km, will experience intermittent theoretical views of turbines. Sizeable, The ZTV suggests southbound users of the A6 may experience intermittent, occasional, oblique successive areas of planting, along with the local landform of the roadside embankments will views. These will be further restricted by the combination of the distance, intervening local screen views along much of the road. landform and small blocks of woodland and mature vegetation.

A short section of approximately 7km of the A428 passes within 10km of the proposed The A45 predominantly has no visibility. However, even in areas where theoretical views are windfarm. This section of road has intermittent theoretical visibility. In reality, views to the possible, they are likely to be filtered and/or screened by intervening man-made structures, proposed turbines are likely to be further filtered and/or screened by the mature roadside local landform and mature roadside vegetation. hedges and trees. The A427 is shown by the ZTV to have small areas of theoretical views. However, potential A section of some 18km of the A43 runs within 10km to the west of the proposed windfarm. views will be oblique at best, and the combination of the distance and intervening vegetation Theoretically this section of road may have potential views of the proposed windfarm, with are expected to mask views. areas of intermittent visibility within Northampton and around Broughton. However, mature roadside vegetation and the intervening landform are likely to combine to severely restrict views The ZTV indicates that the A4500 may experience occasional, intermittent potential views along of the proposed windfarm resulting in occasional intermittent views. some stretches of the road. In reality, the intervening vegetation, settlements and large urban form of Northampton, are likely to screen these views where they are available. The magnitude of change brought about by the proposed windfarm on the routes within 10km is considered to be low. The overall effect on these receptors is recorded in Table 6.10. The A509, which links Milton Keynes with Wellingborough and Kettering, predominantly has no theoretical visibility. The distance from the proposed site will serve to further limit views. 10 to 20km of the Site Within 10 to 20km of the site, in addition to the above mentioned roads, the M1, A5, A6, A45, The magnitude of change brought about by the proposed windfarm on the routes within 20km A427, A4500, A509. The distance from the site will serve to limit views of the proposed site. is considered to be negligible. The overall effect on these receptors is recorded in Table 6.10.

Users of the A508 within 10 to 20km of the site will predominantly have no views of the Rail proposed windfarm, and any potential views arising are likely to be screened by mature trees The two railway lines within the area are as follows; and vegetation. The mainline from London to Rugby and beyond. At its nearest point to the proposed The A5199 between 10 and 20km of the site predominantly has no potential visibility of the turbines, this line comes approximately 13.5km of the south-western edge of the site. proposed windfarm. Again, mature vegetation is likely to screen any potential views. The branch line between Northampton and Long Buckby is some 7.6km from nearest The ZTV demonstrates small areas of potential visibility along the A14 between 10 and 20km of Significantturbine at it closest point to the proposed site. the proposed windfarm. Roadside planting is likely to filter or screen these views. The sensitivity for these railway lines is medium. Theoretical visibility of the proposed turbines is indicated by the ZTV for some stretches of the A361. However, in reality at this distance, roadside vegetation is likely to screen views. The ZTV indicates that large sections of the railway line have no visibility. However, on the main line, there are theoretical views of between the Roade cutting and Weedon Bec, and on the Users of the A428 have potential intermittent visibility of 5-6 turbines. In reality, these views are branch line, and theoretical intermittent views between the Roade cutting and East Haddon Hill. likely to be screened by the intervening landform, man-made structures and settlements, and Actual views from the main line will be restricted by the urban form of Northampton and roadside planting. associated areas, local embankments (of the railway itself and of the M1) and by tree and hedgerow cover. Therefore, at worst, occasional glimpses of the proposed turbines may be The A43 predominantly has no visibility. However, even in areas of potential visibility, the urban possible. The magnitude of change generated is low and level of effect Moderate/Minor and Not form of Kettering, combined with roadside planting, will screen possible views. .

The ZTV indicates that the M1 predominantly has no views of the proposed windfarm. Where Long Distance Foot Paths and Cycle Routes views are potentially available, local landform, roadside planting and manmade structures are There are several long distance footpaths in the study area and two national cycle routes (6 and likely to screen these views. 70). Many of the long distance footpaths have areas of ‘cross over’ (i.e. join together along part of their routes). The routes within 20km are; The A5 mainly has no visibility. In small areas of potential visibility, the intervening settlements and the mature vegetation are expected to screen views. The Brampton Valley Way; The Macmillan Way; The Midshires Way; The Nene Way;

Bolsterstone August 2008 6-28 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 6: Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

The Jurassic Way; and The Grand Union Canal Walk (discussed below as part of the effects upon the Grand Table 6.10: Summary of Effects on Transport Routes Union Canal). Transport Route Sensitivity Magnitude of Change Predicted Effect and Significance on Transport The effects upon these routes are discussed below, in terms of distance from the site. All of Route these routes are considered to be of high sensitivity. M1 Medium Negligible Minor; Not Significant A5 Medium Negligible Minor; Not Significant A6 Medium Negligible Minor; Not Significant Within 5km of the Site A14 Medium Low Moderate/Minor; Not Significant

A43 Medium Low Moderate/Minor; Not Significant The ZTV illustrates that the Brampton Valley Way, Midshires Way (which follows the Brampton A45 Medium Negligible Minor; Not Significant Valley Way in this part of the route), Macmillan Way and National Cycle Route 6 all have A361 Medium Negligible Minor; Not Significant theoretical potential visibility of the turbines within 5km of the development. In reality, the A427 Medium Negligible Minor; Not Significant combination of the landform and mature vegetation is likely to screen and/or filter these views, A428 Medium Low Moderate/Minor; Not Significant particularly along the Brampton Valley Way (refer to Viewpoint 8, Figure 6.16). There is a short A4500 Medium Low Moderate/Minor; Not Significant section of the Brampton Valley Way (at this point joined with the Midshires Way), approximately A508 Medium Medium within 5km of the Moderate; Not Significant 2km long, from Glebe Farm to Hanging Houghton, where views of the turbines are likely to be development; localised High clearly visible within the landscape. The magnitude of the proposed windfarm on this route is magnitude within a 2km area considered to be medium to low generally within 5km of the proposed site, and high locally. adjacent to site. Major and Significant in localised Out-with of 5km; Low to areas. 5 to 10km of the Site negligible

Moderate/Minor; Not Significant The Brampton Valley Way, Midshires Way, The Macmillan Way and National Cycle Route 6 all have intermittent potential visibility between 5 and 10km of the proposed windfarm. Where A509 Medium Negligible Minor; Not Significant views are available, the undulating landform, intervening mature vegetation and settlements are A5199 Medium Medium Moderate; Not Significant predicted to screen and/or filter views. The magnitude of change brought about by the Railway Line High Low Moderate; Not Significant proposed windfarm on the routes within 10km is therefore considered to be low. The overall Brampton Valley High Generally Low Generally Moderate; Not effect on these receptors is recorded in Table 6.10. Way Significant

10 to 20km of the Site Within 5km of the proposed Within 5km the effect is windfarm, magnitude is Moderate; Not Significant) The Brampton Valley Way, Midshires Way, Macmillan Way, Nene Way, Jurassic Way and Medium to Low as much of National Cycle Routes 6 and 70 all have predominantly no visibility between 10km and 20km of the route has mature vegetation on either side (as the proposed windfarm. Any small areas of potential views will be further restricted by the shown in viewpoints 8 and distance from the site, local landform and vegetation, and intervening settlements. The 9), which will limit and magnitude of change on the footpaths within 20km is therefore considered to be negligible. The screen views. overall effect on these receptors is recorded in Table 6.10. Magnitude rises to High Grand Union Canal within a localised 2km The ZTV indicates that the Grand Union Canal (and Grand Union Canal Walk) will predominantly section between Glebe Farm have no visibility. The ZTV indicates that small areas of potential visibility exist; however, given to Hanging Houghton. the distance from the proposed windfarm (at the nearest point, the canal is 13km from the

nearest turbine); canal-side planting and intervening mature vegetation are likely to screen any

potential views. The magnitude of change is assessed to be negligible. The overall effect on Localised 2km section area rising these receptors is recorded in Table 6.10. to Major; Significant Midshires Way High As for Brampton Valley Way, Generally Moderate; Not magnitude is generally Low Significant

Within 5km of the proposed windfarm, magnitude is

Bolsterstone August 2008 6-29 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 6: Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

Transport Route Sensitivity Magnitude of Change Predicted Effect and 6.5.3 Viewpoint Analysis Significance on Transport Route Medium to Low as much of Within 5km the effect is TheGeneral eighteen viewpoints chosen are considered to provide a representative sample of views that the route has mature Moderate; Not Significant) are publicly accessible, from different distances and directions from the site. The existing and/or vegetation on either side (as shown in viewpoints 8 and predicted views from each of the eighteen locations are shown in the Visualisations, Figures 6.9 9), which will limit and to 6.26. screen views. The predicted views from each of the viewpoint locations are shown in the wireframes and Magnitude rises to High photomontages in Figures 6.9 to 6.26. A summary of the viewpoint analysis is given in the table within a localised 2km below and a detailed analysis of the viewpoints includes a description of the existing and section between Glebe Farm predicted view, together with analysis of the magnitude of change, and the effect upon to Hanging Houghton. landscape character and visual amenity is provided for the viewpoints upon which the development is likely to have a significant effect.

Localised 2km section area rising to Major; Significant Macmillan Way High Generally Low, localised Generally Moderate; Not areas in close proximity rising Significant to Medium Localised areas rising to Moderate/Major; Significant Nene Way High Negligible Moderate/Minor; Not Significant Jurassic Way High Negligible Moderate/Minor; Not Significant National Cycle High Generally Low Generally Moderate; Not Route 6 Significant

Within 5km of the proposed Within 5km the effect is windfarm, magnitude is Moderate; Not Significant) Medium to Low as much of the route has mature vegetation on either side (as shown in viewpoints 8 and 9), which will limit and screen views.

Magnitude rises to High within a localised 2km section between Glebe Farm to Hanging Houghton.

Localised 2km section area rising to Major; Significant National Cycle High Negligible Minor; Not Significant Route 70

Grand Union Canal High Low Moderate/Minor; Not Significant

Bolsterstone August 2008 6-30 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 6: Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

Table 6.11: Viewpoint Analysis Summary No Viewpoint Location and Approx Receptors Sensitivity Magnitude Predicted No Viewpoint Location and Approx Receptors Sensitivity Magnitude Predicted Brief Description Distance at of Receptors of Visual Effect and Brief Description Distance at of Receptors of Visual Effect and (refer to Figures 6.9 to to Viewpoint at Viewpoint Change Significance (refer to Figures 6.9 to to Viewpoint at Viewpoint Change Significance 6.26) Nearest on 6.26) Nearest on Visible Viewpoint Visible Viewpoint Turbine Turbine top of through gaps 1 Brixworth; from the 0.6km Settlement Medium Medium to Major/Moderate View illustrates tips may be buildings) in hedgerow) industrial area on the (very few High Significant. visible on the horizon. From northern edge of the houses will (tops of hubs within the grounds, Medium settlement. experience and blades extensive mature Road users View taken from the side of this view) on horizon. vegetation screens views. (A508) Moderate the road through one of the Front-lit Despite the proximity to the Not Significant few gaps in the hedgerow. Industry and Low less contrast. Moderate/Mino site, scale of turbines is not farm workers Two turbines r Not dominant, even if views NB: most of the settlement overlapping Significant where available. will not experience this and gap 5 Brixworth Country Park; 2.6km Country Park Medium Negligible – Minor/None level of visibility, as ground between view taken from within the (active none Not Significant level drops away from turbines.) body of the country park recreational Tips shown development site and there where ZTV demonstrates facility) on the is substantial screening possible visibility. NB no wireline will provided by hedges and views available from visitor be screened tree cover along northern centre. by boundary of village. vegetation. 2 Hanging Houghton; from 0.8km Settlement High High Major 6 Cottesbrooke Park; A view - - - - - the south-western edge of (houses on (direct views) (4 full Significant from the listed historic park the settlement, looking the southern turbines was agreed with the south. edge) visible. Back- Daventry District Council, lit therefore however, the photographer Turbines will be clearly stronger was declined permission to visible at this viewpoint contrast. take a representative view from western edge; filtered Two blades from this property. views only from elsewhere overlapping) in the settlement. Potential effects are 3 Scaldwell; from road 1.7km Settlement Medium Medium Moderate assessed in section 6.6.2 of junction outside of the (very few (oblique views) (turbine tips Not Significant this chapter. settlement. Views from the houses on and and tops 7 Spratton; view taken from 3.4km Settlement Medium to Medium Moderate village likely to be western of hubs on about 750m east of the Low (oblique to Not Significant filtered/screened by edge) horizon. edge of the settlement so (views filtered Spratton and extensive tree cover. Low Back-lit in this view is not properly and oblique) experienced Industry and afternoon representative of the village whist moving Turbines skylined on the farm and summer which will receive much Low on the road) horizon, framed in this view workers evenings) reduced and filtered views Minor road Moderate/ but not often experienced Low to the turbines. There and Farm Minor thus, as road junction Minor road maybe one or two houses workers Not Significant demands attention and on the very eastern edge of pedestrian access limited. the village that have similar views to this, though the 4 Lamport Hall; view taken 1.8km Grade II Medium Medium Moderate/ turbines will be oblique in from verge opposite the Listed (this view not (hub tops Minor Not the view. hall as no views possible Garden visible from and tips Significant from grounds due to grounds – may skylines on mature, extensive boundary only be horzon and planting. possible from glimpsed

Bolsterstone August 2008 6-31 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 6: Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

No Viewpoint Location and Approx Receptors Sensitivity Magnitude Predicted No Viewpoint Location and Approx Receptors Sensitivity Magnitude Predicted Brief Description Distance at of Receptors of Visual Effect and Brief Description Distance at of Receptors of Visual Effect and (refer to Figures 6.9 to to Viewpoint at Viewpoint Change Significance (refer to Figures 6.9 to to Viewpoint at Viewpoint Change Significance 6.26) Nearest on 6.26) Nearest on Visible Viewpoint Visible Viewpoint Turbine Turbine 8 Brampton Valley Way; view 4.4km National long High None None house is closed. Garden the drive; of hub tops Significance taken from the parking and distance (turbines (View oblique) and tips) picnic site. footpath central to constrained view) by extensive Minor Road Low Moderate/ tree cover; Minor no views to Not turbines Significance possible) 14 Althorp; No photograph as - - - - - house was closed.

9 Brampton Valley 5.4km 2 no National High Negligible- Minor Wireframe shows only tops Way/Midshires Way/ long distance (turbines None Not Significant of tips to be visible. National Cycle Route 6/ footpath/ would be (the 15 West Haddon; view taken 10.5km Settlement Medium to Negligible Minor Northampton – Lamport national cycle directly ahead occasional from the eastern edge of Low (only tips of Not Significant Railway; view taken route/ in centre of glimpse of the village, from the minor (orientation of blades alongside the railway track, recreational view.) turbines road just before the houses mainly appear on near the parking at a public railway. through the junction with the A428. away from horizon; house. mature development) these will be planting; screened by structures Low vegetation. etc). Minor/None 10 Boughton Hall Drive 5.9km Grade II High None None Minor Road Not Significant entrance. Taken from the Listed (turbines (turbines 16 A14; this view taken from 16.4 km Road Users Medium None None junction of the Drive and Garden central to screened by pedestrian bridge, A14 the A508, looking north. view) mature approximately 5m above roadside level of road. Therefore the Pedestrians Low Negligible Minor/None vegetation) view is not representative. on footbridge Not Significant

Road Users Medium None None The wireframe (A508) demonstrates that only the very tips would be visible from the bridge, and these 11 Guilsborough; view taken 6.5km Settlement Medium None None would be screened by the from the edge of the (distance (screened by vegetation. settlement. Some houses ensures tree belt) may experience similar turbines small 18 Daventry Country Park; 18.4km Country Park Medium None to Minor views; most will be further element within view taken from body of (active Negligible Not Significant filtered by intervening view) the country park on the recreational (one tip just structures/vegetation. footpath around the lake. facility) visible on 12 Formalised viewpoint by 7.1km Visitors/ Low None None wireframe. A14; view taken from View (view looks (screened by This will be formalised viewing point towards planting) screened by looking back toward site Laughton Hills vegetation) area. . in opposite direction to development) 13 Holdenby House; View from 7.5km Grade II Medium Medium-Low Moderate entrance to drive as the Listed (view exiting (filtered view Not

Bolsterstone August 2008 6-32 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 6: Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

Of the eighteen viewpoints, only two are of significant effect on the visual amenity. These are Predicted view detailed below. Figure 6.10 shows that the four proposed turbines will be fully visible in the middle ground. The other two proposed turbines will be screened in varying degrees by the small areas of existing Viewpoint 1: Brixworth woodland.

Introduction Magnitude of Change This viewpoint is taken from the northern edge of the settlement, from one of the few gaps in The turbines will be spread out over the majority of the 90 degree view and the nearest turbine the mature hedgerow alongside the road which accesses the industrial estate. will be seen at a distance of 0.8km from this viewpoint location. The lower portion of the turbines will be seen against the backdrop of landscape, whilst the tops of hubs and blades will It is notable that this view is not representative of the view that would be experienced by be skylined. The turbines will be back-lit, thus increasing the contrast of the structures. residents of Brixworth. It may reflect views experienced by some of the people that work either in the industrial estate or the fields. Given the increased contrast and the expanse of view taken up by the development, it is considered that the magnitude of change at this viewpoint is high. Existing View The view looks northwards to rolling countryside in the far distance with the long grass edging Effects on Visual Amenity the field in the foreground. Much of the middle ground is hidden behind the rise. This viewpoint is representative of views obtained by those residents of Hanging Houghton that live in along the southern edge of the village. The effect of the proposed windfarm upon the Predicted view visual amenity of this group at this viewpoint is considered to be Major and Significant. Figure 6.9 shows that the proposed turbines will be visible rising up from behind the rise. The tops of hubs and the blades are visible in this view. 6.6 ASSESSMENT OF CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ON LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL RECEPTORS Magnitude of Change The group of turbines will occupy approximately 33% of the 90 degree view from this location. 6.6.1 Introduction All the turbines will be seen against the sky. Turbines 1-4 are well spaced with only a small This section undertakes the assessment of the potential landscape and visual effects arising amount of overlap between the blades of turbine 1 and turbine 4. Turbines 5 and 6 are seen from the proposed wind development in conjunction with other built, consented and application slightly further from the main grouping and these two turbines overlap in this view. The turbines stage wind developments with the potential to interact with Brixworth. The assessment reviews will be front-lit so the contrast between the structures and the sky will be less pronounced than effects within a 30km radius of the development. if they were back-lit. The nearest turbine will be seen at a distance of 0.6km from this viewpoint location. This cumulative assessment has concentrated upon the windfarms within a 30km radius of the proposed windfarm; these windfarms are the closest to Brixworth and therefore have the The close proximity of the development to the viewpoint is off-set somewhat by the placement greatest potential to have a significant interaction with the development. of the turbines behind the local rise resulting in a medium to high magnitude of change. This does not eliminate the potential of interaction with more distant windfarms; however significant cumulative effects are less likely to occur with these distant developments.

Effects on Visual Amenity Figures 6.6 to 6.8 highlight the existing/potential zone of theoretical visibility to each windfarm This viewpoint is not representative of views obtained by residents of Brixworth, nevertheless, identified and the extent of cumulative visibility created through the addition of the proposed the view illustrates that the effect of the proposed windfarm upon the visual amenity of this Brixworth turbines. viewpoint is Major/Moderate and Significant. 6.6.2 Cumulative ZTV Analysis Viewpoint 2: Hanging Houghton

Introduction ThereGeneral are Cumulativethree developments, Visibility in addition to Brixworth Windfarm, within the 30km zone that This viewpoint is taken from the south-western edge of the settlement, alongside the buildings could have a possible cumulative effect. These are; overlooking the fields to the south of the village. Burton Wold, near Kettering (existing) approximately 17km east; Existing View Burton Wold extension approximately 17km east; and Figure 6.10 shows the view over the undulating farmland and associated hedgerows. The 1 turbine at the Tesco Distribution Centre, near Crick approximately 17km west. ground level falls away to the south, affording a panoramic view across gently rolling countryside which has a rural character of medium sized fields bounded by hedgerows.

Bolsterstone August 2008 6-33 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 6: Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

The cumulative effects of each of these with Brixworth are considered in the following sections. No Viewpoint Likely view Likely view Cumulative Predicted location and containing containing Magnitude of Effect and Brixworth with Burton Wold brief turbines; turbines; with Change Significance description without Brixworth on Burton Wold Windfarm is situated approximately 16km to the east of the proposed windfarm. of windfarms Brixworth Viewpoint Within 10km of the proposed Brixworth development, the ZTV indicates that cumulative visibility visible from will be restricted to be distinct, localised areas. These predominantly occur within the area this view between the two developments. The ZTV indicates the potential that many of the settlements 1 Brixworth - - - No cumulative within the 10km could have cumulative views. At the edges of the settlements, (where visibility effect is likely to be higher), the ZTV indicates that where views are available, these will be of the 2 Hanging - - - No cumulative Brixworth development. It is of note that much of the village of Brixworth will not have Houghton effect cumulative views of both developments, and neither will the settlements of Cottesbrooke, 3 Scaldwell; Theoretical Tips and hubs of Low to Minor Harrington, Holcot, Maidwell, Pitsford and Walgrave. Burton Wold & visibility of tips in Brixworth Negligible as Not Significant Burton Wold views to the east; proposal on the there is no Further than 10km of the proposed windfarm, cumulative visibility is intermittent, and Extension unlikely to be horizon. simultaneous predominantly occurs between the two windfarms and the immediate environs. theoretically visible due to visibility of both visible screening effects developments;

of vegetation and visibility is Given the intervening undulating landform, the mature vegetation and man-made structures, manmade successive which combine to provide substantial screening and reduce actual combined visibility, it is features. considered that the cumulative magnitude of change is low. 4 Lamport Hall; No other turbines View illustrates None No cumulative Burton Wold & are visible due to heavy planting effect Brixworth with Burton Wold Extension Burton Wold dense mature within the will Burton Wold Extension is situated approximately 17km to the east of the proposed windfarm, Extension planting and local screen views of adjacent to the existing Burton Wold windfarm. The ZTV indicates that cumulative visibility will theoretically landform. Burton Wold so predominantly be the same as the cumulative visibility for the existing Burton Wold windfarm, visible no combined views likely. with a few very small localised differences occurring, which will not noticeably increase the

actual combined visibility of the two developments. Therefore, magnitude of change is assessed 5 Brixworth - - - No cumulative to be low. Country Park effect 6 Cottesbrooke - - - No cumulative Brixworth with Tesco Distribution Centre Park effect There is a one turbine development located at the Tesco Distribution Centre at Dirft, near Crick, 7 Spratton - - - No cumulative approximately 16.5km west of the proposed windfarm. Within 10km of the proposed Brixworth effect development, the ZTV indicates that there is predominantly no cumulative visibility, with the 8 Brampton - - - No cumulative exception of small areas near the fringes of the 10km zone. Given the undulating landform, Valley Way effect mature hedgerows and that the Tesco development is only of 1 turbine, combined views from (parking/ picnic site) these areas are likely to be very limited.

9 Brampton - - - No cumulative Further than 10km, cumulative visibility is low and intermittent, mainly occurring around Valley Way (at effect Daventry and to the south and west of Northampton. Views from these areas are likely to be parking at screened by manmade elements and intervening mature vegetation. public house near Given the restricted combined visibility of the two developments, the magnitude of change is Sedgebrook) considered to be negligible. 10 A508 looking - - - No cumulative north from effect 6.6.3 Cumulative Visibility from Viewpoints junction with Boughton Hall The viewpoints representative of visual receptors within the study area have been analysed to 11 Guilsborough Tips of both Tips of Brixworth None No cumulative understand the likely cumulative effects of the proposed windfarm at Brixworth Windfarm with Burton Wold & Burton Wold are also screened effect the other windfarms. These are summarized in the table 6.12 below; Burton Wold windfarms by vegetation. Extension theoretically Table 6.12 Cumulative Viewpoint Analysis theoretically visible but

Bolsterstone August 2008 6-34 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 6: Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

No Viewpoint Likely view Likely view Cumulative Predicted No Viewpoint Likely view Likely view Cumulative Predicted location and containing containing Magnitude of Effect and location and containing containing Magnitude of Effect and brief turbines; turbines; with Change Significance brief turbines; turbines; with Change Significance description without Brixworth on description without Brixworth on of windfarms Brixworth Viewpoint of windfarms Brixworth Viewpoint visible from visible from this view this view visible actually screened Kettering. developments will by vegetation and by landform and Burton Wold & be close range, local landform. vegetation Burton Wold looking to east 12 A14 at the Formal viewpoint No view available None No cumulative Extension (opposite formalised faces away from due to tree cover effect theoretically direction to viewpoint. all the windfarm visible proposed Burton Wold & developments. Brixworth Burton Wold Any potential development) Extension views screened by 17 Castle Ashby Theoretical views Tips of Brixworth None No cumulative theoretically A14 embankment Burton Wold & of both development will effect visible and planting. Burton Wold developments be screened by 13 Holdenby Views of turbines Only the tips of None No cumulative Extension possible; however vegetation House from both the Brixworth effect theoretically there is Burton Wold & windfarms turbines. visible substantial Burton Wold possible are mature vegetation Extension screened in reality at the boundaries theoretically by the planting of the parkland visible and landform. which combined with the distance 14 Althorp - - - No cumulative is likely to screen effect views 15 West Haddon; Views of all Tips of Brixworth None No cumulative 18 Daventry - - - No cumulative Tesco development turbines shown in effect Country Park effect Distrubution theoretically the wireline will Centre, Burton possible; however be screened by There are no significant cumulative effects upon the representative viewpoints, therefore the Wold & Burton Burton Wold hedgerow on the viewpoints will not be discussed in any further detail than this table. Wold (existing and horizon. Extension extension) is 6.6.4 Cumulative Summary theoretically located to the visible east, Tesco The cumulative effects are shown to be generally low, as would be expected, given that there distribution centre are only three wind developments in addition to the proposal, and two of these are linked. to the west. Views of both Burton There is considered to be a negligible cumulative magnitude of change arising from effects of Wold the Brixworth proposal with Tesco Distribution Centre development. The predicted effect is developments assessed to be Negligible and Not Significant. likely to be

screened due to distance and The cumulative magnitude of change for the combination of the Burton Wold (existing) intervening windfarm with the Brixworth proposal is assessed to be low. The effect is therefore predicted to vegetation. Tesco be Minor, and Not Significant. development also likely to be The cumulative magnitude of change for the Burton Wold extension with the Brixworth proposal screened by is considered to be low. The predicted effect is Minor, and Not Significant. mature parkland planting. Cumulative effects for the 30km cumulative study area are therefore overall Minor/Negligible 16 A14, near the Views of both Brixworth turbines None No cumulative and Not Significant. edge of Burton Wold will be screened effect

Bolsterstone August 2008 6-35 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 6: Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

6.7 SUMMARY OF EFFECTS 6.2.20 Effects on Landscape Designations There are no national landscape designations within the study area. Of the local designations, 6.7.1 Layout Design there are Special Landscape Areas (SLA) and Locally Important Landscape Areas (LILA). The The general process of the layout design development for the project is presented in site is located on the edge of one of the SLAs where the effect of the development on this SLA Chapter 3: Project Description. After setting out the fundamental technical and was found to be locally Significant. economic requirements which shape the windfarm design, it outlines a design strategy based on a number of fundamental tenets, summarised as follows: There are numerous Historic Parks and Gardens throughout the study area, none of which are predicted to experience significant effects. minimising turbine visibility as far as possible; limiting the number of turbines visible at specific receptors within the theoretical zone of 6.2.21 Effects on Landscape Character visibility; and where views are likely to be significant, i.e. within the topographic enclosure of the site, to Having reviewed the Regional and Local Landscape Character Assessments adopted by the local create a positive visual image by appropriate layout design and turbine siting relating to the authorities, and verified their findings during site visits, the landscape character areas identified form and scale of the landscape and function of the proposal. have formed the baseline for describing the landscape within the 20km study area.

In this regard, the visibility of the wind turbines from Brixworth, the closest settlement to the It is notable that there are no significant effects upon landscape character generally although development, has been considered. Of the original seven turbines proposed at scoping stage, there are predicted to be significant effects on localised parts of the receiving LCA, ‘The Rolling turbine 7 has been omitted and the remaining turbines have been carefully located so that they Ironstone Valley Slopes’. do not dominate this settlement.. 6.2.22 Effects on Visual Amenity Construction Phase The ZTVs and viewpoint assessment, together with field observations, has allowed conclusions The proposal will be located in an area of farmland. Access to the development will utilise to be drawn about the predicted changes to the visual amenity baseline condition throughout upgraded existing tracks and sections of new tracks ensuring access to all turbines. the study area. This is summarised as follows:

The physical effects of the construction phase of the proposal on the landscape fabric of the Settlement application site will be limited due to the small size of the development and will be reversible at the end of the operational life of the project. The changes that will occur in the landscape will All the settlements within 5km of the development site were assessed and only the village of be the introduction of more human activity together with the short-term introduction and Hanging Houghton, situated immediately north of the proposed windfarm is predicted to movement of large construction vehicles and associated construction. experience a significant effect. The nature of the topography and land cover throughout the study area combined with the inward looking nature of settlements conspire to limit the These activities will affect a small proportion of the overall application site leaving the majority significance of effects. of the existing landform and associated vegetation and soil structure completely unaffected. Transport Routes For the above reasons, the construction phase of the proposed windfarm is considered to have a minor and not significant effect on the fabric of the application site. Only localised sections of the A508 was found to experience significant effects. Existing roadside vegetation and mature intervening planting alongside other parts of this road, and all other Operational Phase roads was found to limit effects. The effects of the operational phase of the proposal on the landscape of the application site will be a change arising from the introduction of six turbines which will be a new form in that There are 6 national footpaths and 2 national cycle routes within the study area. Of these, 3 immediate locale. The existing land use on the application site will not be affected by the footpaths and 1 cycle route come within 5km of the proposed site area. This report predicts proposed windfarm. There will be no further changes to the physical landscape during the significant effects on localised sections of these routes where they pass by the southern operational phase. The proposed windfarm is likely to require occasional maintenance visits boundary to the proposed windfarm. which will not cause any further significant disturbance to the landscape baseline. The operational phase of the proposed windfarm will have a negligible effect on the landscape Viewpoint Analysis fabric of the application site. The direct effects of the proposed windfarm will be minimal in extent and reversible at the end of the operational life of the windfarm. Of the 18 representative viewpoints assessed, 2 were found to experience significant effects. Both these views, Viewpoint 1, from Brixworth and Viewpoint 2, from Hanging Houghton, are situated within 1km of the proposed turbines. No other viewpoints were found to experience significant effects.

Bolsterstone August 2008 6-36 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 6: Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

Cumulative Assessment

Three other wind developments were assessed in relation to the proposed windfarm at Brixworth and no significant cumulative effects were found.

6.8 STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE The proposed windfarm has been designed to incorporate standard mitigation measures in relation to the design of the turbines and has been designed to complement the landform of the site. The layout has been optimised and the number of turbines significantly reduced in respect of technical, economic and environmental constraints including landscape and visual amenity considerations.

The proposal is considered to be well sited with due consideration to landscape and visual effects in relation to the other environmental constraints.

Bolsterstone August 2008 6-37

440000 450000 460000 470000 480000 490000 500000 300000 300000

Key

Proposed Turbine Locations

Viewpoints 290000 290000 20km LVA Study Area

30km Cumulative LVIA Study Area

12 280000 280000

8 16

11 6 4 2 15 3 1 7 5 270000 270000 13 9 10 14 18

17 260000 260000

1:225,000 Scale @ A3

0510km 250000 250000

Viewpoints and Study Areas Figure 6.1

Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement 440000 450000 460000 470000 480000 490000 500000 Reproduced under licence from Ordnance Survey digital map data. CrownAll rights Copyright. reserved. number 0100031673 Licence

460000 470000 480000 490000 290000 290000

Key

Proposed Turbine Locations

20km Study Area Local Landscape Designations Locally Important Landscape Area

Special Landscape Area 280000 280000

270000 270000 260000 260000 1:150,000 Scale @ A3

02.55km

Local Landscape Designations Figure 6.2

Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement 460000 470000 480000 490000 Reproduced under licence from Ordnance Survey digital map data. CrownAll rights Copyright. reserved. number 0100031673 Licence

460000 470000 480000 490000 290000 290000

Key

Proposed Turbine Locations

20km Study Area Joint Character Areas DUNSMORE AND FELDON

HIGH LEICESTERSHIRE

LEICESTERSHIRE VALES 280000 280000 NORTHAMPTONSHIRE UPLANDS

NORTHAMPTONSHIRE VALES

ROCKINGHAM FOREST 3 YARDLEY-WHITTLEWOOD RIDGE 270000 270000 260000 260000 1:150,000 Scale @ A3

02.55km

Joint Character Areas Figure 6.3

Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement 460000 470000 480000 490000 Reproduced under licence from Ordnance Survey digital map data. CrownAll rights Copyright. reserved. Licence number 010003167

460000 470000 480000 490000 290000 290000

Key

Proposed Turbine Locations

20km Study Area Landscape Character Areas Broad River Valley Floodplain

Broad Unwooded Vale

Clay Plateau 280000 280000 Farmed Scarp Slopes

Ironstone Uplands

Laughton Hills

Limestone Valley Slopes

Low Wooded Clay Ridge

River Valley Floodplain

Rolling Ironstone Valley Slopes

Undulating Claylands

Undulating Hills and Valleys 270000 270000 Urban

Welland Valley

Wooded Clay Plateau

NOTE: Landscape Character descriptions could not be obtained for areas within the Study Area without coloured shading. 260000 260000 1:150,000 Scale @ A3

02.55km

Local Landscape Character Areas Figure 6.4 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement 460000 470000 480000 490000 Reproduced under licence from Ordnance Survey digital map data. CrownAll rights Copyright. reserved. number 0100031673 Licence

460000 470000 480000 490000 290000 290000

Key

! Proposed Turbine Locations

20km Study Area Blade Tip ZTV (125m) VISIBILITY 1 to 2 Turbines

3 to 4 Turbines 280000 280000 5 to 6 Turbines

!! ! ! ! ! 270000 270000 260000 260000 1:150,000 Scale @ A3 02.55km ¯

Zone of Theoretical Visibility Figure 6.5

Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement 460000 470000 480000 490000 Reproducedlicence under from Ordnance0100031673 Allrightsnumber data. Survey reserved.map digitalCrown Licence Copyright.

450000 460000 470000 480000 490000 500000 510000 300000 300000

Key

Proposed Turbine Locations

Burton Wold Turbine Locations 290000 290000 30km Cumulative LVIA Study Area Blade Tip ZTV (125m) VISIBILITY Brixworth

Burton Wold (Existing)

Brixworth & Burton Wold (Existing) 280000 280000

270000 270000 260000 260000

1:225,000 Scale @ A3

0510km 250000 250000

Cumulative ZTV: Brixworth & Burton Wold (Existing) Wind Farms Figure 6.6 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement 450000 460000 470000 480000 490000 500000 510000 Reproduced under licence from Ordnance Survey digital map data. CrownAll rights Copyright. reserved. number 0100031673 Licence

450000 460000 470000 480000 490000 500000 510000 300000 300000

Key

Proposed Turbine Locations Burton Wold Proposed

290000 290000 Turbine Locations Burton Wold Turbine Locations

30km Cumulative LVIA Study Area Blade Tip ZTV (125m) VISIBILITY Brixworth

Burton Wold (Extension) 280000 280000

Brixworth & Burton Wold(Extension) 270000 270000 260000 260000

1:225,000 Scale @ A3

0510km 250000 250000

Cumulative ZTV: Brixworth & Burton Wold (Extension) Wind Farms Figure 6.7 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement 450000 460000 470000 480000 490000 500000 510000 Reproduced under licence from Ordnance Survey digital map data. CrownAll rights Copyright. reserved. number 0100031673 Licence

450000 460000 470000 480000 490000 500000 510000 300000 300000

Key

Proposed Turbine Locations

Tesco Wind Turbine Location 290000 290000 30km Cumulative LVIA Study Area Blade Tip ZTV (125m) VISIBILITY Brixworth

Tesco

Brixworth & Tesco 280000 280000

270000 270000 260000 260000

1:225,000 Scale @ A3

0510km 250000 250000

Cumulative ZTV: Brixworth & Tesco Wind Turbine Figure 6.8 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement 450000 460000 470000 480000 490000 500000 510000 Reproduced under licence from Ordnance Survey digital map data. CrownAll rights Copyright. reserved. number 0100031673 Licence

Existing view from Northern Edge of Brixworth

Computer Generated Wireline of Proposed Development

Viewpoint Location: 475011, 271438 VP1: Northern Edge of Brixworth View Direction: 343.67 degrees Figure 6.9 Height of Camera: 1.8m AGL Distance to Nearest Turbine: 970m Horizontal Field of View: 90 degrees Brixworth Windfarm Viewing Distance: 25.5 cm Environmental Statement

Reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data © Crown copyright 2008. All rights reserved. Licence number 0100031673 number Licence reserved. rights All 2008. copyright © Crown data map digital Survey Ordnance from Reproduced VIEWPOINT LOCATION MAP Existing view from Hanging Houghton

Computer generated wireline of proposed development Reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data © Crown copyright 2007. All rights reserved. Licence number 0100031673

VP2: Hanging Houghton Viewpoint Location: 475170, 273712 Figure 6.10a View Direction: 199.07 degrees Height of Camera: 1.8m AGL Distance to Nearest Turbine: 930m Brixworth Windfarm Horizontal Field of View: 90 degrees Environmental Statement Viewing Distance: 25.5 cm Photomontage showing proposed development

IMPORTANT Photomontage must be viewed from the correct viewing distance to gain a true representation of the image. Curve image to maintain constant viewing distance at all points.

Viewpoint Location Map VP2: Hanging Houghton Figure 6.10b

Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data © Crown copyright 2008. All rights reserved. Licence number 0100031673 number Licence reserved. rights All 2008. copyright © Crown data map digital Survey Ordnance from Reproduced

Existing view from Scaldwell

Computer Generated Wireline of Proposed Development

Viewpoint Location: 476539, 272362 VP3: Scaldwell View Direction: 279.95 degrees Figure 6.11 Height of Camera: 1.8m AGL Distance to Nearest Turbine: 1600m Horizontal Field of View: 90 degrees Brixworth Windfarm Viewing Distance: 25.5 cm Environmental Statement

Reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data © Crown copyright 2008. All rights reserved. Licence number 0100031673 number Licence reserved. rights All 2008. copyright © Crown data map digital Survey Ordnance from Reproduced VIEWPOINT LOCATION MAP

Existing view from Lamport Hall

Computer Generated Wireline of Proposed Development

Viewpoint Location: 475635, 274232 VP4: Lamport Hall View Direction: 210.59 degrees Figure 6.12 Height of Camera: 1.8m AGL Distance to Nearest Turbine: 1590m Horizontal Field of View: 90 degrees Brixworth Windfarm Viewing Distance: 25.5 cm Environmental Statement

Reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data © Crown copyright 2008. All rights reserved. Licence number 0100031673 number Licence reserved. rights All 2008. copyright © Crown data map digital Survey Ordnance from Reproduced VIEWPOINT LOCATION MAP

Existing view from Brixworth Country Park

Computer Generated Wireline of Proposed Development

Viewpoint Location: 475404, 269527 VP5: Brixworth Country Park View Direction: 349.75 degrees Figure 6.13 Height of Camera: 1.8m AGL Distance to Nearest Turbine: 2900m Horizontal Field of View: 90 degrees Brixworth Windfarm Viewing Distance: 25.5 cm Environmental Statement

Reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data © Crown copyright 2008. All rights reserved. Licence number 0100031673 number Licence reserved. rights All 2008. copyright © Crown data map digital Survey Ordnance from Reproduced VIEWPOINT LOCATION MAP

NO PHOTOGRAPH AVAILABLE

Existing view from Cottesbrooke Park - See Table 6.11

Computer Generated Wireline of Proposed Development

Viewpoint Location: 471200, 273900 VP6: Cottesbrooke Park View Direction: 109.9 degrees Figure 6.14 Height of Camera: 1.8m AGL Distance to Nearest Turbine: 3100m Horizontal Field of View: 90 degrees Brixworth Windfarm Viewing Distance: 25.5 cm Environmental Statement

Reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data © Crown copyright 2008. All rights reserved. Licence number 0100031673 number Licence reserved. rights All 2008. copyright © Crown data map digital Survey Ordnance from Reproduced VIEWPOINT LOCATION MAP Existing view from Olde Hall Close, Spratton

Computer generated wireline of proposed development Reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data © Crown copyright 2007. All rights reserved. Licence number 0100031673

VP7: Olde Hall Close, Spratton Viewpoint Location: 471980, 270179 Figure 6.15a View Direction: 47.93 degrees Height of Camera: 1.8m AGL Distance to Nearest Turbine: 3400m Brixworth Windfarm Horizontal Field of View: 90 degrees Environmental Statement Viewing Distance: 25.5 cm Photomontage showing proposed development

IMPORTANT Photomontage must be viewed from the correct viewing distance to gain a true representation of the image. Curve image to maintain constant viewing distance at all points.

Viewpoint Location Map

VP7: Olde Hall Close, Spratton Figure 6.15b

Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data © Crown copyright 2008. All rights reserved. Licence number 0100031673 number Licence reserved. rights All 2008. copyright © Crown data map digital Survey Ordnance from Reproduced

Existing view from Brampton Valley Way (Picnic Site)

Computer Generated Wireline of Proposed Development VP8: Brampton Valley Viewpoint Location: 475516, 277329 View Direction: 189.76 degrees Way (Picnic Site) Height of Camera: 1.8m AGL Figure 6.16 Distance to Nearest Turbine: 4300m Horizontal Field of View: 90 degrees Brixworth Windfarm Viewing Distance: 25.5 cm Environmental Statement

Reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data © Crown copyright 2008. All rights reserved. Licence number 0100031673 number Licence reserved. rights All 2008. copyright © Crown data map digital Survey Ordnance from Reproduced VIEWPOINT LOCATION MAP

Existing view from Brampton Valley Way (Sedgebrook Lodge)

Computer Generated Wireline of Proposed Development VP9: Brampton Valley Way Viewpoint Location: 473452, 266921 (Sedgebrook Lodge) View Direction: 11.4 degrees Height of Camera: 1.8m AGL Figure 6.17 Distance to Nearest Turbine: 5680m Horizontal Field of View: 90 degrees Brixworth Windfarm Viewing Distance: 25..5 cm Environmental Statement

Reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data © Crown copyright 2008. All rights reserved. Licence number 0100031673 number Licence reserved. rights All 2008. copyright © Crown data map digital Survey Ordnance from Reproduced VIEWPOINT LOCATION MAP

Existing view from A508 Junction of Broughton Hall

Computer Generated Wireline of Proposed Development VP10: A508 Junction Viewpoint Location: 474825, 266055 to Broughton Hall View Direction: 358.66 degrees Height of Camera: 1.8m AGL Figure 6.18 Distance to Nearest Turbine: 6350m Horizontal Field of View: 90 degrees Brixworth Windfarm Viewing Distance: 25.5 cm Environmental Statement

Reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data © Crown copyright 2008. All rights reserved. Licence number 0100031673 number Licence reserved. rights All 2008. copyright © Crown data map digital Survey Ordnance from Reproduced VIEWPOINT LOCATION MAP Existing view from Guilsborough

Computer generated wireline of proposed development Reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data © Crown copyright 2007. All rights reserved. Licence number 0100031673

VP11: Guilsborough Viewpoint Location: 466966, 273984 Figure 6.19a View Direction: 90.54 degrees Height of Camera: 1.8m AGL Distance to Nearest Turbine: 7300m Brixworth Windfarm Horizontal Field of View: 90 degrees Environmental Statement Viewing Distance: 25.5 cm Photomontage showing proposed development

IMPORTANT Photomontage must be viewed from the correct viewing distance to gain a true representation of the image. Curve image to maintain constant viewing distance at all points.

Viewpoint Location Map VP11: Guilsborough Figure 6.19b

Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data © Crown copyright 2008. All rights reserved. Licence number 0100031673 number Licence reserved. rights All 2008. copyright © Crown data map digital Survey Ordnance from Reproduced

Existing view from Fairfax's View

Computer Generated Wireline of Proposed Development

Viewpoint Location: 469767, 279093 VP12: Fairfax's View View Direction: 145.45 degrees Figure 6.20 Height of Camera: 1.8m AGL Distance to Nearest Turbine: 7200m Horizontal Field of View: 90 degrees Brixworth Windfarm Viewing Distance: 25.5 cm Environmental Statement

Reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data © Crown copyright 2008. All rights reserved. Licence number 0100031673 number Licence reserved. rights All 2008. copyright © Crown data map digital Survey Ordnance from Reproduced VIEWPOINT LOCATION MAP Existing view from Holdenby House

Computer generated wireline of proposed development Reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data © Crown copyright 2007. All rights reserved. Licence number 0100031673

VP13: Holdenby House Viewpoint Location: 469425, 268049 Figure 6.21a View Direction: 52.79 degrees Height of Camera: 1.8m AGL Distance to Nearest Turbine: 6700m Brixworth Windfarm Horizontal Field of View: 90 degrees Environmental Statement Viewing Distance: 25.5 cm Photomontage showing proposed development

IMPORTANT Photomontage must be viewed from the correct viewing distance to gain a true representation of the image. Curve image to maintain constant viewing distance at all points.

Viewpoint Location Map VP13: Holdenby House Figure 6.21b

Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data © Crown copyright 2008. All rights reserved. Licence number 0100031673 number Licence reserved. rights All 2008. copyright © Crown data map digital Survey Ordnance from Reproduced

NO PHOTOGRAPH AVAILABLE

Existing view from Althorp - See Table 6.11

Computer Generated Wireline of Proposed Development

Viewpoint Location: 468200, 265100 VP14: Althorp View Direction: 40.77 degrees Figure 6.22 Height of Camera: 1.8m AGL Distance to Nearest Turbine: 9700m Horizontal Field of View: 90 degrees Brixworth Windfarm Viewing Distance: 25.5 cm Environmental Statement

Reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data © Crown copyright 2008. All rights reserved. Licence number 0100031673 number Licence reserved. rights All 2008. copyright © Crown data map digital Survey Ordnance from Reproduced VIEWPOINT LOCATION MAP

Existing view from West Haddon

Computer Generated Wireline of Proposed Development

Viewpoint Location: 463527, 272111 VP15: West Haddon View Direction: 86.22 degrees Figure 6.23 Height of Camera: 1.8m AGL Distance to Nearest Turbine: 10740m Horizontal Field of View: 90 degrees Brixworth Windfarm Viewing Distance: 25.5 cm Environmental Statement

Reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data © Crown copyright 2008. All rights reserved. Licence number 0100031673 number Licence reserved. rights All 2008. copyright © Crown data map digital Survey Ordnance from Reproduced VIEWPOINT LOCATION MAP

Existing view from A14 Junction 10

Computer Generated Wireline of Proposed Development VP16: A14 Junction Viewpoint Location: 489669, 276054 10 Burton Latimer View Direction: 256.25 degrees Height of Camera: 1.8m AGL Figure 6.24 Distance to Nearest Turbine: 15.1 km Horizontal Field of View: 90 degrees Brixworth Windfarm Viewing Distance: 25.5 cm Environmental Statement

Reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data © Crown copyright 2008. All rights reserved. Licence number 0100031673 number Licence reserved. rights All 2008. copyright © Crown data map digital Survey Ordnance from Reproduced VIEWPOINT LOCATION MAP

Existing view from Castle Ashby

Computer Generated Wireline of Proposed Development

Viewpoint Location: 486433, 259123 VP17: Castle Ashby View Direction: 318.91 degrees Figure 6.25 Height of Camera: 1.8m AGL Distance to Nearest Turbine: 17.58 km Horizontal Field of View: 90 degrees Brixworth Windfarm Viewing Distance: 25.5 cm Environmental Statement

Reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data © Crown copyright 2008. All rights reserved. Licence number 0100031673 number Licence reserved. rights All 2008. copyright © Crown data map digital Survey Ordnance from Reproduced VIEWPOINT LOCATION MAP

Existing view from Daventry Country Park

Computer Generated Wireline of Proposed Development

Viewpoint Location: 457935, 264232 VP18: Daventry Country Park View Direction: 45 degrees Figure 6.26 Height of Camera: 1.8m AGL Distance to Nearest Turbine: 18.39 km Horizontal Field of View: 90 degrees Brixworth Windfarm Viewing Distance: 25.5 cm Environmental Statement

Reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data © Crown copyright 2008. All rights reserved. Licence number 0100031673 number Licence reserved. rights All 2008. copyright © Crown data map digital Survey Ordnance from Reproduced VIEWPOINT LOCATION MAP

Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 7: Ecology

Council Directive 79/409/EEC on the Conservation of Wild Birds (Birds Directive); 7. ECOLOGY The Conservation (Natural Habitats &c) Regulations 1994; The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981; The Hedgerow Regulations 1997; 7.1 INTRODUCTION Countryside and Rights of Way Act (CRoW) 2000; Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006; and The Protection of Badgers Act 1992. This chapter of the Environmental Statement (ES) describes the findings of the ecological assessment of the proposed Brixworth Windfarm development at Lodge Farm. Potential National Policy Guidance ecological impacts on habitats, flora, protected mammals, reptiles, amphibians and invertebrates are considered. Potential impacts on birds are considered in Chapter 8: Ornithology and are not The Ministerial Interim Planning Policy Statement 01/2005 – Planning for Renewable Energy; referred to in this chapter. Regional, Local and Structure Plan Policies Planning Policy Statement 9: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation; Arcus Renewable Energy Consulting Ltd (“Arcus”) was commissioned to carry out the ecological Planning for Biodiversity and Geological Conservation – A good practice guide; and impact assessment for the proposed Brixworth Windfarm development. Lapwings Consultants Circular 06/05: Biodiversity and Geographical Conservation - Statutory Obligations and Ltd, the consultancy section of the Lincolnshire Wildlife Trust, carried out the baseline surveys Their Impact within the Planning System. required to inform the assessment.

This chapter includes the following sections: Daventry Local Plan (Saved Policies) Policy EN25; and Daventry Local Plan (Saved Policies) Policy EN26. Legislation and Guidance – a summary of documents consulted in the survey and assessment process; Other Guidance Consultation – a summary of consultations undertaken and responses received; UK and Northamptonshire Biodiversity Action Plans (BAP) 2007; Methodology – a description of the methods used in the baseline surveys and assessment Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the United Kingdom 20061; of the significance of impacts; Bat Mitigation Guidelines 20042; Baseline Description – a description of the ecology of the site based on the results of desk Bat Conservation Trust Bat Surveys Good Practice Guidelines 20073; study, consultations and surveys; Wind Turbines and Bats: guidelines for the planning process and impact assessments Information Gaps – a summary of uncertainties encountered in the assessment; 20064; and Assessment of Potential Impacts – a consideration of the ways in which the proposed Handbook of Biodiversity Methods 20055. development may affect the ecology of the site;

Mitigation – a discussion of appropriate mitigation recommended to off-set identified potential impacts; 7.3 CONSULTATION Enhancement opportunities – identification of land management activities that could enhance the site for biodiversity and contribute to local and UK biodiversity action plan In early 2008, a consultation scoping report detailing ecological methodologies and preliminary targets; baseline findings was issued to the Environment Agency (EA), Natural England (NE), the Residual Impacts – an assessment of the significance of the impacts of the proposed Northamptonshire Bat Group and the Wildlife Trust for Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire, development after mitigation has been implemented; and Northamptonshire and Peterborough (WT). A full ecological data search was also undertaken with the Northamptonshire Biological Records Centre (NBRC), the North Northamptonshire Statement of Significance – a summary of the findings of the assessment with reference to Guidelines the obligation to identify any significant impacts set out in regulations. Badger Group and the Northamptonshire Amphibian and Reptile Group (NARG). A list of these consultees and a summary of their responses are given in Table 7.1.

7.2 LEGISLATION AND GUIDANCE

The ecological baseline surveys and assessment have been carried out with reference to the 1 legislation and guidance documents detailed in the following sections. IEEM. 2006. Guidelines for Ecological Impact Ass . IEEM, Winchester. 2 Mitchell-Jones, A.J. 2004. Bat Mitigation Guidelines. English Nature, Peterborough. 3 National Legislation Parsons, K., Crompton, R., Graves, R., Markham, S., Matthews, S., Oxford, M., Shepherd, P., Sowler, S. 2007. Bat Surveys: Good Practice . BCT, London. 4 Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and Wild Flora and Rodrigues, L., Bach, L., Biraschi, L., Dubourg-Savage,essment M., inGoodwin, the United J., Harbusch,Kingdom C., Hutson, T., Ivanova, T., Lutsar, L., Parsons, K. 2006. Fauna (Habitats Directive); Wind Turbines and Bats: guide EUROBATS, Bonn. 5 Hill, D., Fasham, M., Tucker, G., Shewry, M., Shaw, P. 2005. Handbook of Biodiversity Methods. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

lines for the planning proc Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 ess and impact assessments. 7-1 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 7: Ecology

Table 7.1 Consultation Responses assessed for their importance under the Hedgerows Regulations 1997. Habitats were mapped Consultee Response Comment using the standard JNCC Phase 1 method. Environment Agency No specific ecological issues were TheseHydrogeology issues are addressed in raised. General comments on flood Chapter 9: Hydrology and Badgers: The survey area and the surrounding land within 50m of the site boundary (where risk, drainage strategy and the . accessible) were searched for evidence of use by badgers. The site was investigated for field proximity of a former landfill site. signs including trails, footprints, dung pits/latrines, holes and excavations, and hairs caught on Natural England General feedback provided on The feedback was considered wire fences and posts. survey methods and their extent, and where applicable the identification and separation of information used as appropriate. mitigation and enhancement Otters: Watercourses throughout the site and along its boundaries were surveyed for signs of opportunities and use of baseline otters. In addition to otters themselves, a search was also made for signs of otter activity, data and monitoring. including places used for resting or as holts, spraints, tracks and prints. Northamptonshire Bat Group Noted that the bat surveys were The ground-based surveys were based on BCT guidelines. These considered fit for purpose and Water voles: Watercourses throughout the site and along its boundaries were surveyed for were ground based surveys and not would be expected to detect signs of water voles. The presence of water vole would be detected by the presence of field considered appropriate for wind bats flying over the site to signs of water voles such as the diagnostic ‘plop’ sound as a water vole enters the water, turbines. Suggested monitoring bats indicate the presence of bat sightings, channels through floating vegetation, burrow holes, runs, ‘lawns’ of flattened/grazed at altitude of turbine blades and activity over the site. Survey vegetation, feeding stations of nibbled plant stems, faecal deposits including concentrated follow Eurobat guidance notes methodology was in line with (2006). guidance issued by Natural latrines, prints and above ground nests in bankside vegetation. England. The Wildlife Trust Advice given on the appropriate The feedback was considered Bats: Surveys undertaken in order to determine the use made of the site by foraging and assessment methods, useful policy and where applicable roosting bats comprised the following: documents, sources of information, information used as appropriate. sites that should be considered as An assessment of mature trees and built structures on the site and within approximately part of the assessment and 500m of the site for their potential to support roosting bats. encouragement to include A day-light examination (walkover) of the site in order to identify areas with the greatest conservation management and likelihood of giving rise to bat records, such as sheltered places in the lee of hedges, around enhancements. buildings, over ponds, etc. These were used as designated recording points in the Northamptonshire Mammal Harvest mice occur on site. No Harvest mice are not currently a subsequent surveys. Recorder further records of protected European Protected Species and mammals (other than those held by are unlikely to be affected by the A transect survey that covered the entire area within the site boundary (see Figure 2 in the NBRC) were available for the proposed development. Technical Appendix 7). Two observers walked along the route recording and mapping bat windfarm site. activity using hand-held bat detectors. Three surveys were carried out at dusk and one at North Northamptonshire Provided location and date records The feedback was considered dawn, in September 2007, May and June 2008. At the designated recording points the Badger Group of 12 setts in the area and 81 road and where applicable observers remained standing for a set amount of time, recording and mapping bat activity traffic death reports. information used as appropriate. using hand-held bat detectors. Calls were recorded using a minidisk and later analysed. Northamptonshire Amphibian No response. The buildings at Lodge Farm were surveyed to determine whether they are currently being and Reptile Group used by roosting bats or have been used in the past. The trees identified during the initial walkover were, where possible, surveyed using an endoscope to determine whether they are currently being used by roosting bats or have been used in the past. 7.4 METHODOLOGY Reptiles: Habitats within the site boundary were assessed for their potential to support Ecological Survey Methods reptiles; potential natural refugia were examined; and a search was made for the animals Details of the survey methods employed to collect baseline data on the ecological interests themselves. present at and around the Brixworth Windfarm site are presented in detail in Technical Appendix 7. A summary is provided below. Where reference is made to “the site”, this refers to Great crested newts: Water bodies on site and within approximately 500m of the site which the area shown within the red-line boundary in Figure 1 of Technical Appendix 7. have the potential to act as breeding sites for great crested newts were searched for. Site habitats were assessed for their potential to support foraging, sheltering and/or hibernating Habitats and plants: All habitats identified on site were assessed for their intrinsic value and great crested newts. potential to support protected species. A search for notable plants was made. Hedgerows were

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 7-2 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 7: Ecology

Other species: During the course of the other surveys, evidence was sought for presence of Table 7.2 Approach to Valuing Ecological Receptors. other species of note. Value Level Examples

International An internationally designated site, candidate site, or an area meeting the Background records: A search for existing ecological records for the site and immediate criteria for an international designation. surroundings was undertaken. This was achieved through the use of reference material supplied Large areas of priority habitat listed under Annex I of the Habitats by the Northamptonshire Biodiversity Records Centre, Northamptonshire Mammal Group, North Directive, and smaller areas of such a habitat that are essential to Northamptonshire Badger Group and the Northamptonshire Bat Group. A search for site and maintain the viability of that ecological resource. surroundings records on the National Biodiversity Network website was carried out. A regularly occurring, nationally significant population of any internationally important species, listed under Annex II of the Habitats Assessment Methodology Directive. National A nationally designated site or area meeting criteria for national level The approach taken to carrying out the assessment of ecological impacts follows the guidance 6 designations. produced by the Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (IEEM, 2006) . These Significant extents of a priority habitat identified in the UKBAP, or smaller guidelines set out the process for assessment through the following stages: areas which are essential to maintain the viability of that ecological resource. Identification of Valued Ecological Receptors (VERs) (the ecological components of highest A regularly occurring, regionally significant population of any nationally value present at a site); important species listed as a UK BAP priority species and Species listed Determining the nature conservation value of the VERs present within the zone of influence under Schedule 5 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act or Annex II of the that may be affected by the development; Habitats Directive. Identifying the potential impacts based on the nature of the construction, operation and Regional Viable areas of key semi-natural habitat identified in the UKBAP. decommissioning of the proposed windfarm; A regularly occurring, locally significant population of any nationally important species listed as a UK BAP priority species and Species listed Determining the magnitude of the impacts including consideration of the sensitivity of the under Schedule 5 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act or Annex II of the receptor and the duration and reversibility of the impact; Habitats Directive. Determining the significance of the impacts based on the interaction between the impact Sites which exceed the local authority-level designations but fall short of magnitude/duration, and the nature conservation value and the likelihood of the impact SSSI selection guidelines, including areas of semi-natural woodland occurring; exceeding 0.25ha. Identifying mitigation measures required to address significant adverse impacts; Local Areas of semi-natural ancient woodland smaller than 0.25ha. Determining the residual impact significance after the effects of mitigation have been Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation or equivalent sites selected considered, including a description of any legal and policy consequences; and on local authority criteria. Identification of any monitoring requirements. Local Nature Reserves. Other species of conservation concern, including species listed under the Local BAP (LBAP). The assessment process involves identifying VERs. These ecological receptors and their values Areas of habitat or species considered to appreciably enrich the ecological are determined by the criteria defined in Table 7.2. It should be noted that these criteria are resource within the local context e.g. species-rich flushes or hedgerows. intended as a guide and are not definitive. Attributing a value to a receptor is generally Negligible All other species and habitats that are widespread and common and which straightforward in the case of designated sites, as the designations themselves are normally are not present in locally, regionally or nationally important numbers or indicative of a value level. For example a site designated as a Special Area of Conservation habitats which are considered to be of poor ecological value (e.g. arable under the Habitats Directive is implicitly of European (i.e. International) importance. farmland). Professional judgement is important when attributing a value level to a particular species or individual habitat. In these cases, reference has also been made to national guidelines for the Where a potential impact on a VER has been identified, the impact is judged in terms of selection of Sites of Special Scientific Interest7 in order to determine which level of significance magnitude and duration8. should be applied. Social and economic factors are also considered when valuing receptors. Magnitude refers to the size of an impact, and is determined on a quantitative basis where possible. This may relate to the area of habitat lost to the development footprint in the case of a habitat receptor, or predicted loss of individuals in the case of a population of a particular species of animal. Magnitude is assessed within five levels, as detailed in Table 7.3.

6 http://www.ieem.org.uk/ecia/index.html 8 Regini, K. 2000. Guidelines for ecological evaluation and impact assessment. Ecology and Environmental 7 Nature Conservancy Council 1989 (revised 1998). Guidelines for Selection of Biological SSSIs. Nature Conservancy Management. In Practice, 29 (September), pp. 1, 3-7. Winchester, Institute of Ecology and Environmental Council, Peterborough. Management.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 7-3 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 7: Ecology

Table 7.3 Criteria for Describing Spatial Magnitude (adapted from Percival 2007)9. Knowledge of how rapidly the population or performance of a species is likely to recover Spatial Description following loss or disturbance (e.g. by individuals being recruited from other populations magnitude elsewhere) is used in the assessment of duration of the impact, where such information is Very high Total loss or very major alteration to key elements/features of the available. baseline (pre-development) conditions such that the post development character/composition/attributes would be fundamentally changed and may be lost from the site altogether. Magnitude, duration and sensitivity are then considered alongside proposed mitigation, and the nature of the impact determined. The nature of any impact on a VER is assessed using the Guide: <20% of population/habitat remains criteria in Table 7.5, which is based upon IEEM guidelines. The concept of ‘integrity’ in this High Major loss or major alteration to key elements/features of the baseline context refers to sustained coherence of ecological structure and function of a VER, and conditions such that the post development includes consideration of both temporal and spatial factors. It is to be noted that there may be character/composition/attributes would be fundamentally changed. positive impacts on VERs as a result of development and mitigation, as well as negative.

Guide: 20-80% of population/habitat lost Table 7.5 Nature of Ecological Impacts. Medium Loss or alteration to one or more key elements/features of the baseline Nature of Impact Criteria conditions such that post development character/composition/attributes Major Negative The change is likely to cause an adverse impact on the integrity of would be partially changed. a VER. Negative The change adversely affects the VER, but there will probably be Guide: 5-20% of population/habitat lost no impact on its integrity. Low Minor shift away from baseline conditions. Change arising from the Neutral No impact. loss/alteration would be discernible but the underlying Positive The change is likely to benefit the VER. character/composition/attributes would be similar to pre-development Major Positive The change is likely to cause a positive impact on the integrity of circumstances/patterns. maintain the levels of populations of spec an ecological receptor.

Guide: 1-5% of population/habitat lost Negligible Very slight change from baseline condition. Change barely Having followed this process, the significance of an impact is then determined. The 2006 IEEM distinguishable, approximating to the “no change” situation. guidelines use only two categories: “significant” or “not significant”. In assessing whether an function, that enables it impact is significant, the concept of “ecological integrity” is a guiding principle. The term Guide: < 1% population/habitat lost integrity is used here in accordance with thiese definition in its/their adopted pre-development by the ODPM condition” Circular 06/2005 on Biodiversity and Geological Conservation whereby designated site integrity refers to In the case of SPAs / SSSIs spatial magnitude is assessed in respect of the area within the “…coherence of ecological structure and funct designated site boundary. For non-designated sites, spatial magnitude is assessed in respect of complex of habitats and/or levels of popula . For non- an appropriate scale depending on the value of the receptor e.g. County/Local. designated sites/species this can be amended to “the coherence of ecological structure and [in this case, the area being considered; e.g. the county or region] to Duration is defined as the time over which the impact is expected to affect the receptor (see . Integrity Table 7.4). therefore refers to the maintenance of the conservation status of a species population at a specific location or geographical scale. This concept can be applied to both designated sites (for tions ion…thatof species enablesfor which it it towas classified” Table 7.4 Criteria for Describing Duration. example a SSSI) and to defined populations (for example a local bat population). This concept Duration Definition underpins much of the European legislation in relation to nature conservation. Permanent Impacts continuing indefinitely beyond the span of one human sustain the habitat, generation (taken as approximately 25 years), except where there is likely to be substantial improvement after this period (e.g. the 7.5 BASELINE DESCRIPTION replacement of mature trees by young trees which need >25 years to reach maturity, or restoration of ground after removal of a This section describes the flora and fauna at the Brixworth Windfarm site. development. Such exceptions can be termed very long term Site Location Mitigation impacts) Temporary Long term (15 - 25 years or longer - see above) The survey area is located south of the village of Hanging Houghton, which lies approximately Medium term (5 – 15 years) 15km north of Northampton and 12km south-east of Kettering. The location of the site is given Short term (up to 5 years) in Technical Appendix 7. The entire site is made up of arable farmland, some of which was set- aside at the time the baseline surveys were undertaken. The Ordnance Survey grid reference of

the site’s centre is SP 746 727. The field boundaries are a mixture of seasonally-wet drains, wire 9 Percival, S.M. 2007. Predicting the effects of wind farms on birds in the UK: the development of an objective assessment method. In de Lucas, M., Janss, G. & Ferrer, M. (eds.) Birds and Wind Power: Risk Assessment and fences, planted trees, and hedges. . Quercus, Madrid.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 7-4 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 7: Ecology

Some of the hedges are species-rich and trees occur in some. A strip of woodland (planted in had seven woody species (crab apple, oak, hawthorn, elder, dog rose, blackthorn and field places) and a stream run along the majority of the southern boundary. Harborough Road is the maple), on average, in a 30m length and has less than 10% gaps, a ditch and a number of eastern boundary of the site. connections with other hedgerows, a pond and a woodland. The remaining habitats are not considered to be of particular nature conservation interest. No plant species of note were Statutory and non-statutory sites recorded. Consultation and a search of available digital datasets indicate that there is currently one Badgers statutory site of national importance located within 2km of the windfarm site. This is Pitsford Reservoir Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). In addition, twelve non-statutory sites (i.e. There are records of badgers spread through the OS 10km grid square SP 77 in which the site County Wildlife Site (CWS)) are identified as being located within 2km of the windfarm site. stands. Consultations with the North Northamptonshire Badger Group and the Northamptonshire Table 7.6 provides details of statutory designations of national importance and non-statutory BRC showed that badgers are prevalent in this area. Full records of 12 sett locations and designations within 2km of the application site. Full citations for statutory designated sites and locations of 81 road traffic deaths are provided in the Confidential Appendix. All 12 setts are not other designations and their location in comparison to the windfarm are shown in Technical currently active, as determined by the site surveys conducted in 2007. Appendix 7. During surveys in 2007, a number of badger setts, latrines, snuffle holes, bedding and tracks Table 7.6 Details of Statutory and Non-statutory Designated Sites. were identified (Figure 6 in the Confidential Appendix). Two active holes and several old holes Designation Name Distance from site boundary were located; further details are provided in the Confidential Appendix. (approximate, m) Statutory designated site Otters SSSI Pitsford Reservoir 1900 Non-statutory designated site No waterbodies on site have any potential to support this species and no signs were seen. No RIGS Brixworth Ironstone Cutting 1000 records of otters were found for the site or the immediately adjacent area. Pocket Park Brixworth 1300 County Wildlife Site Creaton Covert 2000 Water Voles RIGS Glebe Allotments, Brixworth 1000 No waterbodies within the site have any potential to support this species and no signs were County Wildlife Site Houghton Crossing - Lamport Station 1300 seen. No records of water voles were found for the site or the immediate adjacent area. County Wildlife Site Houghton Crossing Spinney 800 County Wildlife Site Lamport Lodge Spinney 1500 Bats County Wildlife Site Lamport Marsh 2000 County Wildlife Site Merry Tom Crossing - Brixworth Car 2300 The dusk and dawn surveys suggest that small numbers of common and soprano pipistrelle bats Park and noctule bats use the application area. Low numbers of pipistrelle bats were seen feeding County Wildlife Site Station Rd Bridge - Houghton 500 and commuting along the boundary hedges and trees. No pipistrelle bats were seen crossing Crossing the open area of the site. An unidentified Myotis species was heard south of the site during the County Wildlife Site Scaldwell Spinney 1500 initial transect survey. No other records of Myotis bat were made during the remaining transect County Wildlife Site The Hen Roost 1800 surveys. The low number of noctule bats seen crossing the site appeared to emerge from a tree

within Clint Hill Fox Covert which lies north-west of the site. These noctule bats were seen commuting directly over the site in a southeasterly direction, probably towards Pitsford Background records Reservoir to feed. Background records were requested from various sources and data obtained from Northamptonshire Biodiversity Records Centre, the Northamptonshire Bat Group, the North A number of mature trees with some potential to support roosting bats were identified during Northamptonshire Badger Group, the Northamptonshire Mammal Group and National the initial survey and one of these was found to be used by a single bat (species unknown as Biodiversity Network website. Technical Appendix 7 provides details of the data provided by the bat did not echolocate as it emerged) during the transect surveys. A small on-site building these sources. has some potential to support low numbers of roosting bats. Building 1 at Lodge Farm has an active brown long-eared bat maternity roost and Building 5 has been used in the past by Habitats and plants probably a single pipistrelle bat. Building 4 has also been used by brown long-eared bats, The Phase 1 habitat map is given as Figure 7 and target notes are given in Annex 1 of Technical probably as a maternity roost. It is likely that brown long-eared bats also hibernate within this Appendix 7. building. Although there is a brown long-eared maternity roost close to the site, no brown long- eared bats were noted during the transect surveys. It appears that the bats follow the tall The site is an area of arable farmland with boundary hedges comprising of trees, seasonally wet hedges along the eastern side of Harborough Road to areas of woodland to the north and drains, fences and strips of planted woodland. One species-rich hedgerow was found which is south. ‘Important for Wildlife and Landscape’ as defined by the Hedgerow Regulations. The hedgerow

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 7-5 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 7: Ecology

The use of the area by bats appears to be low and representative of areas of similar farmland in Table 7.7 Valued Ecological Receptors identified during surveys and historical literature the vicinity. The site was not used by large numbers of bats or by any rare species of bats. searches. VER Value Reasons - Comments There are no historical records of bats available for the site or immediately adjacent area. The Pitsford National Designation as a SSSI means the site is of national importance. nearest records are from buildings in Cottesbrooke, Creaton, Hanging Houghton, Brixworth and Reservoir The shortest distance between the two boundaries is Scaldwell. approximately 1.9km. 12 non-statutory Local Various non-statutory designated sites means the sites are of Reptiles designated sites local importance. None of these 12 sites is within 500m of the No reptiles were seen, although the grassy ditch banks, areas of woodland and rough grassland windfarm site adjacent to the site have some potential to support small numbers of common lizard, slow- Important Local The presence of important hedgerows in the area. It is worm, and grass snake. No records of reptiles were found for the site or the immediately Hedgerow recognised that the habitat also has a local Northamptonshire HAP and a national UK HAP. adjacent area. Badgers Local Only present in low numbers and abundant in Northamptonshire. Requires consideration due to its legal Great Crested Newt status. Badgers are protected under the Protection of Badgers The site has no pond or other waterbody which could be used by newts for breeding. Three Act 1992. As such they are considered to be of local value. ponds are shown on the OS map to lie within approximately 500m of the site. Of these, the one Bats Regional Surveys indicate their presence in the site. Requires north of field boundary A1 (see Target Note 4 in Technical Appendix 7) is no longer present; the consideration due to their legal status. As a group certain species e.g. Noctule bats are considered to be declining in the second lies within the hedgerow east of Clint Hill Covert and is isolated, heavily shaded and has UK and they are considered to be vulnerable to collision. turbid water; and the third is within a quarry approximately 500m east of the site. The rough Brown Hare Local UK BAP Priority species, low numbers present on site though grassland of the site’s ditch banks and hedge bottoms provides suitable terrestrial sheltering widespread in Northamptonshire. and foraging habitat for great crested newts. However, it is considered very unlikely that great crested newts would use the pond east of Clint Hill Covert or that any newts present in the quarry pond would cross at least 500m of intensively managed arable field to access the site. 7.6 INFORMATION GAPS No records of great crested newts were found for the site or the immediately adjacent area. The The ecological surveys and desk based literature searches are believed to have provided a full closest record of great crested newts is from the village of Lamport which lies approximately data set from which an informed ecological impact assessment can be carried out. 1.5km north of the site, but this record is from the 1950s. 7.7 ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL IMPACTS Other species This section provides an assessment of the potential impacts of the development with specific Low numbers of brown hares were seen throughout the site. reference to how they may affect VERs. Potential impacts are assessed in terms of spatial magnitude (see Table 7.3), duration (see Table 7.4), nature (see Table 7.5) and significance Valued Ecological Receptors (see section Assessment Methodology). For each VER, impacts are assessed for the Using the baseline information detailed above, Table 7.7 details the identified VERs in the construction, operation and decommissioning phases of the development. context of the proposed Brixworth Windfarm at Lodge Farm. Reasoning for inclusion as a VER is also given, and a value assigned based upon the criteria detailed in Table 7.2. These are the There are five ways in which the VERs may be affected during the construction, operation and VERs on which an assessment of impacts is undertaken in this chapter. Features identified as decommissioning phases of the development: being absent from Lodge Farm, such as Water Vole, Otter, Reptiles and Great Crested Newt, are not included in further detail in the assessment. Direct habitat loss – this is the most obvious ecological impact, where areas occupied by a particular VER is reduced in order to accommodate development infrastructure. Turbine bases, crane pads, access tracks, control buildings and other elements of the development all have a footprint that results in direct habitat loss at those locations. These losses are permanent in the context of this assessment. Displacement – species may be displaced from the site and therefore not able to utilise the area as part of their normal behaviour. Direct mortality – as a result of the VERs being killed during the construction, operation and decommissioning of the windfarm. Disturbance – the impacts of disturbance are variable in their extent, depending on the nature of the disturbance and sensitivity of the VER. Some disturbance types (e.g. creation of temporary hard standing areas at the contractor’s compound) result in long-term

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 7-6 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 7: Ecology

disturbance with extended recovery periods. In other cases (for example, installation of Important hedgerow cables at the sides of access tracks) disturbance is short-term, and some habitat types are The species-rich hedge identified as being important in terms of the Hedgerow Regulations is able to recover quickly. located on the north-east boundary of the site. The hedge will be near Turbine 1 and 3, plus an Indirect impacts – these primarily relate to changes in hydrology of the area in the context access road and the site compound. It is approximately 400m long and contains crab apple, of a windfarm development. For example, if an access track bisects a water course, this oak, hawthorn, elder, dog rose, blackthorn and field maple; plus small ash and field maple trees could result in one half drying out. Pollution of watercourses from spillage of hydrocarbons 2-3m tall. In addition there is a dry ditch on the southern side of the hedge and a grassy strip or siltation may have impacts on aquatic flora and fauna. with soft rush to the south of the hedge/ditch between the ditch and the arable field.

Pitsford Reservoir The hedgerow will remain intact and there will be no direct loss of the hedgerow. Pitsford Reservoir is located approximately 1.9km south-east of the development. This is considered to be sufficiently distant for the development to not have any construction, During construction and decommissioning standard engineering practices will be implemented operational and decommissioning impacts on features for which Pitsford Reservoir is designated that will minimise dust generation. In addition, standard site storage procedures will be followed a SSSI (note this assessment does not include birds – see Chapter 8: Ornithology). that are required to prevent pollution to nearby watercourses. Following implementation of these measures, construction and decommissioning activities are not expected to affect the No direct habitat loss at Pitsford Reservoir is considered likely as a result of the construction, hedgerow in any way. operation and decommissioning of the windfarm. During operation the wind turbines are located approximately 100m from the hedgerow and Standard engineering practices will be operated that will minimise noise and dust generation. traffic will be confined to the access road. Therefore operational activities are not expected to Disturbance in the form of noise and visual disturbance during construction, operation and affect the hedgerow in any way. decommissioning, as well as potential dust generation during construction and decommissioning are therefore not expected to affect Pitsford Reservoir. The integrity of the important hedgerow will remain unaffected and Brixworth Windfarm is considered to have no significant negative impact on this receptor. Hydrological issues are addressed in Chapter 9: Hydrology and Hydrogeology. Compliance with statutory legislation will ensure that flooding or changes in water drainage to Pitsford reservoir Badgers are not expected. In addition standard site storage procedures will be followed that are required The presence of badger setts, latrines, and snuffle holes has been confirmed by surveys of the to prevent pollution to nearby watercourses. site. No active setts identified during the surveys are within the site boundary nor within 30m of a proposed turbine or the access track location. A disused sett is on the northern boundary of Therefore the integrity of the ecological features, for which Pitsford Reservoir is a nationally the site. The distance between this old sett and the access track is approximately 100m. Various important, will remain unaffected and Brixworth Windfarm is considered to have no significant tracks and other signs are visible that suggest the site is used by foraging and commuting negative impact on this receptor. badgers.

Local designated sites A small amount of habitat will be lost as a result of the scheme proposals, caused by the Of the twelve local designated sites, Station Road Bridge – Houghton Crossing (County Wildlife installation of an access track, construction compound and the hard-standings around the base Site) is the nearest, located approximately 500m to the south-west of the development. This is of the turbines. However, the land-take (i.e. habitat loss) is a very small proportion of the site, considered to be sufficiently distant to not have any construction, operational and plus it is of low foraging value for Badgers, as it is intensively farmed arable land. The main decommissioning impacts on features for which the local County Wildlife Site is designated. foraging areas along the field boundaries and margins will remain unaffected by the development, therefore potential displacement of animals from foraging areas is not expected to The scheme will not result in any direct habitat loss of these twelve sites. occur.

Standard engineering practices will be operated that will minimise noise and dust generation. In Badgers receive legal protection through the Protection of Badgers Act 1992. Construction works addition standard site storage procedures will be followed that are required to prevent pollution will occur in the vicinity of the current population. Therefore, construction methods used will to nearby watercourses. Therefore disturbance in the form of noise and visual disturbance ensure compliance with the legislation that protects badgers. For instance, any trenches left during construction, operation and decommissioning, as well as potential dust generation are open overnight will include a means of escape for any animal that could fall in. Construction not expected to affect these receptors. activities will mainly occur during daylight hours, reducing the likelihood of road kill. Therefore disturbance and direct mortality as a result of construction, operation and decommissioning Therefore, Brixworth Windfarm is considered to have no significant negative impact on the activities are not expected to occur. integrity of any of the twelve locally important sites identified above.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 7-7 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 7: Ecology

The measures described above will ensure the works are undertaken in compliance with the The low number of noctule bats seen crossing the site appeared to emerge from a tree within Protection of Badgers Act 1992 and will not have an adverse impact on the populations Clint Hill Fox Covert which lies north-west of the site. These noctule bats were seen commuting recorded. directly over the site in a south-easterly direction, probably towards Pitsford Reservoir to feed. A maximum of two noctule bats were seen crossing the western part of the site during the The integrity of the local Badger population is likely to remain unaffected by the construction, transect surveys. These bats were flying high over the site, commuting to foraging areas away operation and decommissioning of Brixworth Windfarm. The development is considered to have from the site. Therefore, there is a potential negative impact on this species caused by collision no significant negative impact on the local Badger population. mortality as individuals commute from their roost site to foraging areas. Alternatively, some displacement may occur, with individuals changing their commuting route between their roost sites and feeding areas, or the roost may relocate. However, as there are only six turbines to be Bats installed at the site, which will be widely spaced, it is unlikely that an impassable barrier will be The use by bats of the development site appears to be low and is likely to be representative of created to commuting noctule bats. areas of similar farmland habitat in the vicinity. No use of the site by high numbers of bats or by rare species of bats was observed. Noctule bats are recognised as a species more at risk of collision with turbine blades as they regularly fly at heights that intersect with turbine blades and they are not restricted to closely 10 A small amount of habitat will be lost as a result of the development, caused by the installation following boundary features. Natural England guidance regarding the risk of onshore turbines of an access road and the hard-standing around the base of the turbines. However, this area is to populations of noctule bats states that the risk is considered to be high. small and of very low quality for foraging bats. In addition the bats recorded at the site were considered to be commuting to the other areas beyond the site boundary to feed. Therefore the For the reasons provided above, the construction and decommissioning phases of the small amount of habitat loss is not significant. development are considered to have no significant negative impact on the integrity any of the local bat populations. In addition the operational phase of the development is considered to A small on-site building has some potential to support low numbers of roosting bats. Building 1 have no significant negative impact on the local common and soprano pipistrelle and brown at Lodge Farm has an active brown long-eared bat maternity roost and Building 5 has been long-eared bat populations. used in the past by probably a single pipistrelle bat. Building 4 has also been used by brown long-eared bats, probably as a maternity roost. It is likely that brown long-eared bats also The operational phase of the development has the potential to have a low negative impact on hibernate within this building. the noctule bat population. However, it is considered that the ecological integrity of the local noctule bat population will remain intact due to the small size of the roost and low numbers of Although there is a brown long-eared bat maternity roost close to the site, no brown long-eared noctule registrations. Therefore, the impact is considered to be not significant. bats were noted during the transect surveys. It appears that these bats follow the tall hedges Brown Hare along the eastern side of Harborough Road to areas of woodland to the north and south and are therefore unlikely to be affected by the construction, operation and decommissioning of the Low numbers of brown hares were seen throughout the site during the surveys for other windfarm. Brown long-eared bats are considered to be at low risk of impacts from wind species. However, the site is unlikely to be of importance for brown hares, as it is similar to the turbines10. surrounding intensively farmed arable land.

No trees or buildings with potential bat roosts are expected to be lost as a result of the A small amount of habitat will be lost as a result of the development, caused by the installation development, therefore loss of roost sites is highly unlikely. of access tracks and the hard-standing around the base of the turbines. However, this area is small in comparison to the whole area within the site, plus it is of low value for brown hare as it It is considered that the low number of common and soprano pipistrelle bats recorded within is intensively farmed arable land. The main foraging areas along the field boundaries and the site would be unlikely to come into contact with the blades during their normal movements margins will remain unaffected by the development, therefore potential displacement of animals as they closely follow the field boundary features. These species rarely fly at heights that from foraging areas is not expected to occur. intersect with turbine blades. Natural England guidance10 regarding the impacts of onshore turbines on bats states that although these two species are considered to have a medium Construction methods used will ensure compliance with the legislation that protects badgers collision risk, the threat to their populations is considered to be low. None of the commuting (see above). The methods used to protect badgers will also reduce the likelihood of impacts on routes along the hedgerows or the potential bat roosts lie within 50m of the turbines. The brown hares. For instance, detailed method statements will identify the need for any trenches number of pipistrelles recorded was low at this site, because the habitat occupied by the left open overnight to include a means of escape for any animal that could fall in. In addition turbines is largely unsuitable. Collision mortality is therefore unlikely to cause a significant construction activities will mainly occur during daylight hours, reducing the likelihood of road negative effect on the two pipistrelle species’ populations. kill. Consequently, direct mortality as a result of construction, operation and decommissioning activities is not expected to occur.

10 Natural England (2008) Bats and onshore wind turbines: Interim Guidance.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 7-8 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 7: Ecology

Displacement and disturbance during construction and decommissioning is expected to be of Incorporation of cereal field conservation margins. This is a UK priority habitat for which an low magnitude and of a short-term temporary nature. During this period other areas within the action plan has been produced. This measure would include the installation of a 5-10m site will be available for use by brown hares. buffer strip conservation field margin focused along the four sides of the site boundary. Incorporation of species rich hedgerows. This is a UK priority habitat for which an action Therefore the integrity of the local brown hare population is expected to be unaffected by the plan has been produced. This measure would include the enhancement of existing hedges, construction, operation and decommissioning of the development. It is considered to have no achievable through filling gaps in poor quality hedgerows and adding new rows to thicken significant negative impact on the local brown hare population. existing hedges where practicable. Management of the hedges would be planned to create a variety of heights and thickness and cut on a rotational basis to ensure maximum 7.8 MITIGATION biodiversity benefit. This measure would be focused along the northern and southern edge This section presents specific measures adopted through the different phases of the of the site heading south east towards Pitsford Reservoir. development. An ecological clerk of works would be appointed to oversee mitigation measures, and ensure best practice during the construction and decommissioning phases. Through the delivery of the two enhancement measures described above it is recognised that a number of other taxa would benefit, such as brown hare, bats and farmland bird species, which Construction and Decommissioning are also UK priority species for which action plans have been produced. The implementation of these measures would deliver species and habitat enhancement at the development site in Embedded mitigation is integral to the design of the development. The site layout has taken addition to creating better linkage between habitats and ensure better conservation habitat constraints into account from the earliest iterations through avoidance of any sensitive management of the biodiversity on site. habitats. In particular, no hedgerows or woodland will be lost or damaged as a result of this development. Mitigation Measures 7.10 SUMMARY OF RESIDUAL IMPACTS As part of the standard engineering practices, a series of detailed ecological method statements would be produced for use by site construction staff to ensure legal compliance and maintain Table 7.8 Summary of Potential Impacts. VER Value Magnitude Duration Nature Significance Mitigation Residual ecological best practice to minimise potential impacts on receptors, including prevention of Impact pollution of local watercourses. The method statements would be agreed in advance with the Pitsford National local authority and Natural England. Reservoir Habitat Loss No Change Permanent Neutral Not significant None None In addition, appropriate ecological surveys would be conducted within six months prior to Displacement No Change Permanent Neutral Not significant None None construction. These would provide up to date information on the species present at the site. Direct No Change Permanent Neutral Not significant None None From this information potential new issues could be identified and revisions to the detailed Mortality method statements made as necessary to ensure legal compliance with wildlife legislation and Disturbance No Change Permanent Neutral Not significant None None maintain ecological best practice. This applies particularly to badgers, which are known to be Indirect No Change Permanent Neutral Not significant None None present at the site. impacts Local Local Operational Mitigation Measures designated sites Appropriately designed bat boxes will be installed in suitable locations for the benefit of noctule Habitat Loss No Change Permanent Neutral Not significant None None bats in the existing woodland strips along the southern boundary of the site. This will provide an Displacement No Change Permanent Neutral Not significant None None opportunity for noctule bats to establish an alternative roost that will be closer to Pitsford Direct No Change Permanent Neutral Not significant None None Reservoir and avoid the need to cross the windfarm site. Details of the design and locations of Mortality bat boxes would form part of a habitat management and monitoring plan drawn up in Disturbance No Change Permanent Neutral Not significant None None consultation with Natural England. Indirect No Change Permanent Neutral Not significant None None impacts 7.9 ENHANCEMENT OPPORTUNITITES Hedgerow Local A number of opportunities are available to provide some ecological enhancement to an Habitat Loss No Change Permanent Neutral Not significant None None Displacement No Change Permanent Neutral Not significant None None otherwise intensively managed arable farm. These do not form part of the mitigation committed Direct No Change Permanent Neutral Not significant None None by the applicant as part of the development, but have been discussed with the landowner as a Mortality result of producing the development proposals and are considered likely to be implemented. Disturbance No Change Permanent Neutral Not significant None None These measures have not been considered as part of the residual impact assessment Indirect No Change Permanent Neutral Not significant None None summarised below. The opportunities include: impacts Badger Local

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 7-9 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 7: Ecology

VER Value Magnitude Duration Nature Significance Mitigation Residual VER Value Magnitude Duration Nature Significance Mitigation Residual Impact Impact Habitat Loss Negligible Permanent Neutral Not significant None Not Disturbance No Change Permanent Neutral Not significant Production None significant of detailed Displacement No Change Permanent Neutral Not significant None None method Direct Negligible Temporary Neutral Not significant Production Not statements Mortality of detailed significant to ensure method legal statements compliance to ensure Indirect No Change Permanent Neutral Not significant None None legal impacts compliance Disturbance No Change Permanent Neutral Not significant Production None of detailed method 7.11 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS AND EFFECTS statements to ensure legal Three other windfarms or windfarm proposals are located near to Brixworth. These comprise: compliance Indirect No Change Permanent Neutral Not significant None None Burton Wold: an existing operational windfarm located approximately 10km to the east of impacts the Brixworth Windfarm site; Bats Regional Burton Wold Extension: proposals for an extension to the Burton Wold windfarm that has Habitat Loss No Change Permanent Neutral Not significant None None been consented, located approximately 10km to the east of the Brixworth Windfarm site; Displacement Low Permanent Negative Not significant Installation Not and of bat significant Tesco Wind Turbines: two wind turbine generators are located at Tesco Distribution Centre, boxes at near Crick located approximately 15km to the west of the Brixworth Windfarm site. the south of the site. No pathway for impact has been identified whereby a cumulative impact may affect the Direct Low Permanent Negative Not significant Installation Not statutorily and non-statutorily designated sites or the local hedgerow or the bat, badger and Mortality of bat significant boxes at brown hare populations identified in this assessment. The distance between the sites is the south of considered to be sufficient to avoid causing a barrier effect to aerial movement of bats. the site. Therefore it is considered that the integrity of these features will remain unaffected by the Disturbance No Change Permanent Neutral Not significant None None Brixworth windfarm and there will be no negative cumulative impacts. Indirect No Change Permanent Neutral Not significant None None impacts Brown Hare Local 7.12 STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE Overall, this site is of low conservation value, comprising mainly intensively farmed arable fields. Habitat Loss Negligible Permanent Neutral Not significant None Not The presence of badgers, bats and brown hares is worthy of note, although not unusual in this significant type of landscape. In the absence of mitigation, the magnitude of potential impacts of the Displacement No Change Permanent Neutral Not significant None None development on the three faunal receptors is considered to be low and not significant in terms Direct Negligible Temporary Neutral Not significant Production Not Mortality of detailed significant of the integrity of their populations. method statements Some mitigation is recommended to reduce potential impacts further and ensure legal to ensure compliance and maintain ecological best practise. It is also recognised that there is an legal opportunity for potential biodiversity enhancement by the inclusion of a small number of compliance targeted actions. In summary, it is considered that the impact of the scheme on VERs is assessed as not significant.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 7-10 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 8: Ornithology

Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006. 8. ORNITHOLOGY 8.2.2 National Policy Guidance The Ministerial Interim Planning Policy Statement 01/2005 – Planning for Renewable Energy; 8.2.3 Regional, Local and Structure Plan Policies 8.1 INTRODUCTION Planning Policy Statement 9: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation; Planning for Biodiversity and Geological Conservation – A good practice guide; and Circular 06/05: Biodiversity and Geographical Conservation - Statutory Obligations and Their This chapter of the Environmental Statement (ES) describes the findings of the ornithological Impact within the Planning System. assessment of the proposed Brixworth Windfarm (“the development”). Potential effects on birds are considered. Potential effects on non-avian ecology, including habitats and protected species are considered in Chapter 7: Ecology of this ES and are not assessed in this chapter. Daventry Local Plan (Saved Policies) Policy EN25; and Arcus Renewable Energy Consulting Ltd (“Arcus’’) was commissioned to carry out baseline field Daventry Local Plan (Saved Policies) Policy EN26. surveys and an ecological impact assessment (EcIA) of potential effects from the development. 8.2.4 Other Guidance Field surveys for the EcIA were commenced in March 2007 and were completed in March 2008. UK and Northamptonshire Biodiversity Action Plans (BAP) 2007; 1 This chapter includes the following sections: Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the United Kingdom 2006 ; and Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) guidance on survey methods for use in assessing the 2 Legislation and Guidance – a summary of legislation and guidance documents relevant to the impacts of onshore windfarms on bird communities . assessment; Consultation – a summary of consultations undertaken and responses received; Methodology – a description of the methods used in the baseline surveys and assessment of 8.3 CONSULTATION the significance of effects; In early 2008, a consultation scoping report detailing methodologies and preliminary baseline Baseline Description – a description of the ornithological interests at the site based on the findings was issued to the Environment Agency (EA), Natural England (NE), the Royal Society results of desk study, consultations and surveys; for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) and the Wildlife Trust for Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire, Information Gaps – a summary of uncertainties encountered in the assessment; Northamptonshire and Peterborough (WT). A data search for historical bird records within 2km Assessment of Potential Effects – a consideration of the ways in which the proposed of the site was also undertaken with the Northamptonshire Biological Records Centre (NBRC) development may affect birds at the site; and the Hawk and Owl Trust. A list of these consultees and a summary of their responses are Mitigation – a description of appropriate mitigation recommended to off-set identified given in Table 8.1. potential effects; Enhancement Opportunities – identification of land management activities that could enhance the site for biodiversity and contribute to local and UK biodiversity action plan targets; Residual Effects – an assessment of the significance of the effects of the proposed development after mitigation has been implemented; and Statement of Significance – a summary of the findings of the assessment with reference to the obligation to identify any significant effects set out in regulations.

8.2 LEGISLATION AND GUIDANCE The ecological baseline surveys and assessment have been carried out with reference to the legislation and guidance documents detailed in the following sections.

8.2.1 National Legislation Council Directive 79/409/EEC on the Conservation of Wild Birds (“the Birds Directive”); The Conservation (Natural Habitats &c) Regulations 1994 (“the Habitats Regulations”), as amended; The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, as amended; 1 IEEM. 2006. Guidelines for Ecological Impact . IEEM, Winchester. Countryside and Rights of Way Act (CRoW) 2000; and 2 SNH. 2005. Survey methods for use in assessing the imp . SNH, Battleby.

Assessment in the United Kingdom

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 acts of onshore windfarms on bird communities 8-1 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 8: Ornithology

Table 8.1 Consultation Responses of bird collision with the turbine rotors. All field surveys were undertaken by Steve Holloway Consultee Response Comment (Arcus), an experienced ornithological surveyor. Environment Agency No specific ornithological issues were raised. TheseHydrogeology issues are addressed in General comments on flood risk, drainage Chapter 9: Hydrology and Breeding Bird Survey strategy and the proximity of a former . A general breeding bird survey was carried out in all areas within 500m of the proposed turbine landfill site. locations wherever access was possible, following the methods set out by the British Trust for Natural England NE was pleased to note that many of the The feedback was considered 3 key issues were covered in the Scoping and where applicable the Ornithology for the Common Birds Census (CBC) . The survey area is shown in Figure 8.1. Report. Advised that potential impacts on information used as appropriate. Following SNH guidelines for this assessment, the survey was undertaken during three survey th th th statutory and non-statutory sites should be The baseline surveys used are sessions in 2007, made on 24 April, 15 May and 5 June. Each survey was commenced at covered. Advised bird surveys are designed compliant with SNH guidelines dawn and finished by noon. The breeding bird survey records were supplemented by records of with reference to SNH guidelines2. The and with further advice provided birds also displaying breeding behaviour during breeding raptor walkover surveys (see below) assessment should address matters such as in the NE scoping response. on 15th and 31st May and 19th June. disturbance leading to displacement/exclusion, collision During each survey, a route was walked around the survey area that brought the observer into risk/mortality and loss/degradation of close contact with all hedgerows and field boundaries. All species seen or heard were recorded habitat. General feedback provided on accurately onto large-scale maps, using codes defined in the published CBC methodology. This survey methods and their extent, identification and separation of mitigation allowed distinction between different species and between different behaviours, particularly and enhancement opportunities and use of between the behaviour of birds that was indicative of breeding and of birds that were present baseline data and monitoring. but not breeding. The purpose of the survey was to map the territories of breeding birds in Royal Society for the Confirmed the location of Pitsford Reservoir The feedback was considered order to allow an assessment of potential displacement impacts. Protection of Birds SSSI within 2km of the site. Advised that and where applicable the RSPB hold no species data for the area, but information used as appropriate. For the analysis of breeding bird locations, a territory was assumed to be held where there was some Schedule 1 and red-listed breeding a record of a bird displaying some evidence of breeding behaviour. Between the different survey birds may occur. Identified no significant visits, birds were assumed to be at the same territory location if separated by a distance of less ornithological interest of greater than local than 100m for passerine species and less than 200m for waders. The territory location in these importance. Confirmed that the survey cases was plotted at the average location between the records from different visits. methods employed appear satisfactory. The Wildlife Trust Advice given on the appropriate assessment The feedback was considered Breeding Raptor Survey methods, useful policy documents, sources and where applicable of information, sites that should be information used as appropriate. In addition to the general breeding bird survey, walkovers and short watches of suitable areas considered as part of the assessment and of habitat within 2km of the proposed turbine locations were carried out from public rights of encouragement to include conservation way on five occasions between March and June to establish whether any raptors of conservation management and enhancements. importance breed within or close to the site. Surveys were carried out in 2007 on the 20th Northamptonshire Provided historical records of birds in the The information was used to March, 24th April, 15th May, 31st May, and 19th June. The survey area is shown in Figure 8.1. Biological Records area. inform the baseline description Target species were Annex 1 (EU Birds Directive) and Schedule 1 (Wildlife and Countryside Act) Centre of the site. listed species, although observations of buzzard, sparrowhawk and kestrel were also noted. Hawk and Owl Trust No response to data request. With the exception of areas to the north and west of the development site, there is little habitat

within 2km that was suitable for breeding raptors of conservation importance. The surveys

assessing the impacts of onsh focused upon conducting watches of the suitable areas surrounding the site to detect flight 8.4 METHODOLOGY activity (including displays) in the wider area. Raptors are conspicuous when displaying and it is considered that sufficient survey coverage of the wider area was attained without the need to 8.4.1 Baseline Survey Methods leave any public rights of way. ore wind farms on bird communities Details of the survey methods employed to collect baseline data on the ornithological interests Breeding Barn Owl Survey present at and around the development site are presented below. Where reference is made to Potential barn owl nest-sites within 1km of the proposed turbine locations were identified during “the site”, this refers to the core survey area shown within the red-line boundary in Figure 8.1. th The surveys were carried out in compliance with SNH’s guidance Survey methods for use in walkover surveys in May. A further visit was made on 19 June 2007 to watch at potential nest- (SNH 2005)2.

Baseline surveys were carried out between March 2007 and March 2008 to quantify the use of 3 The survey usually requires ten survey visits between mid-March and late June to plot accurately the territories of the site by breeding and non-breeding birds, and to allow an assessment of the theoretical risk breeding birds in a small area.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 8-2 Description

Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 8: Ornithology

sites identified during earlier surveys and where possible, to closely inspect potential nest sites. at 15 second intervals thereafter into one of three height bands: [1] <25m, [2] 25-125m and The survey area is shown in Figure 8.1. [3] >125m. The turbine dimensions for assessment purposes is described in Chapter 3: Project of this ES has a lowest rotor sweep spanning from 35m above ground to 125m Winter Walkover Survey above ground. There is therefore a small discrepancy between the height recording bands and Walkovers of the site and 500m buffer area were carried out on four occasions during the the span of the rotors. However, the height recording bands used are precautionary, covering winter months to record wintering birds, in order to allow assessment of potential displacement more than the actual span of the rotors, therefore all birds potentially flying at risk height impacts on birds that may use the site during the non-breeding season. Surveys were carried between 35m and 125m would have been recorded in height band [2]. Birds that would not be out on 20th March 2007, 30th October 2007, 4th December 2007 and 19th February 2008 and at risk flying between 25-35m would also be included in height band [2] and considered at risk encompassed various times of day between sunrise and sunset. in the analyses.

The same area as the breeding bird survey (accessible areas within 500m of the turbine All secondary species were recorded using 5-minute summaries. Each watch was sub-divided locations) was walked during the survey visits, with all species seen or heard recorded into 5-minute periods. At the end of each 5-minute period, the number and activity of all accurately onto large-scale maps, using the same annotation as for the British Trust for secondary species observed was recorded. If a target species was being tracked during a 5- Ornithology (BTO) “Common Birds Census”4. The survey area is shown in Figure 8.1. minute period, then the activity summary for that period was abandoned and a new one started once observations of the target species had ended. Observation of target species took priority Flight Activity Survey over the recording of secondary species. The number of birds recorded in a 5-minute period Vantage point (VP) watches have been undertaken using the standard methodology published was the minimum number of individuals that could account for the activity observed. in SNH guidelines2, providing data for the assessment of the flight activity and collision risk of target species. Observations were carried out from a single vantage point located to the east of 8.4.2 Assessment Methodology the site, which provided excellent visual coverage of the proposed development site, as well as Ecological Impact Assessment (EcIA) is based on a number of factors, primarily consideration of the surrounding land. The VP was located at SP 75187 72487, viewing a 180° arc centred the value of a site or feature being assessed, and the anticipated magnitude of the potential approximately west-north west over the site (Figure 8.1). impact. The Institute of Ecological and Environmental Management (IEEM) has produced guidelines to assist with ecological evaluation and impact assessment (IEEM, 2006)5 which have Surveys were carried out at various times of day, ensuring that all times of day between dawn been used as a guide in this assessment. These guidelines have no legal standing and are not a and dusk were sampled. Surveys were undertaken in a variety of weather conditions. The substitute for professional judgement and interpretation, particularly where the ecological value weather conditions during each watch were recorded each hour. A total of 76 hours of flight of a site and/or impact magnitudes are not clear, or are borderline. However, they are well activity observations have been carried out from the VP between March 2007 and March 2008 established and recognised guidelines used extensively throughout the industry. (Table 8.2). Full details of the timing and weather conditions during each watch are provided in Technical Appendix 8. The assessment of the potential impacts of the development on bird interests is a staged process that involves: Table 8.2 Summary of VP Observation Effort Determining the nature conservation value of the bird interests present within the study area 2007 2008 that may be affected by the development. Identifying potential impacts based on the nature of the construction, operation and

Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar decommissioning of the development. 2:00 7:00 4:00 11:00 4:00 6:00 6:00 6:00 6:00 6:00 6:00 6:00 6:00 Determining the magnitude of the potential impacts i.e. the size of the change in the 2:00 7:00 4:00 11:00 4:00 6:00 6:00 6:00 6:00 6:00 6:00 6:00 6:00 population of the receptor as a result of the development. This includes consideration of the behavioural sensitivity of the receptor and the duration and reversibility of the potential Target species included all grebes, all swans, all wild geese, all ducks (excluding mallard), all impact. raptors (including owls) listed on Annex 1 of the Birds Directive or Schedule 1 of the Wildlife and Determining the significance of the impacts based on the interaction between the magnitude Countryside Act, all terns and all waders. Secondary species included all other raptors, herons, of the impact and the nature conservation value of the bird interests likely to be affected. gulls and feral geese. Identifying mitigation measures proposed to avoid, reduce or remedy significant adverse impacts. For target species, focal sampling was carried out. The area in view was scanned until a target Determining the residual impact significance after the proposed mitigation measures have species was observed, at which point it was followed until it had ceased flying or had flown out been implemented, including a description of any legal and policy consequences. of sight. The flight lines of target bird species observed were recorded onto 1:10,000 scale field maps. Following the recommended methodology, the time and duration of the flight were recorded, and the altitude of the target bird(s) was recorded at the start of the observation and

4 http://www.bto.org/survey/cbc.htm 5 http://www.ieem.org.uk/ecia/index.html

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 8-3 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 8: Ornithology

Evaluating Features of Ecological Interest account of information available on the responses of birds to various stimuli (e.g. predators, The nature conservation value of the bird interests present at the development site are defined noise and disturbance by humans). It should be noted that behavioural sensitivity can differ according to Table 8.3 (adapted from Percival 2007)6. between similar species and between different populations of the same species. Thus the behavioural responses of birds are likely to vary with both the nature and context of the Table 8.3 Evaluation of Ornithological Receptors stimulus and the experience of the individual bird. Behavioural sensitivity also depends on the Level of Value Examples activity of the bird, for example, a species is likely to be less tolerant of disturbance whilst Very High An internationally or nationally designated site (e.g. Special Protection Area breeding than at other times, but tolerance is likely to increase as the breeding cycle (SPA), Ramsar or Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) designation)7. progresses. The qualifying feature of a SPA or notified interest of a SSSI. Species present in internationally important numbers (>1% of Table 8.4 Behavioural Sensitivity biogeographic/flyway populations). Sensitivity Definition High Species that contribute to the integrity of a SPA or SSSI but which are not cited High Species or populations occupying habitats remote from human activities, or that as species for which the site is designated (SPAs) or notified (SSSIs). exhibit strong and long-lasting (guide: >20 mins) reactions to disturbance events. Ecologically sensitive species such as rare birds (<300 breeding pairs in the UK. Moderate Species or populations that appear to be warily tolerant of human activities, or Species present in nationally important numbers (>1% UK population). exhibit short-term reactions (guide: 5-20 minutes) to disturbance events. Species listed on Annex 1 of the EC Birds Directive or breeding species listed on Low Species or populations occupying areas subject to frequent human activity and Schedule 1 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act. exhibiting mild and brief reaction (including flushing behaviour) to disturbance Regularly occurring relevant migratory species, which are either rare or events. vulnerable, or warrant special consideration on account of the proximity of migration routes, or breeding, moulting, wintering and staging areas in relation In addition to consideration of behavioural sensitivity, impact magnitude takes into account the to the proposed wind farm. Medium Species present in regionally important numbers (>1% regional fact that different sources of change can result in permanent or temporary effects, that different (Cambridgeshire) population). impacts have different probabilities of occurring, and that some changes may be positive Species occurring within SPAs and SSSIs but not crucial to the integrity of the (beneficial). The magnitude of impacts is also dependent on their timing and/or frequency of site. occurrence, and whether they can be reversed. Priority species in the UK Biodiversity Action Plan. Low Other species of conservation interest, e.g. red-listed species in Birds of Impact magnitude can be negative (high, medium or low), neutral or positive. High magnitude Conservation Concern (RSPB, 2006)8 not covered above, and/or Local impacts could include large-scale permanent and/or high probability changes that affect the Biodiversity Action Plan species. receptor’s population or extent. Low magnitude impacts would typically be small in scale or Negligible All other species, e.g. those on the amber or green list that are not present in possibly temporary in their effect. The criteria used in this assessment for describing the overall regionally or nationally important numbers. magnitude of a potential impact are summarised in Table 8.5. The concept of receptor integrity is defined in the subsequent paragraphs relating to the significance of impacts.

Determining the Magnitude of a Potential Impact Table 8.5 Impact Magnitude Once the nature conservation value of the bird species/populations at the development site has Impact Description magnitude been established, the next step is to identify and assess the magnitude of the potential impacts High negative High impacts may include those that result in large-scale, permanent changes that might occur on those species/populations. An impact is defined as the change in the in an ornithological receptor, and likely to change its ecological integrity. These assemblage of bird species present during (or beyond) the life of the development and can be impacts are therefore likely to result in overall changes in the conservation adverse, neutral or positive. The assessment of impact magnitude seeks to determine the status of a species population at the location(s) under consideration. changes in the extent or population of an ornithological receptor. Medium negative Medium impacts may include moderate-scale permanent changes in an ornithological receptor, or larger-scale temporary changes, but the integrity of In assessing the magnitude of potential impacts, the behavioural sensitivity and the potential for the population is not likely to be affected. This may mean that there are recovery from temporary adverse conditions are considered in respect of each potentially temporary changes in the conservation status of a species-population at the affected population. Behavioural sensitivity is determined subjectively based on the species’ location(s) under consideration, but these are reversible and unlikely to be ecology and behaviour, using the broad criteria set out in Table 8.4. The judgement takes long-term. Low negative Low impacts may include those that are small in magnitude, have small-scale temporary changes, and where integrity is not affected. These impacts are unlikely to result in overall changes in the conservation status of a species 6 Percival, S.M. 2007. Predicting the effects of wind farms on birds in the UK: the development of an objective assessment method. In de Lucas M., Janss G. & Ferrer M. (eds.) Birds and Wind Power. Lynx Edicions, Barcelona. population at the location(s) under consideration, but it does not exclude the 7 SPA = Special Protection Area, Ramsar = sites designated under the 1971 Ramsar Convention on Wetlands, SSSI = possibility that mitigation or compensation will be required. Site of Special Scientific Interest. Neutral There is no perceptible change in the ornithological receptor. 8 RSPB 2006. The Population Status of Birds in the . Positive The changes in the ornithological receptor are considered to be beneficial.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 UK: Birds of Conservation Concern 2002-2007 8-4 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 8: Ornithology

8.5 BASELINE DESCRIPTION In the case of SPAs / SSSIs, magnitude is assessed in respect of the size of the cited population. This section describes the ornithological interest at the development site. For non-designated sites, magnitude is assessed in respect of an appropriate scale, i.e. a potential impact is assessed in terms of the size of local, regional (i.e. Northamptonshire) and 8.5.1 Site Location national populations. The survey area is located south of the village of Hanging Houghton, which lies approximately 15km north of Northampton and 12km south-east of Kettering. The entire site is made up of Determining the Significance of Potential Impacts arable farmland, some of which was set-aside at the time the baseline surveys were The concept of significance lies at the heart of the EcIA process. A significant impact is defined undertaken. The Ordnance Survey grid reference of the site’s centre is SP 746 727. The field in ecological terms as an impact on the integrity or conservation status of a defined site, habitat boundaries are a mixture of seasonally-wet drains, wire fences, planted trees, and hedges. or species. The significance of an impact is determined by considering the combination of the Some of the hedges are species-rich and trees occur in some. A strip of woodland (planted in nature conservation value of the receptor and the magnitude of the impact and applying places) and a stream run along the majority of the southern boundary. Harborough Road is the professional judgement as to whether the integrity of the receptor will be affected. This concept eastern boundary of the site. can be applied to both designated sites (for example, a SSSI) and to defined populations (for examplefunction…that a local enables bat population). it to sustain The concept underpins much of the European legislation in 8.5.2 Statutory and non-statutory sites relationof species to nature for conservation. Consultation and a search of available digital datasets indicated that there is currently one statutory site of national importance located within 5km of the windfarm site that is designated As described in Chapterwhich it 7:was Ecology classified” of this ES, the term integrity is used here in accordance with 9 for its ornithological interest. This is Pitsford Reservoir SSSI, located approximately 1.9km away the definition adopted by the Circularthe habitat,06/2005 complex on Biodiversity of habitats and Geological Conservation from the site at its nearest point. whereby designated site integrity refers to “…coherence of ecological structure and development condition” Pitsford Reservoir is cited as a SSSI for its nationally important numbers of several wildfowl . For non-designated sites/species this can be amended to species over different periods of time, with wintering shoveler present in nationally important “the coherence of ecological structure [in and/or this case, levels the of areapopulations being numbers in recent years. The reservoir and marginal land also supports a significant number considered; e.g. county/region] to maintain the levels of populations of species in its/their pre- and variety of breeding birds including great crested grebe, little grebe, teal, kingfisher and reed . Integrity therefore refers to the maintenance of the conservation status warbler. Part of the SSSI is managed as a nature reserve by the Northamptonshire Trust for of a species population at a specific location or geographical scale. Nature Conservation. The full SSSI citation is provided in Technical Appendix 8. and function, that enables it A significant impact will include those considered likely to affect the integrity of a receptor and In addition, twelve non-statutory sites are identified as being located within 2km of the are generally restricted to receptors of very high or high conservation value. Mitigation development site. These include nine County Wildlife Sites (CWS), two Regionally Important measures and detailed design work are unlikely to remove all of the impacts upon such affected Geological and Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) and a Pocket Park: interests. Significant impacts might also include high magnitude impacts on receptors of lower conservation value, if the integrity of the receptor is affected. In this case, mitigation measures Creaton Covert CWS located 2km west of the site: a hilltop plantation providing suitable and detailed design work would ameliorate or enhance some of the consequences upon affected conditions for birds of prey. interests and are likely to reduce such an impact to a non-significant level. Houghton Crossing – Lamport Station CWS is part of a disused rail track that runs well to the north-west of the site: a habitat corridor mostly of value for tree and scrub cover and not for Impacts not considered to be significant would be those where the integrity of the receptor is ornithological interest. not threatened. These could range from low magnitude impacts on receptors of high value to Houghton Crossing Spinney CWS located 0.8km north of the site: hosts some common scrub high magnitude impacts on receptors of low value. Such impacts may be raised as local issues and woodland bird species. but are not considered to be significant. Nevertheless, they are of relevance in enhancing the Lamport Lodge Spinney CWS located approximately 1.5km north-east of the site: a patch of subsequent design of the proposed development and consideration of mitigation or good park habitat encouraging wildlife to a less diverse part of the park in which it is compensation measures. Clearly, impacts of negligible magnitude, or impacts on receptors of situated. The spinney probably hosts common woodland passerines. negligible conservation value are not considered to be significant. Lamport Marsh CWS located approximately 2km north-east of the site: primarily of interest for its scrub habitat and trees, although settling ponds provide suitable habitat for small Significant impacts will be priorities for mitigation and/or enhancement. In some cases, for numbers of breeding waterfowl. example where there may be direct disturbance to breeding birds, there may also be a legal Merry Tom Crossing – Brixworth Car Park CWS is part of a disused rail track that runs well to obligation to provide such mitigation. It should be noted that, alongside the criteria provided, the south of the site: of interest for its acid-loving flora not found elsewhere in the professional judgement is applied in determining the significance of potential impacts. immediate area. It probably holds some reptile interest, but is not noted specifically for its ornithological interest.

9 http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/circularbiodiversity

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 8-5 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 8: Ornithology

Scaldwell Spinney CWS located approximately 1.5km north-east of the site: a woodland Common bullfinch: a single record from Hanging Houghton in 2002. plantation in the middle of a largely arable landscape and hosts some common woodland Corn bunting: three records in the local area in 2002. birds. Station Bridge Road – Houghton Crossing CWS is part of a disused rail track that runs close Amber listed species (not to the western boundary of the site: provides a good habitat corridor in an otherwise arable- Other species recorded in the local area included: cormorant, oystercatcher, common gull, dominated landscape. There is no specific bird interest. green woodpecker, house martin, meadow pipit, grey wagtail, redstart, stonechat, goldcrest and The Hen Roost CWS located approximately 1.8km north-east of the site: a spinney with a redpoll. already listed above) good diversity of trees and scrub, but is not cited for its ornithological interest. Brixworth ironstone Cutting RIGS located approximately 1km south of the site: no data 8.5.4 Breeding Birds available, but unlikely to host substantial ornithological interest. A total of 26 species were recorded as probably breeding within the survey area. Figures 8.2a- Glebe Allotments RIGS located approximately 1km south of the site: no data available, but 8.2g and Table 8.6 provides the details of the species recorded along with their abundance and unlikely to host ornithological interest. distribution at the site. The breeding bird assemblage included a number of UK BAP/red listed Brixworth Pocket Park located approximately 1.3km south of the site: no data available, but species and amber listed species (highlighted in appropriate colour in Table 8.6), but there was unlikely to host substantial ornithological interest. no evidence of any Schedule 1/Annex 1 breeding birds within the survey area.

8.5.3 Background records Table 8.6 Breeding Bird Records Background records were supplied by the Northamptonshire Biodiversity Records Centre and are Species Abundance and distribution Number within summarised below. 100m of tracks/turbines Annex 1 (Birds Directive)/Schedule 1 Woodpigeon 15 locations in woodland and hedgerows, mostly outside the 1 site. Likely to have been more breeding birds in the area. Common crane: a single spring record in 2002. Skylark 41 territories in fields within the site and in the 500m buffer 6 Whimbrel: a spring passage bird at Hanging Houghton in 2002. around the site. Quail: one record well to the north of the site in 2002. Meadow pipit 3 locations in fields to the south and east of the site. 0 Osprey: a spring passage bird at Brampton(Wildlife and Valley Countryside in 2002. Act) Species Yellow wagtail 6 locations in fields all to the east and south-east of the site. 0 Marsh harrier: one record well to the north of the site in spring 2002. Wren 44 territories located in hedgerows and woodland around 8 Red kite: a single record in spring 2002. the periphery of the site and in the 500m buffer around the Merlin: two autumn records from Brampton Valley in 2002. site. Peregrine: three non-breeding records in 2002. Dunnock 21 territories in hedgerows, scrub and woodland in the site 7 Hobby: five records from the local area in summer and autumn 2002. boundary and 500m buffer zone. Barn owl: 11 records from the surrounding area, the majority from presumed breeding sites Robin 28 territories located in hedgerows and woodland around 6 more than 2km away from the proposed development site. Three records were from Hanging the periphery of the site and in the 500m buffer around the Houghton, approximately 1km away from the site. site. Redwing: seven records of wintering birds in the local area in 2002. Blackbird 13 territories located in hedgerows and woodland around 3 the periphery of the site and in the 500m buffer around the Fieldfare: 16 records of wintering birds in the local area in 2002. site. Kingfisher: two records from Brampton Valley Way outside the site. Song thrush 4 territories in woodland and hedgerows outside the site. 0 Brambling: 11 non-breeding records in 2002. Sedge warbler 1 location at the edge of woodland to the west of the site. 0 Common crossbill: an autumn record in Hanging Houghton in 2002. Lesser whitethroat 3 territories in total with birds; two in scrub along the 1 disused railway track to the west of the site and one in a Priority UK BAP and red listed spec hedgerow on the northern site boundary. Grey partridge: five records from local farmland areas in 2002. Whitethroat 23 territories in hedgerows and scrub within the site, around 7 Song thrush: a single record in Houghton Crossing Spinney in 1994. the periphery of the site and in the 500m buffer around the Ring ouzel: an autumn passage bird recorded in 2002. site. Spotted flycatcher: three recordsies in (not the alreadylocal area listed in 2002. above) Garden warbler 1 territory in woodland to the west of the site. 0 Blackcap 14 territories identified in hedgerows and woodland in the 1 Yellow wagtail: two records in the local area in 2002. 500m buffer zone around the site. Common grasshopper warbler: a single record from a farm over 2km away from the site in Chiffchaff 4 territory locations in woodland/scrub outside the site. 0 Willow tit: six records in the local area in 2002. Willow warbler 3 territories in woodland and scrub to the west of the site. 0 Marsh tit: five records in the local area in 2002. Long-tailed tit 1 location along the disused railway track to the west of the 0 Tree sparrow: four records from local farms in 2002. site. 2002.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 8-6 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 8: Ornithology

Species Abundance and distribution Number within Species Abundance and distribution 100m of Black-headed gull Recorded through most of the winter, with 556 observed in October, tracks/turbines 203 in December and 58 in February. The majority of birds were using Blue tit 3 locations around the periphery of the site or in Clint Hill 2 fields to the south of the site although birds were also foraging in Fox Covert. smaller numbers in fields within the site. Great tit 2 locations in hedges along the A508 main road bordering 0 Common gull Present in small numbers throughout the winter foraging in fields on site the east side of the site. or flying over, with up to ten recorded in December. Carrion crow 1 breeding location identified to the north of the site. 0 Feral pigeon Two birds observed in December. Chaffinch 39 territories in hedgerows, scrub, woodland and isolated 7 Stock dove One or two birds recorded flying over in March and October. trees in the site boundary and 500m buffer zone. Woodpigeon Large feeding flocks recorded in fields throughout the winter, with a Greenfinch 1 location in a hedgerow just to the north of the site. 1 maximum of 793 observed in March. Goldfinch 2 locations in hedges along the A508 main road bordering 0 Green woodpecker A maximum of three recorded in February. the east side of the site. Great spotted woodpecker Singles recorded in March and October. Bullfinch 2 territories located along the disused railway track to the 0 Skylark Small numbers foraging in fields on site and in the 500m buffer zone, west of the site. with a maximum of 34 recorded in October. Yellowhammer 18 territories located in hedgerows and scrub, the majority 4 Meadow pipit Small numbers foraging in fields on site and in the 500m buffer zone, of them along the disused railway track, although some with a maximum of 10 recorded in October. were also around the .periphery of the site. Pied wagtail A single bird recorded in March. Reed bunting 2 territories located in crops within the site. 0 Wren Recorded throughout the winter in hedgerows and woodland around the periphery of the site and in the 500m buffer zone, with a maximum of There was no evidence of any Annex 1 or Schedule 1 breeding raptors within 2km of the site. 15 recorded in December. Although no nest sites were found, given the relatively frequent observations of buzzard and Dunnock Recorded throughout the winter in hedgerows and woodland around the kestrel at the site and in the surrounding area, it is likely that one or two pairs of each nest periphery of the site and in the 500m buffer zone, with a maximum of within 1km of the site. 17 recorded in December. Robin Recorded throughout the winter in hedgerows and woodland around the periphery of the site and in the 500m buffer zone, with a maximum of A barn owl nest box is located approximately 800m away from the nearest turbine location. 18 recorded in February. Anecdotal evidence indicates that barn owls nest at that location. However, access to the nest Blackbird Recorded throughout the winter in hedgerows and woodland around the box was not possible in 2007, therefore it was not inspected. periphery of the site and in the 500m buffer zone, with a maximum of 47 recorded in December. 8.5.5 Wintering birds Fieldfare Recorded throughout the winter in hedgerows and foraging in fields A total of 47 species were recorded using the survey area during the winter bird surveys. Table throughout the survey area, with a maximum of 171 recorded in 8.7 provides the details of the species recorded along with their abundance and distribution at December. the site. This included a number of UK BAP/red listed species and amber listed species Song thrush Recorded in small numbers throughout the winter in hedgerows and (highlighted in appropriate colour). There was one Annex 1 bird recorded, golden plover. woodland around the periphery of the site and in the 500m buffer zone, with a maximum of 20 recorded in December. Redwing Recorded throughout the winter in hedgerows and foraging in fields Table 8.7 Winter Bird Survey Records throughout the survey area, with a maximum of 38 recorded in Species Abundance and distribution December. Mallard Two flew over in December. Mistle thrush A maximum of three recorded in December. Red-legged partridge Recorded in small numbers on all four visits, with a maximum of 24 Goldcrest Present in small numbers in woodland outside the site, with a maximum observed in February. of three recorded in October. Grey partridge Five birds recorded to the southwest of the site in October. Long-tailed tit Two birds recorded in March. Pheasant Recorded in small numbers on all four visits, with a maximum of 13 Blue tit Recorded in small numbers throughout the winter in hedgerows and observed in February. woodland around the periphery of the site and in the 500m buffer zone, Sparrowhawk One recorded hunting in October. with a maximum of 10 recorded in December. Buzzard Recorded in October, December and February. A maximum of six Great tit Recorded in small numbers throughout the winter in hedgerows and records in December, although there may be some double-recording of woodland around the periphery of the site and in the 500m buffer zone, birds. with a maximum of 10 recorded in December. Kestrel Three records during the October visit, one in February. Coal tit Singles recorded in woodland outside the site in March and February. Golden plover (Annex 1) A small flock of 18 birds in the centre of the site in October. Willow tit One bird recorded in December in woodland to the west of the site. Lapwing Small flocks of 20 and 11 birds observed using the northern part of the Jay One bird recorded in December in woodland to the west of the site. site and buffer zone in October and February respectively. Magpie Small numbers present with a maximum of 4 birds recorded in February.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 8-7 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 8: Ornithology

Species Abundance and distribution 30/10/07 129 0744 3 52 0 0 100 N Jackdaw Small numbers present with a maximum of 10 birds recorded in 15/11/07 132 1602 45 165 0 75 25 N October. 14/01/08 134 0957 1 62 0 20 80 Y Carrion crow Small numbers recorded in fields and hedgerows throughout the survey 19/02/08 135 1509 11 18 0 100 0 N area with a maximum of 25 recorded in December. 26/02/08 136 1009 9 67 0 100 0 Y Starling A flock of 70 birds recorded near the site in October. Chaffinch Recorded in small numbers throughout the winter in hedgerows and There were three red kite flights observed, one in November 2007 and two in March 2008. Only woodland around the periphery of the site and in the 500m buffer zone, one was observed flying across the windfarm site and the majority of that flight was above with a maximum of 16 recorded in December. potential risk height. Greenfinch Five recorded in October and four in December.

Goldfinch Small numbers recorded with a maximum of six birds in December. Siskin Eight recorded in woodland outside the site in December. A single hobby was observed in spring flying across the windfarm site at potential collision Linnet Six birds recorded in October. height. Lesser redpoll One recorded flying over in December. Bullfinch A maximum of six birds recorded to the west of the site in December. Golden plover were seen on four occasions during the winter, with flocks of between 15 and 90 Yellowhammer Flocks of birds recorded in fields and hedgerows throughout the survey birds observed. Only one flight of 90 birds was recorded crossing the windfarm site at potential area during each visit, with a maximum of 32 observed in December. collision height, the other three flights were either above potential collision height or did not Reed bunting Small numbers recorded on site or to the west of the site with a cross the windfarm site. maximum of seven in December. Lapwings were also recorded infrequently with a total of eleven flights. The number of birds in each flight was usually small although one flight of 46 birds was recorded in the area. Six flights 8.5.6 Flight activity of between one and nine birds were recorded crossing the windfarm site at potential collision Four target species were observed during vantage point watches: red kite, hobby, golden plover height. and lapwing. Table 8.8 details the individual flight records of each species. The shaded rows show those flights that were recorded either entirely beyond 200m of the turbine locations, or Secondary species observed included cormorant, grey heron, mallard, buzzard, sparrowhawk, entirely below/above potential collision height. Potential collision height was defined as 25- kestrel, lesser black-backed gull, herring gull, common gull, black-headed gull. 125m. Flight lines of each target species are displayed in Figures 8.3a – 8.3b. Cormorant, grey heron and mallard were seen very infrequently, with no more than two records Table 8.8 Winter Bird Survey Records of each species out of 819 five-minute recording periods throughout the year. Date Flight Time Number of Total flight % of % of % of Within No. (GMT/ birds duration flight flight flight 200m of Buzzards were more frequently observed, with records during 86 five-minute recording periods. BST) (secs) <25m 25- >125m turbines 39 records were of birds over the site at potential collision height (4.8% of 5-minute periods), 125m [Y/N] 47 records were of birds either off site or not at potential collision height. The minimum number Red kite recorded during each period was usually a single bird, although the minimum number ranged 15/11/07 130 1427 1 99 0 43 57 N from one to ten birds. 18/03/08 137 1047 1 303 0 24 76 Y

18/03/08 138 1129 1 160 0 0 100 N Sparrowhawks were rarely observed, with just three out of seven records of single hunting birds Hobby over the site at potential collision height. 24/04/07 121 1350 1 150 9 91 0 Y

Golden plover 30/10/07 128 0729 15 21 0 0 100 N Kestrels were recorded during 31 five-minute periods, with 24 of those being single birds flying 15/11/07 131 1602 90 410 0 36 64 Y over the site at potential collision height (2.9% of 5-minute periods). 04/12/07 133 1306 50 81 0 0 100 Y 18/03/08 139 1203 25 156 0 0 100 Y Between one and three lesser black-backed gulls were recorded during 15 five-minute periods Lapwing at potential collision height over the site (1.8%). 05/06/07 122 1105 1 22 0 100 0 Y 20/09/07 123 1622 2 90 0 71 29 Y There was only one record of a herring gull. 20/09/07 124 1631 7 33 33 67 0 Y 20/09/07 125 1848 4 80 0 100 0 Y Black-headed and common gulls were infrequently observed in small numbers until August, 05/10/07 126 1209 2 19 0 0 100 Y after the crops in the area had been harvested. Subsequently, between August and March, 05/10/07 127 1302 1 49 0 0 100 N conditions were then suitable for birds to forage in the fields. Highest numbers were present in

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 8-8 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 8: Ornithology

mid to late winter with up to 170 black-headed gulls and up to 10 common gulls present at and Table 8.10 Behavioural Sensitivity of Valued Receptors (Species) around the site, mostly flying low over feeding areas. Species Description Level of sensitivity Golden plover Foraging/roosting/loafing birds sensitive to visual Moderate A barn owl was observed on one occasion hunting low along the disused railway track to the Lapwing disturbance and noise up to 600m. west of the site at dusk in June; this was outside the vantage point watch session. Farmland birds Birds sensitive to visual disturbance and sudden noise Low 8.5.7 Valued Ecological Receptors events, but effects likely to extend only a short distance (e.g. up to c.100m). Individuals appear Using the ecological criteria described earlier (Table 8.3), the value of the bird populations capable of a high degree of habituation. This applies within the study area, as derived from the desk study and site surveys, is summarised in Table to most species found in the modern farmland 8.9. landscape. Red kite Foraging birds sensitive to visual disturbance and Low Table 8.9 Valued Ecological Receptors sudden noise events, but effects likely to be short- Receptor Nature Conservation Value Reason Hobby lived and easily reversible. Statutory designated sites Barn owl Pitsford Reservoir Very high Designated as a SSSI for its important wintering and breeding bird populations. Non-statutory designated sites 8.6 INFORMATION GAPS 12 sites listed in Low Provide diverse and valuable The ornithological surveys and desk based literature searches are believed to have provided a Section 8.5.2 habitats for breeding birds, comprehensive data set from which a robust ecological impact assessment can be carried out. although the breeding bird community within each is not considered to be important. 8.7 ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL EFFECTS Species Red kite High Listed on Annex 1 of the Birds Three main potential effects of the development have been identified that may affect birds: Directive and Schedule 1 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act. Habitat loss; Hobby High Listed on Annex 1 of the Birds Disturbance; and Directive and Schedule 1 of the Collision. Wildlife and Countryside Act. Barn owl High Listed on Schedule 1 of the Habitat loss due to development (turbine bases, anemometer mast, substation, new access Wildlife and Countryside Act. tracks etc.) could result in the loss of breeding or foraging opportunities for birds. However, Golden plover High Listed on Annex 1 of the Birds direct land-take by the development structures would result in the loss or change of a very Directive. small proportion of the available habitat within the site; see Chapter 7: Ecology of this ES). Lapwing Medium UK BAP priority species.

Farmland bird Low Includes UK BAP and red and community amber listed passerine species. During the construction phase of the development, the potential impacts of associated noise All other species Negligible Those species on the amber and and visual disturbance could lead to the temporary displacement or disruption of breeding and ‘green’ lists that were not foraging birds. Potential effects are likely to be greatest during the breeding season (mainly present in regionally or between March and September depending on species) and behavioural sensitivity to the effects nationally important numbers. will vary between species. Disturbance of birds due to construction activities of this type has not These species are not been sufficiently quantified and the available information is often contradictory. However, larger considered further in the bird species, those higher up the food chain or those that feed in flocks in the open tend to be assessment as none are present more vulnerable to disturbance than small birds living in structurally complex or closed habitats in regionally, nationally or such as woodland (Hill et al. 1997)10. The potential impacts associated with construction internationally important activities are only likely to occur for as long as the construction phase continues. The exception numbers. to this would be if an adverse impact on the breeding success of a receptor were such that the local population becomes extinct and replacement does not occur. Table 8.10 shows the behavioural sensitivity of those bird species that will be considered further

in this assessment using the criteria set out in Table 8.4.

10 Hill, D.A., Hockin, D., Price, D., Tucker, G., Morris, R. & Treweek, J. 1997. Bird disturbance: improving the quality of disturbance research. Journal of Applied Ecology 34: 275-288.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 8-9 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 8: Ornithology

The operation of turbines and associated human activities for maintenance purposes also has that the wildfowl using the Pitsford Reservoir SSSI will not be disturbed by the construction and the potential to cause disturbance and displace birds from the wind farm area. It is considered operation of the development. Potential impacts on Pitsford Reservoir SSSI and its wildfowl likely that disturbance effects during the operational phase will be less than during the populations are therefore considered to be neutral and impacts on this receptor are not construction phase. Studies have shown that in general, species are not disturbed beyond 600- considered in further detail in this assessment. 800m from turbines and, in some cases, birds have not been disturbed at all. However, individual turbines, or the wind farm as a whole, may present a barrier to the movement of 8.7.2 Potential Impacts on Non- birds, restricting or displacing birds from much larger areas. The impact this would have on a The development will not directly affect any of the twelve non-statutory designated sites population is subtle, and difficult to predict with any great certainty. If birds regularly have to fly through habitat loss. over or around obstacles or are forced into suboptimal habitats, this may result in reduced feeding efficiency and greater energy expenditure. By implication, this will reduce the efficiency Station Road Bridge – Houghtonstatutory Crossing Designated (County Sites Wildlife Site) is the nearest, located with which they accumulate reserves, potentially affecting breeding success. During the lifetime approximately 50m to the west of the core survey area, although it is 170m away from the of the wind farm, however, birds may habituate to the presence of turbines, thus the effect is nearest part of any of the development infrastructure. It is not cited for any particular likely to be greatest in the short-term. ornithological interest and due to the distance between the nearest part of the designated site and the nearest part of the development infrastructure, it is considered that there would be no Collision of a bird with the turbine rotors is almost certain to result in the death of the bird. In disturbance to any bird species using the designated site. Furthermore, the County Wildlife Site low density populations, such as raptors, this could have a more adverse impact on the local does not hold bird species that are likely to fly over the site and be at risk of collision. The population than in higher density populations (e.g., skylark) because a higher proportion of the magnitude of potential impacts on the Station Road Bridge – Houghton Crossing County Wildlife local population would be affected in a low density population. The frequency and likelihood of a Site is therefore considered to be neutral. collision occurring depends on a number of factors. These include aspects of the size and behaviour of the bird, the nature of the surrounding environment and the structure and layout All other non-statutory designated sites that are listed in Section 8.5.2 are of low ornithological of the turbines. interest and are more than 800m away from the development site. This is considered to be sufficiently distant to not have any construction, operational and decommissioning impacts on Collision risk is perceived to be higher for birds that spend much of the time in the air, such as features for which the non-statutory designated sites are notified. foraging raptors, and those that have regular flight paths between feeding and breeding/roosting grounds (e.g., geese). The majority of bird fatalities at wind farms have In terms of bird populations, the development is therefore considered to have no significant occurred on major migration flyways, in reduced visibility or at night (Crockford 1992; Gill et al., negative impact on the integrity of any of the twelve non-statutory designated sites identified 1996; Thelander et al., 2003)11. Birds are also more susceptible if the wind farm is located in an above. area of unusually high prey density. A close array of turbines across a natural wind funnel (a “wind wall”) has also been known to cause increased bird mortality. For diurnal foraging raptors, 8.7.3 Potential Impacts on Red Kite the proximity of structures on which to perch can increase the likelihood of collision with There was no evidence that red kites breed within 2km of the development site. Their use of 12 turbines (Orloff & Flannery, 1996) . The development presents none of these factors that are the site and surrounding area was very infrequent, with just three observations of birds foraging likely to increase the risk of bird collision. in the area.

It should be noted that operational disturbance and collision risk effects are mutually exclusive The site does not provide valuable foraging habitat for this species, therefore habitat loss and in a spatial sense i.e. a bird that avoids the windfarm area cannot be at risk of collision with the construction (and decommissioning) or operational disturbance will not affect red kites. turbine rotors at the same time. However, they are not mutually exclusive in a temporal sense; a bird may initially avoid the wind farm, but habituate to it, and would then be at risk of A collision risk model has not been carried out for red kite, as their flight activity at the site was collision. too infrequent. Based on the results of surveys in 2007-08, the collision risk to this species is negligible. 8.7.1 Potential Impacts on Statutory Designated Sites During 76 hours of flight activity observations over the course of one year, there were no The development is therefore considered to have no significant negative impact on the integrity observations of wildfowl species associated with Pitsford Reservoir. Due to the lack of any flights of the red kite population at a local, regional or national scale. of species for which the SSSI is notified and the distance to the development, it is considered 8.7.4 Potential Impacts on Hobby

11 Crockford, N.J. 1992. A review of the possible impacts of windfarms on birds and other wildlife. JNCC Report No. There was no evidence that hobby breeds within 2km of the development site. Their use of the 27. JNCC, Peterborough; Gill, J.P., Townsley, M. & Mudge, G.P. 1996. Review of the impacts of windfarms and other site and surrounding area was very infrequent, with just one observation of a bird foraging in aerial structures upon birds. SNH Review 21; Thelander, C.G., Smallwood, K.S. & Rugge, L. 2003. Bird risk behaviours the area. and fatalities at the Altamont Wind Resource Area. Report to the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Colorado. 12 Orloff, S. & Flannery, A. 1996. Avian mortality in Altamont Pass WRA – final report. California Energy Commission, Sacramento.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 8-10 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 8: Ornithology

The development site does not provide valuable foraging habitat for this species, therefore 8.7.7 Potential Impacts on Lapwing habitat loss and construction (and decommissioning) or operational disturbance will not affect Small numbers of lapwing were infrequently observed flying high over the development site and hobby. a small number were recorded on two occasions foraging within the site during the non- breeding season. There is no suitable breeding habitat at the site. A collision risk model has not been carried out for hobby, as their flight activity at the site was too infrequent. Based on the results of surveys in 2007-08, the collision risk to this species is Based on these observations, it is concluded that the site does not provide valuable habitat for negligible. foraging lapwing, therefore habitat loss and construction (and decommissioning) and operational disturbance will not have more than a neutral magnitude impact on this species. The development is therefore considered to have no significant negative impact on the integrity of the hobby population at a local, regional or national scale. A collision risk model has not been carried out for lapwing, as their flight activity at the site was too infrequent. Based on the results of surveys in 2007-08, the collision risk to this species is 8.7.5 Potential Impacts on Barn Owl negligible. A barn owl was observed on just one occasion to the west of the development site. There is anecdotal evidence that birds breed approximately 800m away from the nearest proposed The development is therefore considered to have no significant negative impact on the integrity turbine location. of the wintering lapwing population at a local, regional or national scale.

The development site does not currently provide valuable foraging habitat for this species, 8.7.8 Potential Impacts on the therefore habitat loss and construction (and decommissioning) or operational disturbance will not affect barn owls. TheBreeding survey area supports a diverse but low density assemblage of breeding farmland birds, It is acknowledged that barn owls hunt at night and flights during darkness would have been including skylark, meadow pipit,Farmland yellow wagtail,Bird Community dunnock, song thrush, willow warbler, bullfinch, missed. However, they also fly during the day, particularly at dawn and dusk. Surveys were yellowhammer and reed bunting. undertaken during the dawn and dusk periods and no flight activity over the site was observed. Barn owls would typically hunt low to the ground and they are not considered to be at very low The majority of species recorded (not including skylark, meadow pipit, yellow wagtail and reed risk of collision. Based on the results of surveys in 2007-08, the collision risk to this species is bunting) were found in hedgerows and field margins at the periphery of the site or in the 500m negligible. buffer area around the site. The layout of the development has been designed in such a way that there will be no loss of field boundary habitats, therefore the impact of habitat loss on The development is therefore considered to have no significant negative impact on the integrity those species is considered to be of neutral magnitude. of the barn owl population at a local, regional or national scale. In such structurally complex habitats (hedgerows and woodland around the periphery of the 8.7.6 Potential Impacts on Golden Plover site), the behavioural sensitivity of birds to disturbance is low and species using those habitats Golden plover were very infrequently observed flying high over the development site and a are unlikely to suffer any significant disturbance effects during construction, decommissioning or small number were recorded on one occasion foraging within the site during the non-breeding operation of the development. The potential impact of disturbance on farmland breeding species season. There is no suitable breeding habitat in the region. using boundary habitats is therefore considered to be of neutral magnitude.

Based on these observations, it is concluded that the site does not provide valuable habitat for Skylark, meadow pipit, yellow wagtail, and reed bunting all held territories and had probable foraging golden plover, therefore habitat loss and construction (and decommissioning) and nest sites in more open habitat within the crops, where they may be more vulnerable to the operational disturbance will not have more than a neutral magnitude impact on this species. potential impacts of habitat loss and disturbance. However, of these four species, there were only six skylark territories within 100m of the development infrastructure. The other three A collision risk model has not been carried out for golden plover, as their flight activity at the species all had territories more than 100m away from any part of the development. The amount site was too infrequent. Based on the results of surveys in 2007-08, the collision risk to this of the arable field habitat lost to the development infrastructure as a proportion of that available species is negligible. in the survey area is very small. Therefore, it is considered that the magnitude of the impact of habitat loss would be neutral for those four species. The development is therefore considered to have no significant negative impact on the integrity of the wintering golden plover population at a local, regional or national scale. Birds breeding in more open habitats may be more vulnerable to disturbance than those using boundary habitats. However, small passerine species such as skylark, meadow pipit, yellow wagtail and reed bunting are unlikely to be disturbed by construction and decommissioning activities more than 100m from the source of the activity. During operation of the development, the threshold distance for disturbance is likely to be less than this. However, taking a

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 8-11 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 8: Ornithology

precautionary approach under the assumption that birds would potentially be displaced from The development is therefore considered to have no significant negative impact on the integrity areas within 100m of track and turbine locations during construction, decommissioning and of the wintering farmland bird population at a local, regional or national scale. operation of the development, this could lead to possible long-term displacement of territories of six skylarks. In reality, there is much suitable habitat that would remain available within the 8.8 MITIGATION survey area into which displaced birds could relocate. This section presents specific measures adopted through the different phases of the development. An ecological clerk of works would be appointed to oversee mitigation measures In terms of the populations of breeding farmland birds in the wider area, both locally and and ensure best practice during the construction and decommissioning phases. regionally, the development is unlikely to cause more than a very small decline in their overall populations. The magnitude of the impact of disturbance due to construction, operation or 8.8.1 Construction and Decommissio decommissioning on breeding farmland birds is therefore judged to be of low negative Embedded mitigation is integral to the design of the development. The site layout has taken magnitude. habitat constraints into account from the earliest iterations through avoidance of any sensitive habitats. In particular, no hedgerows or woodland will be lost or damaged as a result of the Most farmland passerines would rarely fly at potential collision height, with most flights likely to development. occur well below the lowest sweep of the rotor blades. They would therefore be at low risk of ning Mitigation Measures 13 collision (Langston & Pullan, 2003) . The exception to this would be skylark song flights which As part of the standard engineering practices, a series of detailed ecological method statements would frequently occur at potential collision height. However, Thomas (1999 – quoted in would be produced for use by site construction staff to ensure legal compliance and maintain Langston & Pullan, 2003) showed that the skylark populations at UK upland sites were not ecological best practice to minimise potential impacts on breeding birds. The method statements affected by windfarm development. Whilst the possibility of collisions of skylark and other would be agreed in advance with the local authority and Natural England. species of passerines is not discounted, it is unlikely to occur with such frequency that the local populations of those species would be negatively affected at any more than a neutral Nest boxes would be installed in suitable locations for the benefit of various farmland breeding magnitude. birds. These would ideally be located around the periphery of the site, providing an opportunity for an increased density of some species. Species potentially benefiting from nest boxes include The development is therefore considered to have no significant negative impact on the integrity robin and tit species that have been recorded at the site, and others that could be attracted to of the breeding farmland bird population at a local, regional or national scale. the site, such as tree sparrow, spotted flycatcher, barn owl, little owl and tawny owl. Details of the number, design and location of nest boxes would form part of a habitat management and Wintering monitoring plan drawn up in consultation with Natural England. The survey area supports a range of wintering farmland birds that use the area for foraging, including a number of UK BAP and red-listed species of conservation concern. However, the 8.8.2 Operational Mitigation Measures numbers recorded within the site were low, as the habitat present does not provide high-quality No specific operational mitigation measures are considered necessary. conditions for foraging farmland birds.

Habitat loss as a proportion of the survey area is minimal and the boundary habitats in which 8.9 ENHANCEMENT OPPORTUNITITES many of the species forage will remain unaffected by the development, therefore the impact of As described in Chapter 7: Ecology of this ES, a number of opportunities are available to provide habitat loss on wintering farmland birds is considered to be of neutral magnitude. some ecological enhancement to an otherwise intensively managed arable farm. These do not form part of the mitigation committed by the applicant as part of the development, but have During the winter months, farmland birds are likely to be less susceptible to disturbance than been discussed with the landowner as a result of producing the development proposals and are during the breeding season. The consequences of disturbance are also of lower magnitude, as considered likely to be implemented. These measures have not been considered as part of the foraging birds can simply relocate to another, less disturbed area. It is considered that the residual impact assessment summarised below. The opportunities include: development site does not provide critical foraging habitat, therefore the magnitude of potential disturbance impacts during construction, operation or decommissioning on wintering birds is Incorporation of cereal field conservation margins. This measure would include the considered to be neutral. installation of a 5-10m buffer strip conservation field margin focused along the four sides of the site boundary. As described above for wintering farmland birds, there is a low risk of collision for farmland Incorporation of species rich hedgerows. This measure would include the enhancement of birds. Whilst the possibility of collisions of passerines is not discounted, it is unlikely to occur existing hedges, achievable through filling gaps in poor quality hedgerows and adding new with such frequency that the local populations of those species would be negatively affected at rows to thicken existing hedges where practicable. Management of the hedges would be any more than a neutral magnitude. planned to create a variety of heights and thickness and cut on a rotational basis to ensure maximum biodiversity benefit. 13 Langston, R.H.W. & Pullan, J.D. 2003. Windfarms and Birds: An analysis of the effects of windfarms on birds, and guidance on environmental assessment criteria and site selection issues. Report written by Birdlife International on behalf of the Bern Convention.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 8-12 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 8: Ornithology

Through the delivery of the two enhancement measures described above, breeding and VER/ Value Magni- Duration Confid- Significance Mitigation/ Residual wintering farmland bird species would benefit from enhanced breeding and foraging conditions, Impact tude ence Enhancement Impact potentially resulting in a positive gain in biodiversity. The details of habitat enhancement Golden High proposals would form part of a habitat management and monitoring plan drawn up in plover consultation with Natural England. Habitat Loss Neutral N/A High Not Neutral None significant Disturbance Neutral N/A High Not Neutral None significant 8.10 RESIDUAL IMPACTS Collision Neutral N/A High Not Neutral None significant Table 8.11 Summary of Potential Impacts Lapwing Medium VER/ Value Magni- Duration Confid- Significance Mitigation/ Residual Habitat Loss Neutral N/A High Not Neutral None Impact tude ence Enhancement Impact significant Pitsford Very Disturbance Neutral N/A High Not Neutral None Reservoir high significant Habitat Loss Neutral N/A High Not None None Collision Neutral N/A High Not Neutral None significant significant Disturbance Neutral N/A High Not None None Farmland Low significant bird Collision Neutral N/A High Not None None community significant Habitat Loss Neutral N/A High Not Habitat Potential Non- Low significant enhancement positive statutory and nest boxes impact designated to provide sites additional Habitat Loss Neutral N/A High Not None None breeding and significant foraging Disturbance Neutral N/A High Not None None resources significant Disturbance Low Long- High Not Production of Not Collision Neutral N/A High Not None None negative term significant detailed method significant significant statements to Red kite High ensure legal Habitat Loss Neutral N/A High Not None None compliance. significant Collision Neutral N/A High Not None None Disturbance Neutral N/A High Not None None significant significant Collision Neutral N/A High Not None None Overall, this site is of low conservation value, comprising mainly intensively farmed arable fields significant that do not support important bird populations. Hobby High Habitat Loss Neutral N/A High Not None None Due to the distance of the site from Pitsford Reservoir SSSI and the absence of any records significant indicating a link between the site and the SSSI, potential impacts on the designated site can be Disturbance Neutral N/A High Not None None confidently dismissed. Similarly, there are no potential impacts predicted on twelve non- significant statutory designated sites within 2km of the proposed windfarm site. Collision Neutral N/A High Not None None significant Barn owl High Six avian receptors of more than negligible conservation value were identified as using the site: Habitat Loss Neutral N/A High Not None None red kite, hobby, barn owl, golden plover, lapwing and the farmland bird community. It is significant predicted that the integrity of the populations of all six receptors will not be negatively affected. Disturbance Neutral N/A High Not None None significant In the absence of mitigation, the magnitude of potential impacts of the development on the Collision Neutral N/A High Not None None farmland bird community is considered to be low negative, but not significant in terms of the significant integrity of their populations. Some mitigation is recommended to reduce potential impacts further and ensure legal compliance and maintain ecological best practise. It is also recognised

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 8-13 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 8: Ornithology

that there is an opportunity for potential biodiversity enhancement by the inclusion of a small number of targeted actions. In summary, it is considered that the impact of the scheme on birds and areas of ornithological interest is assessed as not significant.

8.11 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS AND EFFECTS Three other windfarms or windfarm proposals that are built, consented or have planning applications in are located within 20km to Brixworth. These comprise:

Burton Wold: an existing operational windfarm located approximately 10km to the east of the development site; Burton Wold Extension: proposals for an extension to the Burton Wold windfarm that has been consented, located approximately 10km to the east of the development site; and Tesco Wind Turbine: one wind turbine generator located at in a car park at the Tesco Distribution Centre, near Crick located approximately 15km to the west of the development site.

No pathway for impact has been identified whereby a cumulative impact may affect the statutory and non-statutory designated sites. This assessment has identified no potential impacts of the development on red kite, hobby, barn owl, golden plover or lapwing, therefore there would be no contribution of this development to any cumulative impact. The distance between the sites is considered to be sufficient to avoid causing any cumulative impact on farmland birds. Therefore it is considered that the integrity of these features will remain unaffected by the development and there will be no negative cumulative impacts.

8.12 STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE It is considered that the impact of the scheme on birds and areas of ornithological interest is not significant.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 8-14 472000 474000 476000

Key

Proposed Turbine Locations

Viewpoint Location

Core Survey Area 274000 274000 Breeding and Winter Bird Survey Area

1km Barn Owl Survey Area

2km Raptor Survey Area

1

. 3

5 2

4

6 272000 272000

1:20,000 Scale @ A3

0 500 1,000 m

Bird Survey Areas Figure 8.1

Brixworth Windfarm 270000 270000 Environmental Statement 472000 474000 476000 Reproduced under licence from Ordnance Survey digital map data. CrownAll rights Copyright. reserved. 0100031673 Licence number

474000 475000 476000 274000 274000

Key

Proposed Turbine Locations

Core Survey Area Territory Centres Meadow Pipit

1 Skylark

Woodpigeon 3 Yellow Wagtail

Breeding Bird Survey Area 273000 273000

5

2

4

6 272000 272000

1:10,000 Scale @ A3

0 250 500 m

Breeding Bird Survey Figure 8.2a

Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement 474000 475000 476000 Reproduced under licence from Ordnance Survey digital map data. CrownAll rights Copyright. reserved. number 0100031673 Licence

474000 475000 476000 274000 274000

Key

Proposed Turbine Locations

Core Survey Area Territory Centres Dunnock

1 Robin

Wren 3 Breeding Bird Survey Area 273000 273000

5

2

4

6 272000 272000

1:10,000 Scale @ A3

0 250 500 m

Breeding Bird Survey Figure 8.2b

Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement 474000 475000 476000 Reproduced under licence from Ordnance Survey digital map data. CrownAll rights Copyright. reserved. number 0100031673 Licence

474000 475000 476000 274000 274000

Key

Proposed Turbine Locations

Core Survey Area Territory Centres Blackbird

1 Song Thrush

Breeding Bird Survey Area 3 273000 273000

5

2

4

6 272000 272000

1:10,000 Scale @ A3

0 250 500 m

Breeding Bird Survey Figure 8.2c

Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement 474000 475000 476000 Reproduced under licence from Ordnance Survey digital map data. CrownAll rights Copyright. reserved. number 0100031673 Licence

474000 475000 476000 274000 274000

Key

Proposed Turbine Locations

Core Survey Area Territory Centre Blackcap

1 Chiffchaff

Garden Warbler 3 Lesser Whitethroat

Sedge Warbler 273000 273000 Whitethroat

5 Willow Warbler

2 Breeding Bird Survey Area

4

6 272000 272000

1:10,000 Scale @ A3

0 250 500 m

Breeding Bird Survey Figure 8.2d

Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement 474000 475000 476000 Reproduced under licence from Ordnance Survey digital map data. CrownAll rights Copyright. reserved. number 0100031673 Licence

474000 475000 476000 274000 274000

Key

Proposed Turbine Locations

Core Survey Area Territory Centre Blue Tit

1 Carrion Crow

Great Tit 3 Long Tailed Tit

Breeding Bird Survey Area 273000 273000

5

2

4

6 272000 272000

1:10,000 Scale @ A3

0 250 500 m

Breeding Bird Survey Figure 8.2e

Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement 474000 475000 476000 Reproduced under licence from Ordnance Survey digital map data. Crown Copyright.All rights reserved.

474000 475000 476000 274000 274000

Key

Proposed Turbine Locations

Core Survey Area Territory Centre Bullfinch

1 Chaffinch

Goldfinch 3 Greenfinch

Breeding Bird Survey Area 273000 273000

5

2

4

6 272000 272000

1:10,000 Scale @ A3

0 250 500 m

Breeding Bird Survey Figure 8.2f

Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement 474000 475000 476000 Reproduced under licence from Ordnance Survey digital map data. Crown Copyright.All rights reserved.

474000 475000 476000 274000 274000

Key

Proposed Turbine Locations

Core Survey Area Territory Centre Reed Bunting

1 Yellowhammer

Breeding Bird Survey Area 3 273000 273000

5

2

4

6 272000 272000

1:10,000 Scale @ A3

0 250 500 m

Breeding Bird Survey Figure 8.2g

Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement 474000 475000 476000 Reproduced under licence from Ordnance Survey digital map data. CrownAll rights Copyright. reserved. number 0100031673 Licence

Figure 8.3a Scale @ A3 @ Scale Proposed Turbine Locations Turbine Proposed Area Survey Core Hobby Red Kite Window Risk 200m Brixworth Windfarm Hobby & Red Kite Flights Environmental Statement 1:10,000 0 250 500 m

Key

274000 273000 272000

476000 476000 138 475000 475000 6 130 5

121 3 137 4 1 2

474000 474000

274000 273000 272000

0100031673 number Licence reserved. rights All Copyright. Crown data. map digital Survey Ordnance from licence under Reproduced

b Figure 8.3 Lapwing Flights Lapwing Golden Plover & Plover Golden Scale @ A3 @ Scale Proposed Turbine Locations Turbine Proposed Area Survey Core Golden Plover Flights Lapwing Flights Window Risk 200m Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement 1:10,000 0 250 500 m

Key

274000 273000 272000 476000 476000

128

132 126

135 122 129

139

475000 475000

6 131

5 136 134 3 4

1 2

125

133

474000 123 474000 124

127

274000 273000 272000

0100031673 number Licence reserved. rights All Copyright. Crown data. map digital Survey Ordnance from licence under Reproduced

Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 9: Hydrology and Hydrogeology

9. HYDROLOGY AND HYDROGEOLOGY Table 9.1 Consultation Responses Consultee Key Points in Response The Meteorological Information provided on meteorological conditions for Northamptonshire and 9.1 INTRODUCTION Office regional climatic averages. Environment Agency A number of watercourses cross the windfarm site. No record of flooding, but This Chapter of the Environmental Statement (ES) assesses the hydrological and south of the windfarm site may be subject to marginal flooding in low lying hydrogeological effects of the proposed windfarm during construction, operation and areas. decommissioning. Reference is made to Chapter 7: Ecology where appropriate. Daventry District Information provided on private water supplies. Council This chapter contains the following sections: The British Geological Details provided on solid and drift geology and groundwater. Survey Planning Service Listed planning requirements, and consultees who did and did not respond to Methodology - describing the methods used in baseline surveys and in the assessment of the scoping. significance of effects;

Baseline Description - a description of the hydrology and hydrogeology of the windfarm site based on the results of surveys, desk information and consultations; 9.2.3 Desk Study Information Gaps - a summary of the main uncertainties encountered in the assessment; Potential Effects - identifying the ways in which the development site could be affected by The desk study included: the proposed windfarm; Mitigation - a description of measures recommended to off-set potential effects; Identification of catchments, watercourses, springs and water features; Residual Effects - an assessment of the significance of the effects of the windfarm, after Collation of data provided through consultations; mitigation measures have been implemented shown in Summary Tables; and Collation of flood plain information and water quality data; and Statement of Significance. Compilation of soils, geological and hydrogeological information.

9.2 METHODOLOGY Reference was made to the following sources of information:

9.2.1 Assessment Methodology The British Geological Survey (BGS) Digital Mapping; Hydrogeological Map of England and Wales 1:625,000, 1977; This assessment has involved the following elements, further details of which are provided in The Ordnance Survey (OS) 1:50,000 Landranger Map (Sheet 152); the sections below: Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC). The Water Framework Directive (WFD) establishes a framework for the protection, improvement and sustainable use of all water environments; Consultation with relevant statutory and non-statutory bodies; The Construction Industry Research and Information Association (CIRIA) Environmental Desk study, including review of available maps and published information; Good Practice On Site (C502) (1999). C502 provides guidance on how to avoid causing Site walkover; environmental damage when on a construction site; and Evaluation of potential effects; CIRIA Control of Water Pollution from Construction Sites (C532) (2001). C532 provides Evaluation of the significance of these effects; and guidance on how to plan and manage construction projects to control water pollution. Identification of measures to avoid and mitigate potential effects. 9.2.4 Site Walkover

9.2.2 Consultations A site walkover was carried out on 26th March 2008 to visually inspect surface water features and to obtain an understanding of the local topography and hydrological regime. Further Information has been provided by a range of organisations during the assessment, and this is information on site conditions was obtained from a walkover undertaken on 21st May 2008 as summarised in Table 9.1 below. part of the geotechnical studies.

9.2.5 Assessment of Significance

The significance of the potential effects of the development has been classified by taking into account sensitivity of receptor and magnitude of potential effect, combined with the likelihood of an event occurring.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 9-1 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 9: Hydrology and Hydrogeology

The sensitivity of the receiving environment can be defined as its ability to absorb an effect Topography is broadly defined by a ridge in the eastern section of the site, sloping from east to without perceptible change and can be classified as either low, moderate or high. These are west. The site is traversed by a small tributary (draining from north to south) of an unnamed dependent on factors such as the quality of local receiving waters; their purpose (e.g.; whether watercourse in the southern section of the site. The majority of the land is used for arable used for drinking, fisheries); and existing influences; etc. farming. Habitats are described in detail in Chapter 7: Ecology.

The magnitude includes the timing, scale, size and duration of the potential effect resulting Surface watercourses and catchments are illustrated in Figure 9.1. from the proposed windfarm. The magnitude of potential affects can be classified as negligible, minor, moderate or major. 9.3.2 Solid Geology

The significance of the unmitigated effect is therefore defined as follows: The BGS Digital Mapping shows the main part of the windfarm site is underlain by mudstone of the Whitby Mudstone Formation. Land in the north east section of the site is underlain by Ooidal Table 9.2 Unmitigated Significance Criteria Ironstone of the Northampton Sand Formation. Solid geology is shown in Figure 9.2. Sensitivity Magnitude Low Moderate High 9.3.3 Superficial Geology Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Minor Negligible Minor Medium The BGS Digital Mapping shows that superficial deposits are absent within the application Moderate Minor Medium Medium/Major boundary, indicating bedrock is at or near to the surface. Topsoil and residual soil was evident Major Minor Medium/Major Major during the site visit. Areas beyond the southern section of the application boundary are overlain by undifferentiated clays. Areas beyond the east of the application boundary are overlain by The likelihood of an event occurring is then included, and classified as unlikely, possible or Diamicton Till. likely. 9.3.4 Hydrogeology Finally, the residual (or overall) significance after mitigation is a function of the unmitigated significance combined with the likelihood of an event occurring (with mitigation taking place); as The Hydrogeological Map of England and Wales 1:625,000 (1977), shows the windfarm site to shown below: be underlain by thick clays with alternating limestone beds. Fissured Marlstone Rock bed yields small supplies in the East Midlands. These regions tend to be underlain by impermeable rocks Table 9.3 Residual Significance Criteria after Mitigation generally without groundwater, except at shallow depth. Likelihood Unmitigated Unlikely Possible Likely 9.3.5 Climate Significance Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible The Hydrogeological Map of England and Wales 1:625,000 (1977), shows the Average Annual Minor Negligible Negligible Minor Rainfall to be 508mm to 635mm per annum. The Meteorological Office report regional Average Medium Negligible Minor Medium Annual precipitation for Northamptonshire to be 606.2mm per annum (1971 to 2000). Major Minor Medium Major 9.3.6 Hydrology Conclusions will therefore state whether residual significance will be major, medium, minor or negligible, once appropriate mitigation has been implemented. This assessment relies on Figure 9.1 shows the main surface watercourses and their associated catchments. professional judgment to ensure that the effects are appropriately assessed. Effects of medium significance or greater are considered significant in terms of the EIA Regulations. An unnamed watercourse runs from east to west along the southern windfarm site boundary, and is fed by an unnamed tributary issuing in the northern section of the site. The unnamed watercourse feeds into a wider drainage network that flow south towards the 9.3 BASELINE DESCRIPTION Grand Union Canal, approximately 13km from the windfarm site. All watercourses within the 9.3.1 Topography and Landuse study area are within the same catchment and drain in the same direction. The 1:50,000 Ordnance Survey Landranger Map (Sheet 152) shows several springs issuing in the east and The windfarm site is located approximately 1.7km to the north of Brixworth and 1.1km to the northeast of the site. These were not evident during the site walkover, conducted after two south of Hanging Haughton in Northamptonshire. The proposed turbine envelope and access days of persistent rain. Mapping also shows a well in the southern section of the study area track layout are illustrated in Figure 3.1. (NGR 474772, 271993) shown in Figure 9.1. Visual inspection during the site walkover suggests that the well was used for agricultural purposes but is no longer in use. The 1:50,000 Ordnance Survey Landranger Map (Sheet 152) shows the turbine envelope to lie on an elevated plateau rising from approximately 85m AOD to 119m AOD.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 9-2 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 9: Hydrology and Hydrogeology

9.4.6.1 Hydrological Regime 9.4 INFORMATION GAPS In terms of hydrological regime, steeper sections of brooks will naturally respond more quickly to rainfall. Watercourses at Brixworth are relatively flat and slow flowing and the steeper The following elements of work are not required to complete this assessment, but are likely to sections tend to be outside the turbine envelope (to the northwest). Watercourses onsite are be necessary prior to construction: therefore likely to have more capacity to absorb rainfall, with corresponding slower response rates. Pollution Prevention Plan.

9.4.6.2 Surface Water Continuity 9.5 ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL EFFECTS Surface watercourses appear to be relatively continuous, with no obvious blockages evident during the site visit. These are considered for construction, operation and decommissioning.

9.4.6.3 Surface Water Morphology Before looking at individual effects, however, it is important to recognise that the predominant From what was observed onsite, morphology is relatively typical of centripetal drainage network effects on local hydrology and hydrogeology in windfarm developments are typically associated watercourses, which are steeper in their upper reaches and become increasingly flatter as they with borrow pit construction. In order to eliminate this risk, a decision has been made not to progress downslope. excavate borrow pits at Brixworth, and instead, to import stone from local quarries for foundation material. 9.3.7 Designations Furthermore, all potentially polluting activities can be controlled through a Pollution Prevention There are three watercourse designations within a 10km radius of the site; Plan (PPP).

Birch Spinney & Mawsley SSSI, designated for woodland habitat and marshy peat; 9.5.1 Potential Const Southfield Farm Marsh SSSI, designated washland supporting varied fauna and flora; and Pitsford Reservoir SSSI, designated for wintering wildfowl. 9.5.1.1 Access Tracks and Cabling Approximately 2.88kmruction of Effectsnew access track, approximately 5m wide will be constructed. There No site watercourses drain directly into the above mentioned SSSI’s. would also be passing places of approximate width 5m and length 15m (every 250m). It is planned that access tracks will cross the unnamed tributary three times. New culverts will be 9.3.8 Fisheries needed for these crossings.

Desk studies have highlighted the importance of local fisheries for populations of Brown Trout There do not appear to be any other notable water course crossings. and Rainbow Trout, particularly Pitsford Reservoir (3km south east). Windfarm construction, if poorly controlled, can lead to increased run-off, sedimentation, compaction, and changes to soil Access tracks can lead to increased run-off, sedimentation, compaction, and changes to soil flow flow patterns. In this instance, run-off would drain in accordance with the existing surface run- patterns. Run-off would drain in accordance with the existing surface run-off regimes onsite, off regimes on site, predominantly towards the west of the windfarm site. predominantly towards the unnamed watercourse and its tributary, draining west in the southern section of the windfarm. Culverting across watercourses can, in addition to the above, 9.3.9 Water Supplies Public and Private impede flows and passage of wildlife.

Consultation responses have not highlighted any private water supplies within 1.5km of the Such potential effects can be mitigated against. However, it is possible that under certain proposed windfarm and no potable water supplies exist within the immediate vicinity of the circumstances, such as during heavy rainfall, they may still occur. In order to ensure that the proposed turbine locations. worse-case has been considered, therefore, these potential effects are classed as “Possible”.

9.3.10 Flooding Figures 3.5, 3.6 and 3.7 in Chapter 3 of this ES provide details on access tracks, culverting, and drainage respectively. The Environment Agency (EA) has no records of flooding at the site and the Flood Map shows the site located in an area described as Flood Zone 1 in PPS25. The EA have suggested that 9.5.1.2 Compound and Substation marginal flooding in low lying areas beyond the south of the site around an unnamed watercourse may be possible during heavy and prolonged precipitation events. No turbines or The proposed compound (~50m X 50m) is in the northern part of the windfarm site, within the ancillary structures are located within these areas. Areas at risk from marginal flooding are catchment of the unnamed watercourse. This would be used in part for fuel storage and re- shown on Figure 9.1. fuelling, and would be equipped with the necessary bunding. It would also have a car parking area, offices, and self contained toilets. The substation would be located in the northern section

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 9-3 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 9: Hydrology and Hydrogeology

of the site adjacent to the access track, also within the catchment of the unnamed watercourse. Felling of woodland can increase surface water run-off and cause impediments to river flow. Both areas will be located a minimum of 50m from surface watercourses. Land at Brixworth is predominantly used for arable farming. There is limited woodland to the north of Turbine 1 and there are no proposals to fell this woodland. Potential physical effects would be similar as for access tracks above, and these can be mitigated against. Again, however, it is possible that under certain circumstances, they may still 9.5.1.7 Compaction of Soils occur, and so to ensure a worse-case has been considered, they are classed as “Possible”. Construction of access tracks and movement of construction traffic can lead to compaction of Potential chemical effects are considered below. the soil. This can reduce soil permeability, potentially leading to increased run-off and increased erosion. The site geology is generally of low permeability and has gently sloping topography, so 9.5.1.3 Chemical Pollution the effects of compaction would not result in a significant increase in runoff. Furthermore, the Potential risks include the spillage or leakage of chemicals, unset cement, foul water, fuel or oil, percentage affected area is relatively small in relation to the unaffected area. For these reasons, during use or storage onsite. These pollutants have the potential to adversely affect soils, water the magnitude of this effect will be minor. quality, and groundwater, and hence effects on the biodiversity of receiving watercourses. 9.5.1.8 Migration of Pollutants from Contaminated Land All turbines lie within the catchment of the unnamed watercourse draining towards the west of There are no known areas of contaminated land within the windfarm site. Should potentially the site. This watercourse could, therefore, be at risk from a pollution incident during contaminated land be encountered during excavations, however, this would be tested and construction. All surface watercourses and surface water bodies are considered to be of high disposed of in line with appropriate guidelines and legislation. sensitivity. 9.5.1.9 Increase in Runoff Potential effects can be mitigated against; however, accidental spillages cannot be absolutely Increased run-off has the potential to influence a range of factors discussed in this section ruled out and, in order to ensure the worse-case has been considered, are classed as “Possible”. (sedimentation, chemical pollution, soil flow changes, etc), particularly in relation to surface watercourses (see below). 9.5.1.4 Erosion and Sedimentation Erosion and sedimentation can occur from excavations, ground disturbance and poor design of The increase in hardstanding can increase the volume and rate of localised surface run-off. The drainage ditches. Sediment entering watercourses has the potential to affect flood storage impermeable nature of the underlying geology, however, means there will be limited infiltration capacity, water quality, and ecology. Clearly therefore, if unmitigated, increased sedimentation and relatively high run-off rates, which suggests that the increase in hardstanding is unlikely to could have an indirect effect on local watercourses, and ultimately the receiving river systems have a significant effect. such as the River Nene. There are also no active floodplains, either on or nearby the windfarm site, and the Environment The magnitude of such effects is considered to be moderate, but potential effects can be Agency have no records of flooding at the site. mitigated against, particularly through best practice in the design and construction of the site. Despite this, and in order to ensure that the worse-case is assessed, they are still classed as 9.5.1.10Surface Watercourses “Possible”. Surface water run-off has the potential to directly enter onsite surface watercourses and water bodies (detailed previously), and to indirectly reach off-site surface watercourses such as the 9.5.1.5 Change to Soil Interflow Patterns River Nene. Some turbine base excavations may need temporary sub-surface water controls such as physical cut-offs or de-watering. These divert flows away from the excavation, and de-watering The design of the site layout has incorporated a buffer zone of 50m between watercourses and temporarily lowers the local water table. Localised temporary changes to soil interflow patterns all tracks and turbine bases. The closest infrastructure is located 52m. Micrositing will be may therefore arise. employed to minimise water course crossings and ensure that this buffer is maintained.

Given the low sensitivity of groundwater in this area and the temporary nature of this effect, the The use of interceptor drains, silt traps and balancing ponds will ensure that there is no risk is not considered to be significant (with appropriate management and mitigation). pathway for pollutants or additional sediment to enter watercourses onsite (see Figure 3.7 in Chapter 3 of this ES). This mitigation will therefore ensure in most circumstances that no 9.5.1.6 Impediments to Flow surface run-off from the worked areas of the windfarm site will flow directly into a watercourse The access track would entail two crossings of the tributary of the unnamed watercourse which during normal operations. Despite this, it is possible that under certain circumstances, such as runs east to west along the southern site boundary. All crossings will be designed to best during heavy rainfall, surface water effects may still occur. In order to ensure that the worse- practice guidance such that they do not impede flows. In order to ensure that the worse case is case has been considered, these potential effects are classed as “Possible”. assessed, stream flow impediments are classed as “Possible”. Figures 3.5, 3.6 and 3.7 in Chapter 3 of this ES provide culvert details, and road and drainage details respectively.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 9-4 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 9: Hydrology and Hydrogeology

9.5.2 Potential Operatio The PPP will set out measures to be employed to avoid or mitigate against potential effects for all phases of the windfarm, and will also include an Incident Plan to be followed, should Potential medium and long term effects associated with site infrastructure such as access tracks, pollution occur. A nominated person will have specific responsibility for implementation of the turbine bases and hardstandings could potentially include: PPP. nal Effects

Increased run-off rates and volume; Method statements will also be applied, which will follow the principles laid out in relevant Further erosion and sedimentation; Environment Agency Pollution Prevention Guidelines. Alterations to natural flow pathways; and Increased pollution risk. In terms of water crossings, micrositing will be employed to minimise the number of these, and ensure that the 50m buffer is maintained. Where crossings are necessary, a simple culvert type These effects have been discussed in relation to the construction phase, and as there would be construction would typically be employed. The size of the culvert would depend on the location significantly less activity during operation, the magnitude and likelihood of these is thus and would be based on CIRIA recommendations. Precise details would be submitted to the reduced. This will be further ensured through best practice design and construction, such as appropriate authorities for their agreement prior to construction. Written consent will also be cross drainage, use of shallow drainage ditches, prevention of blockages, and adherence to a sought from the Environment Agency, prior to working in the vicinity of watercourses. Pollution Prevention Plan (PPP) as discussed below. Access tracks would have adequate crown or cross-slope to allow rainwater to be shed and 9.5.3 Potential Decommissioning Effects where gradients are present lateral drainage would intercept flow. A drainage ditch would be formed on the upslope side of the track (dependant on a detailed drainage design). The potential effects of the decommissioning phase are also similar and generally less than those outlined above, and are not repeated here. Drainage cross pipes would be laid as required in areas where the position of the site track could lead to ponding on one side. As far as possible these would coincide with naturally 9.6 MITIGATION occurring drainage channels. When the track slopes downhill ‘waterbars’ would be placed to divert the flow into naturally occurring channels. The advice of the site ecologist would be Mitigation measures are referred to in the preceding discussion, and are broadly divided into sought to ensure that the location and outfall of cross pipes and waterbars minimise vegetation those which will be “embedded” into the layout and project design of the proposed windfarm damage or change. and those which will be implemented through best practice and a Pollution Prevention Plan. In order to further reduce surface water pollution potential, concrete batching during 9.6.1 Embedded Mitigation Measures construction will be carried out off-site, with the final material simply being imported onto site for immediate use. A fundamental “embedded” mitigation measure is the use of interceptor drains, silt traps and balancing ponds in proximity to access tracks to avoid introducing silt to site watercourses. Mitigation measures for construction, operation and decommissioning are listed in the following tables. The tables also provide an overall analysis of the significance of the effects, both pre and Secondly, the predominant effects on local geology and hydrology in windfarm developments post mitigation. This is based on the preceding discussion, and demonstrates that with the are typically associated with borrow pit construction and borrow pits will not be excavated at appropriate mitigation, the residual significance of all effects will be minor (or lower). Brixworth. Stone for use in foundation, track and construction compound construction will be imported.

Thirdly, a 50m buffer zone has been established for all turbine bases and ancillary structures/infrastructure around the watercourses on the site. This 50m buffer zone, in conjunction with a suitable PPP (see below) should avoid potential impacts on surface watercourses.

Sustainable Urban Drainage (SUDS) relates to the management of run-off in urban areas. However, the principles of sustainable drainage and site management would be implemented on site in order to minimise the risk to surface watercourses and groundwater.

9.6.2 Best Practice

Best Practice will be followed in all aspects of construction and operation, specifically through a Pollution Prevention Plan (PPP).

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 9-5 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 9: Hydrology and Hydrogeology

9.7 MITIGATION MEASURES CONSTRUCTION (AND DECOMMISSIONING)

Activity Effect Receptor(s) Sensitivity Mitigation Before Mitigation After Mitigation Magnitude Significance Likelihood Residual Significance 1) Access Tracks Increased run- Watercourses High 1a) No borrow pits onsite Moderate Medium Possible Minor (including cabling & off (and fisheries) 1b) Pollution Prevention Plan water crossings) 1c) Method Statements (including onsite effluent disposal) and consent from Environment Agency 1d) Interceptor drains 1e) Silt traps 1f) Balancing ponds 1g) 50m buffer around all watercourses (and micrositing) 1h) Sustainable Urban Drainage (SUDS) Erosion and Watercourses High As 1a to 1h Moderate Medium Possible Minor sedimentation (and fisheries) Brook flow Watercourses High 1i) Construction best practice Moderate Medium Possible Minor impediments (and fisheries) 1j) Suitable culvert design Soil flow Soils High As 1a to 1j Moderate Medium Possible Minor changes 1k) Drainage cross pipes and waterbars Soil loss and Soils High As 1a to 1k Moderate Medium Possible Minor compaction 2) Compound (and As 1) As 1) As 1) As 1) As 1) As 1) As 1) As 1) Substation) 3) Crane Pads, Turbine As 1) As 1) As 1) As 1) As 1) As 1) As 1) As 1) Bases, and Other Hardstandings 4) Activities Involving Pollution Watercourses High As 1a to 1k Moderate Medium Possible Minor Chemical Handling and and fisheries 4a) Storage in bunded compound Storage 4b) Disposal via registered waste carriers (includes turbine 4c) Off-site concrete batching erection, vehicle Pollution Groundwater High As 1a to 1k Moderate Medium Possible Minor operations, etc) As 4a to 4c Pollution Soils High As 1a to 1k Moderate Medium Possible Minor As 4a to 4c

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 9-6 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 9: Hydrology and Hydrogeology

9.8 MITIGATION MEASURES OPERATION

Activity Effect Receptor(s) Sensitivity Mitigation Before Mitigation After Mitigation

Magnitude Significance Likelihood Residual Significance 1) Access Tracks Drainage Watercourses High 1a) Pollution Prevention Plan Minor Medium Possible Minor (including cabling & modifications, and fisheries 1b) Interceptor drains water crossings) including 1c) Silt traps increased run- 1d) Balancing ponds off 1e) Fisheries management 1f) 50m buffer around all watercourses 1g) Regular inspections (part pf PPP) 1h) Sustainable Urban Drainage (SUDS) Erosion and Watercourses High As 1a to 1h Minor Medium Unlikely Negligible sedimentation and fisheries Soil flow Soils High As 1a to 1h Minor Medium Unlikely Negligible changes 2) Compound (and As 1) As 1) As 1) As 1) As 1) As 1) As 1) As 1) Substation) 3) Crane Pads, and As 1) As 1) As 1) As 1) As 1) As 1) As 1) As 1) Other Hardstandings 4) Activities Involving Pollution Watercourses High As 1) Minor Medium Unlikely Negligible Chemical Handling and and fisheries Storage Pollution Groundwater High As 1) Minor Medium Unlikely Negligible Pollution Soils High As 1) Minor Medium Unlikely Negligible

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 9-7 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 9: Hydrology and Hydrogeology

9.9 RESIDUAL EFFECTS

The effects are summarised in the previous tables, with residual significance for all issues being assessed as minor (or lower) for construction, operation and decommissioning.

9.10 STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE

This chapter has assessed the likely significance of effects of the proposed windfarm on hydrology and hydrogeology. Following adoption of the proposed mitigation measures, particularly through the implementation of “embedded” measures and a Pollution Prevention Plan, Brixworth Windfarm has been assessed as having the potential to result in effects of a minor significance or lower.

Given that effects of medium significance or greater are considered significant in terms of the EIA Regulations, the potential effects on hydrology and hydrogeology are considered to be not significant in terms of the EIA Regulations.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 9-8 1 Key

Proposed Turbine Locations

Anemometer

3 Substation/Control Building

Culverts

Track Layout

Site Boundary

Construction Compound

Crane Hardstandings 5

Watercourses

50m Buffer of Watercourses

2

4

6

1:5,000 Scale @ A3

0125250m

Surface Watercourses Figure 9.1

Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Reproduced underReproduced licence from Ordnance Survey digital map data. CrownAll Copyright. rights reserved. number 0100031673 Licence

1

Key

Proposed Turbine Locations 3 Anemometer

Substation/Control Building

Culverts

Track Layout

Site Boundary

Crane Hardstandings 5 Construction Compound SOLID GEOLOGY

2 Mudstone (Whitby Formation) Ooidal Ironstone Siltstone and Mudstone (Interbedded)

4

6

1:5,000 Scale @ A3

0 125 250 m

Solid Geology Figure 9.2

Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Reproduced under licence from Ordnance Survey digital map data. CrownAll rights Copyright. reserved. number 0100031673 Licence

Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 10: Cultural Heritage

Assessment of the significance of the effects taking into account the sensitivity of site (and 10. CULTURAL HERITAGE selected features beyond the site), the magnitude of potential effects (both direct and indirect) and the likelihood of such effects occurring; and Identification of means to mitigate and avoid, where possible, any potential effects, as well as the assessment of the residual effects which may exist after application of any mitigation. 10.1 INTRODUCTION

A detailed method statement for the assessment of effects and their significance is presented in The purpose of this chapter of the Environmental Statement (ES) is to identify and assess the section 10.2.4 below proposed windfarm in terms of potential effects upon the Cultural Heritage resource of the site and surrounding area. Cultural heritage resources include World Heritage, Scheduled 10.2.2Relevant Guidance Monuments, other archaeological sites recorded on the Northumberland Sites and Monuments The assessment has been undertaken taking into account the following guidance and legislation: Record, Listed Buildings, Conservation Areas, Registered Historic Park and Gardens, and Registered Battlefields. Planning Guidance Planning Policy Statement 6 Planning, (PPS6, March The assessment is intended to identify cultural heritage sites which may be affected, either 1999). This statement sets out planning policies for the protection and conservation of directly (e.g. through physical disturbance during construction) or indirectly (e.g. through archaeological remains and features of the built heritage. changes to visual and archaeological setting) during construction, throughout operation or from PPG15 Planning and the Historic Environment (1994) and PPG16 Archaeology and Planning de-commissioning of the proposed windfarm. The development is described in Chapter 3: (1990) provide guidance on development and historic interests such as Listed Buildings and Project Description. Conservation Areas, and on dealing with known and unknown archaeological remains Archaeology and the Built Heritage through the planning system. This chapter contains the following sections: Methodology - describing both the methods used in baseline surveys and in the assessment Legislation of the significance of effects; Baseline Description - a description of the condition of the site and its archaeological Statutory protection for archaeology is principally outlined in the Ancient Monuments and potential, as well as a listing of features of cultural heritage interest beyond the immediate Archaeological Areas Act (1979) as amended by the National Heritage Act (1983) and site, resulting from of surveys, desk information and consultations carried out to inform this nationally important sites are listed in a Schedule of Monuments. Scheduled Monument chapter; Consent (SMC) is required before any work affecting the fabric of a Scheduled Monument can Information Gaps - a summary of the main uncertainties encountered in the assessment; be carried out. Potential Effects - identifying the ways in which the cultural heritage resource of the site and Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas receive protection under the Planning (Listed its environs could be affected by the proposed windfarm; Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. Works that affect the character and appearance Mitigation - a description of measures recommended to off-set the identified potential of such structures may require an approval from the Local Planning Authority via a procedure effects; set out in the act. Residual Effects - an assessment of the significance of the effects of the development, after Other mitigation measures have been implemented; Summary of Effects; and The following guidance and advice was also considered, although not all is specific to England: Statement of Significance. Standards and Guidance for Ar (Institute of Field Archaeologists,Ancient Monuments 1999). and ArchaeolThis advises that the aim of a desk-based assessment is to gain information about the known and potential archaeological resource within the proposed 10.2 METHODOLOGY development site boundary and that from this an appraisal can be made on the presence or absence of archaeology. chaeological Desk Based Assessments 10.2.1Assessment Methodology Planning Advice Note Archaeologyogical - Planning Areas PrAct This assessment has involved: (PAN 42, Scottish Executive) provides advice on the handling of archaeological matters within the planning process and on the separate control over Scheduled Monuments under the Consultation with the Statutory and Non-statutory authorities to gain data establishing the (1979). baseline conditions for the site and its surrounding area; Planning Advice Note - Renewable Energy Technologies (PAN 45, Revised 2002, Scottish Desk-based studies and site visits to contribute to and validate data relevant to establishing Executive) provides useful advice and information for on-shore wind power, and contains the baseline conditions (presented as a Desk-based Assessment Report as Technical guidance on the visual effects from wind turbines.ocess and Scheduled Monument Procedures Appendix 10); Landscape Appraisal for Onshore , University of Newcastle 2003. Assessment of the effects expected from the development and their potential effect upon the existing conditions;

Wind Development Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 10-1 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 10: Cultural Heritage

Guidelines on the Environmental Impacts of Wind Farms and Small Scale Hydroelectric Schemes, Scottish Natural Heritage, 2001. . It further clarifies Visual Assessment of Wind Farms – Best Practice, University of Newcastle (for Scottish the relationship between distance and prominence of the windfarm in an open landscape: Natural Heritage), 2002. Within an area of 2km from the windfarm it will be a prominent feature; 10.2.3Consultation Within an area between 2-5km from the windfarm it will be relatively prominent; Consultation was undertaken with both Statutory and Non-Statutory Consultees, both at the Between 5-15km, the windfarm will only be prominent in clear visibility and as part of the Scoping stage and as part of the Assessment process. The responses are summarised below; wider landscape; and the turbines can be viewed adjacent to Between 15-30km the turbines will only be seen in very clear visibility and then as a minor Table 10.1 Consultation Responses character of the development and the element in the landscape. Consultee Response Northamptonshire County Council The Council expressed itself satisfied with the It is therefore considered for this assessment that the indirect visual impact on the setting of a approach to the assessment in a meeting on nationally important monument beyond 10km from the windfarm is not significant. Beyond 5km rd 3 April. Asked that indirect effects upon the an historic site of regional importance does not suffer significant impacts on setting. Church At Brixworth, and Lamport Hall and other features, different weather conditions, the landscape and nature of the visibility’ Gardens be assessed. It is also important to consider existing screening of the cultural heritage from natural Daventry District Council Daventry stated that the assessment should topography of the landscape. Forest and woodlands can also provide suitable visual screening to take into account the national advice in PPG 15 and PPG16. the cultural heritage. However, it is noted that in managed forests the level of screening will English Heritage English Heritage expressed themselves content alter and views may be opened up over time, which once were non-existent. with the proposed assessment methodology in their response to the Scoping Report. No detailed consideration of potential impacts from noise or shadow flicker has been undertaken for Cultural Heritage features, since no significant above ground or built heritage features exist within or immediately adjacent to the site to receive any such impacts. The assessment of 10.2.4Assessment Methodology indirect (visual) effects is based on the final form of the proposed development and is discussed The assessment of effects on the cultural heritage is concerned with direct (physical) and in 10.5.2 Potential Operational Effects. indirect (largely visual) impacts. 10.2.5Assessment of Significance Direct (Physical) This assessment proceeds from a consideration of the Sensitivity of a cultural heritage feature Assessment of physical effects considers direct impacts to the cultural heritage, where sites or against the Severity of any potential impact, to arrive at the Significance of the effect. potential sites/buried archaeology is in danger of being disturbed or destroyed. Physical impacts are likely to occur during construction and decommissioning, and are permanent and Sensitivity for the purposes of this assessment has been equated with designation status, as irreversible. They are discussed in 10.5.1 Potential Construction Effects. shown in the table below;

Indirect (Visual, noise etc.) Table 10.2 Sensitivity This assessment will take account of the potential visual intrusion on the settings of Scheduled Level of Sensitivity Designation Status Monuments, monuments registered as nationally important and Listed Buildings that exist within Very High World Heritage Sites the proposed windfarm site and a 15km Zone of Theoretical Visibility around it. The setting of a High Scheduled Monuments (whether or not in State Care), national monument or Listed Building can be loosely interpreted as features that form an Grade I Listed Buildings, Registered Battlefields, integralTechnologies part of their significance. Setting can be tangible, such as a defined boundary or Registered Historic Gardens etc. Medium intangible, such as atmosphere or ambience. The main concern for visual impacts is the Grade II* Listed Buildings, regionally important potential for the proposed development to fragment the historic landscape, separate archaeological features and areas (as defined in the connectivity between historic sites and impinge on views to and from sites with important Sites and Monuments Record). Conservation Areas. landscape settings. Visual impacts can occur during construction, operation and Low decommissioning. Windfarms can have a lifespan of up to 25 years, but the visual impacts from Grade II Listed Buildings, sites and features noted as this sort of development are considered temporary and easily reversible. Locally important in the Sites and Monuments Record. Negligible In the absence of other guidance, Scotland’s Planning Advice Note - Renewable Energy Badly preserved/damaged or very common (PAN 45, Revised 2002) has been used in determining visual effects. It notes that: archaeological features/buildings of little or no value ‘visual effect will be dependent on at local or other scale.

Bolsterstone Plc the distance over which a August 2008 10-2

wind farm may be viewed, whether Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 10: Cultural Heritage

Table 10.4 Significance Listed Buildings are nationally designated and are subject to a grading process (Grade I, II*, II) Sensitivity Very High High Medium Low Negligible and we have taken this grading as indicative of a presumed level of importance, based on rarity, period, architectural style, completeness, degree of subsequent alterations and so on. This Severity assessment has assigned the Grades to different levels of sensitivity for purposes of assessment Very High Major Major Moderate Minor Minor of potential impacts upon setting, as shown above on Table 10.2. High Major Major Moderate Minor Not Significant Severity is a measure of the nature of the expected impact. It has been broken down, for direct Medium Moderate Moderate Moderate Minor Not and indirect impacts, as shown in table 10.3 below. For the purposes of visual assessment, Significant proximity to the windfarm (within the Zone of Theoretical Visibility) has been taken to be the Low Minor Minor Minor Not Not determining attribute (so as to allow for concordance with the statements of visual prominence Significant Significant presented in PAN 45). A site centre at approximate grid reference 474665, 272745 has been Negligible Minor Not Not Not Not used for purposes of calculating distance to the various features, or the distance to the nearest Significant Significant Significant Significant turbine or to the nearest point in the proposed site boundary is stated. A significant effect is considered to occur where the combination of sensitivity and severity Table 10.3 Severity results in a major or moderate effect. The assessment text considers in detail only those Level of Magnitude Definition features for which a potential effect of “moderate” or higher significance is initially predicted Very High Total loss of or major alteration to a site, building or based on the distance of the feature from the site and the feature’s designatory status (in other feature. accordance with the matrix presented above). The Summary Table and Statement of Presence within or immediately adjacent to windfarm Significance use the final assessed significance levels derived from the consideration in the main site. assessment text. High Major damage to or significant alteration to a site, building or other feature. Loss of one or more key 10.2.6Zone of Theoretical V attributes. The Zone of Theoretical Visibility used in this assessment has been calculated from Tip height to Extensive change to the setting of a Scheduled Monument, Historic Park Grade 1, II* Listed Building ground contours and does not allow for any vegetation (such as mature blocks of trees) or settlement. The ZTV is calculated to reflect visibility at approximately 2m above ground level. or other feature (i.e. proximity within 2km of the isibility (ZTV) windfarm site). Medium In considering effects using this methodology, the following points need to be borne in mind. Damage or alteration to a site, building or other Firstly, the Zone of Theoretical Visibility is a theoretical construct, based upon a fairly crude feature. Encroachment on an Area considered to have base terrain modelling only, with no modelling of settlement and vegetation cover (see the high archaeological potential. Landscape and Visual Assessment in Chapter 6 for further detail). Within each “band”, based on Change in setting to Monuments/buildings and other numbers of turbines theoretically visible, no distinction is made in how much of each turbine is features within 5km of development site, (i.e. visible. The ZTV therefore represents a “worst case scenario” and in reality visual effects may be proximity within 2-5km of the windfarm site). substantially less than suggested. Secondly, mechanical application of the methodology will Low generate major and medium effects (simply based on distance and designatory status), for Minor damage or alteration to a site, building or other feature. Encroachment on an area where it is which (in case of visual effects upon settings) no mitigation is proposed. Where this is the case, considered that low archaeological potential exists. predicted medium or major effects are discussed in detail within the assessment text (in section 10.4.1 Potential Operational Effects) and ameliorating conditions highlighted. Minor change in setting of Monuments, site and other features (i.e. proximity within 5-15km of the windfarm 10.3 BASELINE DESCRIPTION site). Negligible 10.3.1Baseline Assessment No Physical impact. A desk-based assessment was undertaken by Archaeological Services WYAS in May 2008 to Proximity within 15-30km of the windfarm site. identify known archaeological and other cultural heritage features within the site, and in a study area 1km around its boundary. The purpose was to validate data received from the The Significance of any potential effect can be arrived at by matching Sensitivity against Northamptonshire Historic Environment Record, and to identify whether previously unrecorded Severity in the following table; features were visible. It was also required to inform on the potential for currently unknown, buried archaeological remains to exist within the site. The report is presented as Technical Appendix 10. Note that the Desk-based assessment was carried out using the originally

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 10-3 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 10: Cultural Heritage

proposed site boundary for the 7 turbine site issued during the Scoping phase of the windfarm. Registered Battlefields It is not proposed to repeat all of the information here, but the following represents a summary There are 2 Battlefield within 15km of the proposed development, but neither of these lie within of that work. In addition, this section has identified and quantified other cultural heritage 5km. They are listed below and assessed in section 10.5.2. features at varying ranges beyond the reduced site boundary which may receive an indirect impact upon their settings. 24 Battle of Naseby, 1645 29 Battle of Bedford, 1460

10.3.2Site Condition and walkover Listed Buildings The site consists of land used for arable farming. It varies in height from c. 90m AOD in the There are over 2000 listed buildings of all grades within 15km of the site. The majority of these west to c.130m AOD along its eastern side. The soils are well drained loams overlying clay in lie within urban settings, such as in Market Harborough, Wellingborough, Kettering and the western part of the site, and sandstones and ironstone to the east. A site walkover was Northampton, as well as in the smaller villages and settlements, such as Brixworth, Spratton undertaken in April 2008, in good weather. No previously unrecorded archaeological or cultural and Cottesbrooke. The majority of these are listed at Grade II. Of these, 158 lie within 5km of heritage features were noted at this time. the site, and 14 of these are listed at Grade I or Grade II*. These are listed below, and assessed in section 10.5.2 below. There are 65 Listed Buildings within 2km of the site, of which 5 are listed at Grade I or Grade II*. 10.3.3Features within the site There are no recorded archaeological sites or other features of cultural heritage interest 360072 All Saints Church, Brixworth (Grade I); recorded on the Northamptonshire Historic Environment Record lying within the site boundary. 360110 Cottesbrooke, Cottesbrooke (Grade I); There are Scheduled Monuments within the site in whole or part, and no part of the site lies 360121 Church of All Saints, Cottesbrooke (Grade I); within a Registered Historic Park or Garden or other heritage designation. 360130 Church of St Michael, Creaton (Grade II*); 360225 Church of All Saints, Pitsford (Grade II*); 360236 Church of St Andrew, Spratton (Grade I); 10.3.4Features beyond the site boundary 360279 Church of St Catherine, Draughton (Grade II*); 360305 Church of St Mary and All Saints, Holcot (Grade I); 360324 Church of All Saints, Lamport (Grade I); ThereScheduled are 59 Ancient Scheduled Monuments Ancient Monuments within 15km of the site boundary (see table 10.6). 360328 The Old Rectory, Lamport (Grade II*); Of these, there are 6 that lie within 5km, for which a significant impact upon setting might be 360333 Lamport Hall, Lamport (Grade I); anticipated. These are listed below, and assessed in section 10.5.2 below. Only 2 Scheduled 360360 Church of St Mary the Virgin, Maidwell (Grade II*); Monuments lie within 2km of the proposed development. 360421 Church of St Andrew, Old (Grade I); and 360481 Church of St Peter and Paul, Scaldwell (Grade II*). 13626 Walgrave Moated Site 13671 Longman’s hill Long Barrow 29734 Brixworth Market Cross 10.3.5Archaeological Potential 30070 Medieval Settlement at Haselbech The desk-based assessment has shown that there is archaeological evidence for human activity 30071 Great House and Garden at Hanging Houghton in the wider landscape from at least the Neolithic period onwards, which all major NN109 Deserted Village (Site Of) at Faxton archaeological periods from then on being well represented in the record. The majority of records appear to relate to an intensively farmed landscape in the Late Iron Age and Romano- Registered Historic Parks and Gardens British Periods. Of particular note is the excavation of a Roman villa site to the south of the site There are 11 Registered Parks within 15km (see table 10.7), of which only 3 lie within 5 km, for (Lodge Leys), and the Anglo-Saxon period burials recorded relatively close to the south of the which a significant impact might be anticipated. These are listed below, and assessed in section site. Brixworth itself has produced evidence of Post-Roman and early to mid-Saxon settlement, 10.5.2. although Hanging Houghton to the north has no records prior to the Norman Conquest.

2030 Cottesbrooke Hall (Grade II) Aerial photography has revealed cropmark evidence for former landuse to the immediate north 2038 Lamport Hall (Grade II) of the site (Clint Hill) and to the west and north-west. This, in conjunction with scatters of lithic 2325 Boughton Hall (Grade II) material to the south, indicates that archaeological remains are widespread across the area. Archaeological remains are typically located close to the surface, often at the base of the ploughsoil.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 10-4 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 10: Cultural Heritage

The site appears to have been primarily in agricultural use since the medieval period. It is likely 10.5.2Potential Operation that the lack of development will have lead to archaeological remains of earlier periods (if No direct impacts upon cultural heritage features are anticipated from the operational windfarm. present) surviving. However, centuries of ploughing are likely to have damaged or destroyed shallow deposits or features. There is also potential for the survival of palaeo-environmentally There will be some indirectal Effects (visual) impacts upon the settings of some cultural heritage features important (organic) remains to exist (in deeper fills of boundary ditches) which may also provide beyond the site boundary. These are described and assessed below. information of the past climate, as well as local habitats and evidence for farming practices and diets. Such material may also be suitable for providing dating through scientific methods. Scheduled Ancient Monuments There are 59 Scheduled Ancient Monuments within 15km of the site boundary. Of these, there The archaeological potential of the site is considered to be moderate, given the large number of are 6 that lie within 5km, for which a significant impact upon setting might be anticipated. features within the immediate environs, despite the lack of significant evidence from within the These are assessed below. site itself. It is likely that archaeological remains (if present) may be of local and possibly regional significance depending upon the degree of survival, and type and periods of features 13626 Walgrave Moated Site represented. There is a low potential that significant remains may survive within the site. Such The monument lies on the northern side of the village of Walgrave, approximately 5.2km to the remains might include further evidence for the Post-Roman or Saxon period, and may be in the east of the nearest turbine. The monument consists of the low remains of a moated site, now form of burial. Buried remains of this period would be potentially of national importance. filled in. The monument has only a limited above ground presence, and there are no long views to it in which the turbines would be seen. Whilst all of the turbines are predicted to be visible 10.4 INFORMATION GAPS from the site, it is likely that they would be only a limited presence in view to the west, where The exact line of the access tracks was not walked during the site walkover survey as the final visible at all above intervening roof lines of buildings to the west, on the western side of the layout was not known when the walkover was undertaken. However, the site was walked over village. The significance of any effect is considered “minor” at worst. in general, and all turbine locations were visited (including one which has since been deleted from the scheme). 13671 Longman’s hill Long Barrow This monument lies approximately 4.6km to the south of the nearest turbine, on the western 10.5 ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL EFFECTS edge of the village of Pitsford. It is approximately 30m long by 11m wide and 2m high. It is truncated on its west by a modern path. It is covered by mature trees, and lies immediately 10.5.1Potential Const north of the minor road leading into Pitsford. Modern dwelling lie immediately to its north. It is No impact upon known archaeological features is anticipated. However, there is potential for considered that the turbines will have negligible effect upon the setting of the barrow, even impacts upon unknown buried archaeological remains to arise from construction activities, such where visible above the intervening house to its north (as well as the structures in Brixworth, ruction Effects as the provision of access roads and turbine foundations. All activities where topsoil is to be closer to the windfarm). The effect is therefore assessed as “not significant”. removed or where excavation is to be carried out are considered likely to damage or destroy underlying features and will require mitigation. If present, remains may be expected of any 29734 Brixworth Market Cross period, but the potential for significant remains (that is, remains that might be of national or The monument consists of a medieval standing cross on octagonal base. It lies within the north regional importance) is considered to be low. part of Brixworth, at the junction of Church Street and Cross Hill, approximately 1.3km south of the nearest turbine. Although predicted to lie within the one of theoretical visibility, it is unlikely Using the matrix in table 10.4, the effect of major damage (high severity) or loss (very high that the proposed turbines will be visible above or between the buildings on the northern side of severity) to a site of local (low) importance would be of “minor” significance at worst, before the Church Street, and on the northern side of Brixworth. The setting of the Cross is also considered implementation of any mitigation. For a site of regional (medium) importance, the effect would to be defined by its street side situation within the village. The potential effect upon the be of “moderate” significance at worst. The significance of these effects will be considered to be monument’s setting is assessed as “not significant”. reduced so as to be negligible, by the implementation of appropriate mitigation, allowing for the preservation of the site by record, where preservation in situ cannot be achieved. An indicative 30070 Medieval Settlement at Haselbech scheme of mitigation is proposed below in section 10.6.1. The monument consists of the remains of the former medieval settlement at Haselbech, west of the church and Hall. The monument has a very limited above ground presence. Although there There will be indirect effects upon the settings of some cultural heritage features beyond the will be views from the scheduled area to the proposed windfarm, there are no long views to the site boundary for example resulting from the presence of cranes and other plant, as monument which the windfarm will block or otherwise form part of. The setting of the construction progresses. However, these are considered to be temporary only. The visual effect scheduled are is bound to the western side of the modern settlement (and the roads and of the turbines themselves is considered below, based on the full operational status of the boundaries that define to north and east). The turbines, whether visible through modern windfarm. structures, hedges and trees, will only be relatively prominent in views to the south-east. However, the presence of the turbines is not considered to jeopardise the basis on which the monument is scheduled, not to prevent an understanding of the historical development of the village. On this basis the potential impact is assessed as being of only “minor” significance.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 10-5 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 10: Cultural Heritage

30071 Great House and Garden at Hanging Houghton 2038 Lamport Hall This monument consists of the low earthwork remains of the former gardens and great house at The park is listed at Grade II, and is associated with the Grade I listed Lamport Hall. It is Hanging Haughton, approximately 780m north of the nearest turbine at its closest point. The approximately 1.5km north-east of the nearest turbine at its closest point. The Hall has a formal remains date back to the late medieval period and the house was abandoned in the mid- garden to its immediate south-east, beyond which is a larger landscaped area. This has an Seventeenth century. The internal features, including the house platform, exist to 0.75m high. avenue of tree aligned to the south-east, as well as an area of denser planting to the south- The boundary of the garden survives as a bank and ditch along the south and west sides of the west of the hall, which is itself screened from the A508 by a denser belt of woodland. It is likely scheduled area. The scheduling is intended to preserve archaeological evidence relating to the that the turbines will be prominent in some views to the south-west from the designated area, physical development of the house and its formal garden, which may be of importance in the but the degree of visibility will be significantly lessened by the screening effect of the trees in reconstruction of the economies and social place of great houses, and the development of the western part of the parkland. The turbines will not be present in views towards the Hall tastes in gardens and landscape. The location of the scheduled area is on “promontory” of itself. The turbines will not be readily visible from the more formal part of the grounds, due to higher ground to the south-west of Hanging Houghton. It is likely that the position on this this screening effect. As a result, the potential impact upon the setting of the park is assessed higher ground was important in allowing views to and from the house and the gardens may as being of “minor” significance, in that the principal views to and from the Hall will not be have been designed with views in mind. The proposed turbines will be prominent in views to the significantly affected, even though turbines may be visible from the outer parts of the park. south from the site. Although the potential impact upon the monument’s setting is scored as “major” using the matrix in Table 10.4, the limited above ground presence of the monument 2325 Broughton Hall (which is not promoted, nor is access facilitated), suggest that the effect will be less. This The park is listed at Grade II. It lies approximately 5.1km south of the nearest turbine at its assessment considers the potential impact upon its setting as of “moderate” significance closest point. The turbines are predicted to be visible across only part of the designated area. It (which is considered “Significant” under the EIA regulations). is likely that the turbines will be visible only relatively prominently as part of the wider landscape, in views to the north. The turbines will be further screened in such views by the built NN109 Deserted Village (Site Of) at Faxton up area of Brixworth. It is noted that the designated area is in parts heavily wooded, and these The monument consists of the remains of the deserted village of Faxton, the nearest part of plantations will reduce the impact of the turbines further. The impact of the proposed turbines which is approximately 4km from the closest turbine. The remains have no substantial above on the setting of this park is assessed as being “not significant”. ground presence and the site is under agricultural use. Although the monument is predicted to be intervisible with the windfarm, the turbines will be present in views to the west and south Registered Battlefields west, where possible between the blocks of plantation, and the house. Given the limited above There are 2 Registered Battlefields within 15km of the site. ground presence of the monument, the potential impact upon its setting is assessed as being of no more than “minor” significance. The Naseby (1645) battlefield lies approximately 7.8km to the north-west of the nearest turbine at its closest point. No part of it is predicted to be intervisible with the windfarm, and therefore the potential impact is considered “not significant”. Registered Historic Parks and Gardens There are 11 Registered Parks within 15km (see table 10.7), of which only 3 lie within 5 km, The Northampton (1460) battlefield site lies approximately 12.9km south of the site. Although it which are assessed below. The remainder are not anticipated to receive any significant impact is predicted to be intervisible in part with the windfarm, in fact is location on the southern side upon their settings, due to their distance, and in some case, due to the very limited predicted of Northampton indicates that no turbines will be visible. The potential impact upon the setting intervisibility with the turbines. of the Battlefield is therefore assessed as being “not significant”.

2030 Cottesbrooke Hall The Park is listed at Grade II, and covers much of the landscaped grounds around Cottesbrooke Listed Buildings Hall (itself listed at Grade I). It lies approximately 2.4km west of the nearest turbine at its There are 158 Listed Buildings within 5km of the site, and 14 of these are listed at Grade I or closest point. Although the turbines may be visible in whole or part across much of the Grade II*. The latter are assessed below. designated area, it is considered that the visibility from the environs of the Hall itself is the most sensitive part. The turbines will be relatively prominent in views to the east from the formal 360072 All Saints Church, Brixworth gardens to the immediate east of the hall, and the avenue of trees leading from the end of the This Grade I listed church lies approximately 1.2km south of the nearest turbine. It is located on gardens to the east will lead the eye straight towards the turbines. However, the end of this the northern side of Brixworth. The church has its origins in the Anglo-Saxon period and has a avenue is effectively closed by another stand of trees to its east between it and the turbines. tower at its east end. It is approached from the south (and the main door faces south). It is The impact upon the setting of the Registered Park is considered to be “minor”, taking into possible that the turbines will be visible behind the church, or to its side, when viewed from the account that the turbines will form a new and relevantly prominent feature in views to the east car park and from the western and eastern sides of the church yard. Long views to the church from the hall and grounds. However, the windfarm will not significantly affect the are limited from the south (beyond the car park) due to intervening buildings within Brixworth interrelationship of the elements of the designed landscape and the hall. itself. There are long views towards the church from the north, for example from Hanging Houghton, and along the A508 in which the turbines will be prominent in the foreground.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 10-6 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 10: Cultural Heritage

Approaching from the west, along station road, the turbines will be visible in the left hand periphery of views, but will not obscure the church. The immediate setting of the church, within 360225 Church of All Saints, Pitsford its yard, and in terms of its relationship to Brixworth will not suffer a significant impact. This Grade II* Listed church lies on the northern side of Pitsford, approximately 4.2km south of However, the turbines will be prominent in the foreground of some views towards the church the nearest turbine. The church lies within a small churchyard, with matures trees to its north from the north, and may take attention from the church tower as a focal tall point in the and west. Beyond the yard are modern dwellings to its south and east, and farm buildings close landscape. The impact of the turbines on the setting of the church and its relationship to the to the north-east. It is considered unlikely that the turbines would constitute a significant edge of Brixworth and the landscape to the north of the village is assessed as receiving an presence in any views to the church, even where visible above the trees and the intervening effect of “moderate” significance (which is considered “significant” under the EIA regulations). settlement of Brixworth (which lies between the proposed development and Pitsford). The potential impact upon the setting of the church is therefore assessed as being “not 360110 Cottesbrooke Hall significant”. The Hall is listed at Grade I. It lies approximately 3.2km to the west of the nearest turbine. The hall lies within a Registered Historic Park (its self graded as Grade II). The hall is oriented north- 360236 Church of St. Andrew, Spratton west to south-east, and is approached from the south, with the entrance in its north-western The church lies within the centre of the village of Spratton, approximately 3.6km south-west of face. The Hall has wings, and these partially enclose a formal garden on its south-eastern face. the nearest turbine. It is listed at Grade I. The Church and yard occupy a central location, with Form the south-eastern facing of the house and the garden there is an open view cross roads on three sides, and building beyond them. There are some tree within the yard, and the landscaped grounds including water features and a long avenue of tree towards the east and church is approached from the west, with doors on the west and north sides. Although south-east, in the direction of the proposed windfarm. The turbines would feature relatively predicted to be intervisible with all of the turbines it is unlikely, given the distance of the prominently in the background of views across this landscape, but they are much less likely to turbines, as well as the church’s location within the village, that the proposed development will impact upon views towards the Hall itself. The Hall has a substantial amount of mature be prominent in any views to or from the church. The proposed turbines are considered to have plantation to its north, south and western sides, which help to define its setting and limit long a negligible impact upon the settings of this church within its yard, nor within the village itself. views towards it. The immediate settings if the Hall is not considered to be affected, in that the The potential impact is therefore assessed as being “not significant”. turbines will not be prominent in long views towards the Hall itself. However, the turbines will be relatively prominent in designed views from the south-western side of the house, across the 360279 Church of St. Catherine, Draughton formal gardens partially enclosed by the Hall’s north and southern wings, as well as across the The Grade II* listed church lies approximately 4.1km north-east of the nearest turbine. The designated parkland to the east. On the basis of this, this assessment considers the potential church lies on the northern side of the village, within its small yard. There are mature trees to impact upon the settings of the Hall to be of “minor” significance. west and north-east, and a row of younger trees along the southern boundary of the yard. The entrance faces south. The bulk of the village lies between the church and the turbines, and it is 360121 Church of All Saints, Cottesbrooke unlikely that the turbines will form a significant presence in views from the church, even where The church is listed at Grade I. It lies approximately 3.3km to the west of the nearest turbine. It possible above the buildings and trees of the village. There are no long views to the church in lies south of the road through Cottesbrooke. Its setting is here defined as the churchyard, with which the turbines would be prominent. The potential impact upon the setting of the church the road to its north, the large dwelling to its east, the range of buildings to its north-east and within the village is assessed as being “not significant”. the open fields to its south and west. The church is approached from the north, although the entrance is in the annex on its southern side. There is a considerable presence of mature 360305 Church of St. Mary and All Saints, Holcot plantation to its north and north-east (parts of the landscaped ground around Cottesbrooke The church is listed at Grade I and lies approximately 5km to the south-east of the nearest Hall), and mature trees screen the church along the east side of the churchyard. There are only turbine. The church lies within the village, within a small churchyard, with tree to north and limited ling views towards the church, principally across the open land to its south and west. south. It is approached from the south-east, and its entrance lies in is southern face. It is The turbines will not be prominent in these views, even where visible. It is unlikely that there possible that the turbines may be visible above buildings and trees in the north-western quarter will be any significant intervisibility of the church and turbines, and so the potential impact upon of the village, as one approaches the church. However, even where visible, at this distance the the setting of the (defined above) is assessed as being “not significant”. turbines will be a limited presence in such views, and the impact upon the setting of the church within the village is assessed as “not significant”. 360130 Church of St. Michael, Creaton This Grade II* listed church is approximately 3.7km south-west of the nearest turbine. The 360324 Church of All Saints, Lamport church lies in the south-western quarter of the village of Creaton. The church is approached The church is listed at Grade I. It lies east of the village of Lamport on the north side of the from the north, and its main entrance is on the northern side. Although predicted to lie within a Lamport Road. It is closely associated with the Hall which lies to the south-east. The nearest zone where all the turbines might be visible, it is likely that the turbines will not be visible from turbine lies 1.9km to the south-west. The turbines are likely to be visible only above the trees to the northern side of the church due to the intervening buildings of Creaton, as well as a belt of the east of Lamport, and above the settlement of Hanging Houghton. They are unlikely to form mature trees along the eastern side of the churchyard. It is considered that the setting of the significant components in any long views towards the church (along the Lamport Raid from the church within the village will be subject to a negligible effect from the proposed turbines, and east), due to plantations of mature tree to the east of Lamport, and associated with the Hall. the potential effect is therefore assessed as being “not significant”. The impact upon the setting of the church is assessed as being “minor”.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 10-7 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 10: Cultural Heritage

from the churchyard, although less visible from the yard to the immediately south of the church 360328 The Old Rectory, Lamport itself. The potential impact upon its setting is assessed as being of “minor” significance. The Grade II* listed Rectory lies adjacent to the church, approximately 2km from the nearest turbine. The Rectory’s setting is here defined as its association with the church to its immediate There are 65 listed Buildings within 2km of the site, of which 5 are listed at Grade I or Grade II* west, residential and other buildings to its east, and the outbuildings of Lamport Hall to its (and have been considered above). Using the matrix presented at Table 10.4, the Grade II south. There are mature trees on the western boundary of the property between the Rectory Listed Buildings (which are of “low” sensitivity) within 2km of the windfarm and thus receiving and the church which will further screen the Rectory and limit views from it to the west and an impact of “high” magnitude, would receive an effect of “minor” significance on their south-west. The presence of the proposed turbines, even where visible, is considered to cause settings. Those Grade II Listed Buildings beyond this distance are not assessed as receiving any a negligible impact upon the Rectory’s setting. The significant of the potential effect is therefore significant impact upon their setting. These are not considered further. assessed as “not significant”. 10.5.3Potential Decommissioning Effects 360333 Lamport Hall No direct impacts are anticipated from the decommissioning of the windfarm. However, should The Hall is listed at Grade I. It lies approximately 1.9km to the north-east of the nearest alternative access be required or any disturbance if previously undisturbed ground be required, turbine. It lies at the north edge of landscaped grounds which are themselves registered at then an appropriate programme of archaeological work may need to be required with the Grade II. The principal facade of the hall faces to the south-west, with long views available in County Archaeologist. Any such work should take into account the results of any archaeological that direction, between mature plantations screening Lamport village and further south along investigation undertaken in mitigation of the construction of the windfarm. the A508. It is possible that the turbines will be visible in part in this view, although they will not impede views towards the hall. There are formal gardens to the south and south-east of the The decommissioning of the windfarm will have the effect of removing any indirect, visual Hall, from which the turbines may be visible (this potential impact is dealt with under the impacts upon the settings of cultural heritage features beyond the site boundary. Registered Gardens below), but there are no view from this aspect of the Hall in which the turbines would be visible. The potential impact upon the setting of the Hall is assessed as being of “minor” significance only. 10.6 MITIGATION

360360 Church of St. Mary the Virgin, Maidwell 10.6.1Construction Mitigation Measures The church lies on the Draughton Road and is listed at Grade II*. It lies 3.8km to the north of Mitigation for indirect (visual) impacts has been undertaken through the evolution of the the nearest turbine, within the village of Maidwell. The church lies within a small churchyard, proposed design, including the reduction of the proposal from 7 to the currently proposed 6 immediately north of Maidwell Hall. The environs are well stocked with mature trees. The turbine scheme. It is noted that the initially proposed seventh turbines was located to the south setting is considered to be defined by the church’s relationship with the northern part of the Hall of the southern proposed row, much closer to known archaeological evidence. The removal of and the surrounding buildings in Maidwell. The turbines are unlikely to be visible through the this turbine lessens the chance that remains associated with the Roman Villa at Lodge Leys will tree cover in views from the church yard, and there are no long views to the church which the be disturbed, and reduces the chance that Anglo-Saxon period remains associated with the turbines could impede. The significance of the potential impact upon the church is therefore burials recorded from this area will be encountered. assessed as “not significant”. Mitigation for direct impacts upon unknown, buried archaeological remains will be required. The 360421 Church of St. Andrew, Old design has sought to limit direct impacts by sitting turbines away from concentrations of known The Grade I listed church lies within the village of Old, approximately 3.7km to the east of the features. However, it is possible that unknown features may be present which could be affected. nearest turbine. It lies in the southern part of the village, and is approached from the north (the In these cases, preservation by record is considered to constitute appropriate mitigation, given entrance being in its northern wall). The churchyard has residential properties to its east and the limited impact of the development as a whole, and given that it is unlikely that the remains north, and a farm with its outbuildings to its west and south-west, which define the immediate that may survive are of regional or greater importance. Preservation by record is understood to setting of the church. It is not considered that the proposed turbines will affect this setting, include the assessment and analysis of records and finds made during an agreed programme of even if visible from the churchyard above or between surrounding properties and the archaeological work, leading to the creation of an appropriate archive, as well as a published significance of the potential impact is therefore assessed as being “not significant”. report. It is considered that an appropriate scheme of mitigation can be agreed and implemented in response to a condition on the planning permission (if granted). 360481 Church of St. Peter and St, Paul, Scald well This Grade II* church lies within the village of Shadwell, approximately 1.9km to the east of the An indicative phased, scheme of mitigation is proposed below. nearest turbine. Its immediate setting is the churchyard and the village within which it sits. The church’s entrance is on the south side, and it is approached from the south and south-east. A geophysical survey should be conducted on the footprint of the development. There is open ground to its west (allotments and the graveyard extention), although views towards the windfarm will be somewhat limited by mature trees in the churchyard. The turbines This should be followed by targeted trial trenching on concentrations of anomalies of will not impede any long views towards the church, but will be prominent is view to the west archaeological origin.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 10-8 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 10: Cultural Heritage

10.7.3Decommissioning Effects The areas of the turbine bases should be excavated, as these will completely destroy any No residual direct impacts are anticipated from the decommissioning of the windfarm. archaeological remains beneath them. Indirect visual effects upon the settings if some cultural heritage features beyond the site A “strip, map and sample” exercise is recommended the area of the proposed construction boundary will be removed. compound. 10.8 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS AND EFFECTS A trial trench evaluation could be implemented upon lengths of the access tracks; to be The nearest windarms are the existing Burton Wold site (approximately 16km to the east of the expanded into a strip, map and sample investigation should archaeological features be proposed development) and the proposed extension to Burton Wold. A single turbine at the present. Tesco’s distribution centre at Dirft near Crick is 16km to the west.

The archaeological works should ideally be carried out in advance of construction. The scope Given the distances, no significant cumulative effects are anticipated upon any cultural heritage and extent as well as location of any archaeological works will be agreed with Northamptonshire features, from the addition of the proposed scheme to those built or in planning. County Council’s Archaeologist on behalf of the Local Planning Authority in the form of a Written Scheme of Investigation to be approved and implemented in advance of construction. Further information on cumulative effects can be found in Chapter 6: Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment. The effect of the implementation of an agreed programme of archaeological work would be to create a Record of the site, mitigating against the physical damage to or loss of the archaeological features, and reducing the significance of the predicted, unmitigated, impacts. 10.9 SUMMARY OF EFFECTS 10.6.2Operational Mitigation Measures Table 10.5 Summary of Effects Table No mitigation is proposed as no direct impacts upon cultural heritage features are anticipated. Potential Effect Mitigation Residual Effect Construction Effects No mitigation is proposed or considered practicable (beyond that embedded in the designed Potential for damage or Implementation an appropriate Preservation of layout) in respect of potential impacts upon the settings of features beyond the site boundary. destruction of unknown scheme of archaeological work, archaeological archaeological remains. both in advance of and during remains by record. 10.6.3Decommissioning construction. No mitigation is proposed as no effects are anticipated. If alternative access arrangements are Operational Effects made, requiring groundworks on previously undisturbed ground, then an appropriate No significant direct None proposed None impacts are anticipated. programme of archaeologicalMitigation recordi Measuresng may need to be agreed (to be carried out in advance) with the relevant body. Such a programme should take into account the results of any Significant indirect (Visual) None proposed (beyond that Indirect impacts effects are anticipated upon embedded in the final designed upon settings of archaeological work carried out in mitigation of the proposed initial construction of the the settings of the following layout). some cultural windfarm. cultural heritage features: heritage features, SAM 30071 Hanging which are temporary Houghton; All Saints Church and reversible. 10.7 RESIDUAL EFFECTS Brixworth (Gr I). Decommissioning Effects 10.7.1Construction Effects Removal of potential None. Restoration of No residual effects are anticipated upon known or unknown archaeological remains within the impacts upon settings of previously existing site, once an appropriate programme of archaeological recording has been implemented leading some cultural heritage settings. to the preservation by record of any such remains. features beyond the site boundary.

10.7.2Operational Effects

No residual direct impacts are anticipated during the operation of the windfarm. 10.10 STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE Indirect visual effects upon cultural heritage features will continue throughout the operational lifespan of the windfarm, for which no additional mitigation is considered practical. However, this Although the potential for damage or destruction to buried, unknown archaeological remains effect is considered temporary, and reversible upon decommissioning. has been identified, the assessment concludes that the significance of this impact can be

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 10-9 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 10: Cultural Heritage

reduced by the implementation of an appropriate scheme of archaeological mitigation. This will lead to the preservation by record of any remains encountered. The effect is therefore considered to be “not significant”.

Indirect, visual impacts have been identified upon the settings of some cultural heritage features beyond the site boundary. However, only 2 (upon the SAM at Hanging Houghton, All Saints Church [Brixworth] Listed Building) of these are considered “significant” in terms of the EIA regulations (i.e. any effect assessed as being of “moderate” or greater significance in this assessment). These effects are considered to be temporary, lasting only for the consented life of the windfarm, and fully reversible upon decommissioning.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 10-10 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 10: Cultural Heritage

TABLE 10.6 Grade I and II* Listed Buildings within 5km of Boundary DISTANCE NO ASSESSED TO TURBINES SIGNIFICANCE SIGNIFICANCE NEAREST VISIBLE (SEE MATRIX (SEE TEXT LISTED BUILDING NUMBER NAME STREET NAME GRADE EASTING NORTHING TURBINE (ZTV) SENSITIVITY MAGNITUDE TABLE 10.4) 10.5.2) 360072 ALL SAINTS CHURCH, BRIXWORTH CHURCH STREET I 474750 271217 1.2km 6 HIGH HIGH MAJOR MODERATE 360110 COTTESBROOKE HALL I 471108 274001 3.2km 6 HIGH MEDIUM MODERATE MINOR 360121 CHURCH OF ALL SAINTS, COTTESBROOKE I 471009 273531 3.3km 6 HIGH MEDIUM MODERATE NOT SIGNIFICANT 360130 CHURCH OF ST MICHAEL, CREATON VIOLET LANE II* 470632 271847 3.7km 6 MEDIUM MEDIUM MODERATE NOT SIGNIFICANT 360225 CHURCH OF ALL SAINTS, PITSFORD CHURCH LANE II* 475427 268193 4.2km 6 MEDIUM MEDIUM MODERATE NOT SIGNIFICANT 360236 CHURCH OF ST ANDREW, SPRATTON CHURCH STREET I 471769 270100 3.6km 6 HIGH MEDIUM MODERATE NOT SIGNIFICANT 360279 CHURCH OF ST CATHERINE, DRAUGHTON II* 476192 276814 4.1km 6 MEDIUM MEDIUM MODERATE NOT SIGNIFICANT 360305 CHURCH OF ST MARY AND ALL SAINTS, HOLCOT MAIN STREET I 479231 269830 5km 6 HIGH MEDIUM MODERATE NOT SIGNIFICANT 360324 CHURCH OF ALL SAINTS, LAMPORT HIGH STREET I 475809 274557 1.9km 6 HIGH HIGH MAJOR MINOR 360328 THE OLD RECTORY, LAMPORT HIGH STREET II* 475860 274610 2km 6 MEDIUM MEDIUM MODERATE NOT SIGNIFICANT 360333 LAMPORT HALL I 475883 274504 1.9km 6 HIGH HIGH MAJOR MINOR 360360 CHURCH OF ST MARY THE VIRGIN, MAIDWELL DRAUGHTON ROAD II* 474916 276936 3.8km 6 MEDIUM MEDIUM MODERATE NOT SIGNIFICANT 360421 CHURCH OF ST ANDREW, OLD CHURCH LANE I 478545 273120 3.7km 6 HIGH MEDIUM MODERATE NOT SIGNIFICANT 360481 CHURCH OF ST PETER AND ST PAUL, SCALDWELL OLD ROAD II* 476868 272574 1.9km 6 MEDIUM MEDIUM MODERATE MINOR

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 10-11 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 10: Cultural Heritage

TABLE 10.7 Registered Historic Parks and Landscape within 15km of Boundary DISTANCE NO ASSESSED TO TURBINES SIGNIFICANCE SIGNIFICANCE IMPACT NEAREST VISIBLE (SEE MATRIX (SEE TEXT REGISTERED PARK NUMBER NAME GRADE EASTING NORTHING TYPE TURBINE (ZTV) SENSITIVITY MAGNITUDE TABLE 10.4) 10.5.2) INDIRECT, TEMPORARY, 1328 BOUGHTON HOUSE I 490292 282794 REVERSIBLE 14.9km 6 HIGH LOW MINOR NOT SIGNIFCANT INDIRECT, TEMPORARY, 1355 GREAT HARROWDEN HALL II* 488496 271111 REVERSIBLE 13.1km 2 HIGH NEGLIGIBLE NEGLIGIBLE NOT SIGNIFCANT INDIRECT, TEMPORARY, 2025 ALTHORP II* 468288 265113 REVERSIBLE 8.9km 6 HIGH LOW MINOR MINOR INDIRECT, TEMPORARY, 2030 COTTESBROOKE HALL II 470924 274199 REVERSIBLE 2.4km 6 HIGH MEDIUM MODERATE MINOR INDIRECT, TEMPORARY, 2036 HARRINGTON II* 477261 280371 REVERSIBLE 7.6km 0 HIGH NEGLIGIBLE NEGLIGIBLE NOT SIGNIFCANT INDIRECT, TEMPORARY, 2037 HOLDENBY HOUSE I 469145 267765 REVERSIBLE 6.8km 6 HIGH LOW MINOR MINOR INDIRECT, TEMPORARY, 2038 LAMPORT HALL II 476005 274356 REVERSIBLE 1.5km 6 HIGH HIGH MAJOR MINOR INDIRECT, TEMPORARY, 2325 BOUGHTON HALL II 475224 266535 REVERSIBLE 5.1km 6 HIGH MEDIUM MODERATE NOT SIGNIFCANT INDIRECT, TEMPORARY, 4041 BROCKHALL PARK II 463068 262627 REVERSIBLE 14.8km 0 HIGH NEGLIGIBLE NEGLIGIBLE NOT SIGNIFCANT INDIRECT, TEMPORARY, 4793 WICKSTEED PARK II 488039 276929 REVERSIBLE 13.3km 2 HIGH NEGLIGIBLE NEGLIGIBLE NOT SIGNIFCANT INDIRECT, TEMPORARY, 5180 RUSHTON HALL II* 483461 282617 REVERSIBLE 12.7km 2 HIGH NEGLIGIBLE NEGLIGIBLE NOT SIGNIFCANT

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 10-12 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 10: Cultural Heritage

TABLE 10.8 Scheduled Ancient Monuments within 5km of Boundary DISTANCE NO OF ASSESSED T O TURBINES SIGNIFICANCE SIGNIFICANCE NEAREST VISIBLE (SEE MATRIX (SEE TEXT MONUMENT NUMBER NAME EASTING NORTHING TURBINE (ZTV) IMPACT TYPE SENSITIVITY MAGNITUDE TABLE 10.4) 10.5.2) INDIRECT, TEMPORARY, 13626 WALGRAVE MOATED SITE. 480210 272337 5.2km 6 REVERSIBLE HIGH MEDIUM MODERATE MINOR INDIRECT, TEMPORARY, 13671 LONGMANS HILL LONG BARROW 475079 267745 4.6km 6 REVERSIBLE HIGH MEDIUM MODERATE NOT SIGNIFICANT INDIRECT, TEMPORARY, 29734 BRIXWORTH MARKET CROSS 474731 271104 1.3km 6 REVERSIBLE HIGH HIGH MAJOR NOT SIGNIFICANT INDIRECT, TEMPORARY, 30070 MEDIEVAL SETTLEMENT AT HASELBECH 471070 277292 4.9km 6 REVERSIBLE HIGH MEDIUM MODERATE MINOR INDIRECT, TEMPORARY, 30071 GREAT HOUSE AND GARDENS AT HANGING HOUGHTON 475050 273729 0.8km 6 REVERSIBLE HIGH HIGH MAJOR MODERATE INDIRECT, TEMPORARY, NN109 DESERTED VILLAGE (SITE OF) AT FAXTON 478467 275148 4.0km 6 REVERSIBLE HIGH MEDIUM MODERATE MINOR

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 10-13

Key

LAMPORT HALL Proposed Turbine Locations

Site Boundary

2km Study Area

Listed Buildings GREAT HOUSE AND GARDENS AT HANGING HOUGHTON Scheduled and Ancient Monuments

Registered Parks and Gardens

1

3

5 2

4

6

BRIXWORTH MARKET CROSS

1:20,000 Scale @ A3

00.51km

Cultural Heritage Features within 2km of Site Figure 10.1 Brixworth Windfarm 270000 270000 Environmental Statement Reproduced under licence from Ordnance Survey digital map data. CrownAll rights Copyright. reserved. number 0100031673 Licence

470000 480000

MEDIEVAL SETTLEMENT AT HASELBECH Key

CHURCH OF ST MARY THE VIRGIN CHURCH OF ST CATHERINE Proposed Turbine Locations

Site Boundary

5km Study Area

Grade I & II* Listed Buildings DESERTED VILLAGE (SITE OF) AT FAXTON Grade II Listed Buildings

Scheduled and Ancient Monuments

THE OLD RECTORY Registered Parks and Gardens LAMPORT HALL CHURCH OF ALL SAINTS COTTESBROOKE HALL LAMPORT HALL COTTESBROOKE HALL

GREAT HOUSE AND GARDENS

CHURCH OF ALL SAINTS AT HANGING HOUGHTON

1 CHURCH OF ST ANDREW 3 5 2 4 6 WALGRAVE MOATED SITE.

CHURCH OF ST MICHAEL

ALL SAINTS CHURCH BRIXWORTH MARKET CROSS

CHURCH OF ST ANDREW

CHURCH OF ST MARY AND ALL SAINTS 270000 270000

CHURCH OF ALL SAINTS 1:50,000 Scale @ A3

LONGMANS HILL 012km LONG BARROW

Cultural Heritage Features within 5km of Site BOUGHTON HALL Figure 10.2 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement 470000 480000 Reproduced under licence from Ordnance Survey digital map data. CrownAll rights Copyright. reserved. number 0100031673 Licence

Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 11: Noise

‘The measurement of low frequency noise at three UK wind farms’, Hayes McKenzie, The 11. NOISE Department for Trade and Industry, URN 06/1412, 20064; ‘Research into aerodynamic modulation of wind turbine noise’. Report by University of Salford, The Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform, URN 07/1235, July 20075; and 11.1 INTRODUCTION ETSU W/13/00385/REP: A Critical Appraisal of Wind Farm Noise Propagation6.

This Chapter of the Environmental Statement (ES) assesses the potential noise effects of the PPS 22 Renewable Energy proposed Brixworth Windfarm (hereafter referred to as “the windfarm”) on nearby noise sensitive PPS 22 provides guidance to local authorities on policy matters relating to renewable energy receptors (houses) during construction, operation and decommissioning. This Chapter was developments. In terms of noise, it states: written by Arcus Renewable Energy Consulting Ltd. “Renewable technologies may generate sm The aim of the assessment is to predict the effects of noise at the nearest noise sensitive such as aerodynamic noise fr receptors and assess this against relevant standards and guidelines. traffic). Local planning authorities should ens

been located and designed in A glossary of acoustic terminology and a definition of terms are contained at the end of this chapter. may include criteria that set o om wind turbines,all increases or fromin noise associat levels (whether from machinery renewable energy projects and Department of Trade and Industry should be The Noise Technical Appendix, included as Section 11 in Volume II of the ES, presents such a way to minimise increases in development.” descriptions of methodologies and data used in this assessment. ut the minimumure separation that renewable distances energy be developments have The Companion Guide to PPS227 provides further details of technical aspects of renewable ed sources – for example, This Chapter contains the following sections: energy technologies. In terms of noiseexisting from developments.wind turbines, Tit describes its character and sources, and restates that ETSU-R-97 should be used in the assessment process. It also states Methodology - describing both the methods used in baseline surveys and in the assessment that there is no evidence that ground transmitted low frequency noise from ambient wind noise turbines levels. is at Plans a of the significance of effects; used to assess and rate noise from wind energy sufficient level to be harmful to human health. he 1997 tweenreport differentby ETSU types for theof Baseline Description - a description of the noise environment in the area around the site and identification of potential sensitive receptors, based on the results of surveys, desk PPG 24: Planning and Noise information and consultations; PPG 24 provides guidance to local authorities in England on the use of their planning powers to Information Gaps - a summary of the main uncertainties encountered in the assessment; minimise the adverse effects of noise. The guidance: Potential Effects - identifying the ways in which the identified potentially noise-sensitive receptors could be affected by the proposed windfarm; Outlines considerations to be taken into account in determining planning applications both Mitigation - a description of measures recommended to off-set the identified potential for noise-sensitive developments and for those activities which will generate noise; effects; Recommends appropriate levels for exposure to different sources of noise; and Residual Effects - an assessment of the significance of the effects of the windfarm, after Advises on the use of conditions to minimise the effects of noise. mitigation measures have been implemented; Summary of Effects; and It gives no specific guidance on the assessment of noise from windfarms. Statement of Significance. ETSU-R-97 11.2 METHODOLOGY ETSU-R-97 provides a framework for the assessment and rating of noise from wind turbine 11.2.1Relevant Guidance installations. It has become the accepted standard for windfarm developments in the UK, and the methodology has therefore been adopted for the present assessment. The following guidance and information sources have been considered in carrying out this assessment:

3 Planning Policy Statement (PPS) 22 Renewable Energy (2004)1; ETSU-R-97: The Assessment and Rating of Noise from Wind Farms, ETSU for the DTI, 1996 4 Planning Policy Guidance (PPG) 24 Planning and Noise (1994)2; ‘The measurement of low frequency noise at three UK wind farms’, Hayes McKenzie, The Department for Trade and Industry, URN 06/1412, 3 2006 5 ETSU-R-97: The Assessment and Rating of Noise from Wind Farms ; Research into aerodynamic modulation of wind turbine noise’. Report by University of Salford, The Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform, URN 07/1235, July 2007 1 6 Planning Policy Statement 22: Renewable Energy, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, 2004 ETSU W/13/00385/REP: A Critical Appraisal of Wind Farm Noise Propagation, ETSU for the DTI 2000 2 7 Planning Policy Statement 24: Planning and Noise, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, 1994 Planning for Renewable Energy, A Companion Guide to PPS22, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister 2004

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 11-1 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 11: Noise

ETSU-R-97 recommends the application of noise limits at the nearest noise-sensitive properties, Locations should be chosen on a worst case scenario basis with properties with clear line of to protect outside amenity and prevent sleep disturbance inside dwellings. It proposes that site- site of the proposed turbine location, or properties that may have a greater exposure to the specific noise criteria are adopted based on the background noise. Noise from wind turbines and noise due to their configuration (e.g. courtyards facing the site) given preference; and background noise both typically vary with wind speed. According to ETSU-R-97, windfarm noise The ES should include a description and justification of the background noise monitoring assessments should therefore consider the site-specific relationship between wind speed and locations. background noise, along with the particular noise emission characteristics of the proposed wind Copies of consultation correspondence are contained within section 11 of the Technical turbines. Appendix.

The Measurement of Low Frequency Noise 11.2.3Assessment Methodology A recent study8, published in 2006 by Hayes McKenzie on the behalf of the DTI investigated low ETSU-R-97 does not provide guidance on appropriate prediction techniques. However, a review frequency noise from windfarms. This study concluded that there is no evidence of health of windfarm noise propagation was carried out on behalf of ETSU in 2000 (ETSU effects arising from infrasound or low frequency noise generated by wind turbines. It also W/13/00385/REP: A Critical Appraisal of Wind Farm Noise Propagation). This review examined a noted, however, that a phenomenon known as Aerodynamic Modulation was in some isolated number of alternative prediction techniques and provided recommendations on appropriate circumstances (5 out of 126 operating windfarms in the UK) occurring in ways not anticipated methods. Based on these, the prediction method used for this assessment was that detailed in by ETSU-R-97. ISO 9613-210 with the exception that barrier attenuation has been omitted in accordance with the recommendations of ETSU W/13/00385/REP, which is somewhat more conservative than Research into Amplitude Modulation the standard ISO9613-2 method. The use of this technique is considered to be appropriate for A further study9 was carried out on behalf of the Department for Business, Enterprise and predicting the noise from the proposed wind turbines. Regulatory Reform (BERR) by the University of Salford, which investigated the incidence of noise complaints associated with windfarms and whether these were associated with Amplitude A computer model (SoundPLAN) has been used to predict noise levels resulting from the Modulation (AM). This report defined Amplitude Modulation as aerodynamic noise from wind operation of the proposed windfarm, based on the methodology described above. Noise model turbines with a greater degree of fluctuation than normal at blade passing frequency. Its aims settings and outputs are reproduced in Section 11 of the Technical Appendix. The ISO 9613 were to ascertain the prevalence of AM on UK windfarm sites, to try to gain a better method predicts noise levels likely to occur under conditions favourable to noise propagation, understanding of the likely causes, and to establish whether further research into AM is i.e., downwind or under a moderate ground-based temperature inversion (such as may occur at required. night). The accuracy of the method is estimated in the standard as +/- 3 dB(A), however, conservative assumptions have been made in the modelling process and it is therefore more The study concluded that AM has occurred at only a small number (4 of 133) of windfarms in likely that the model will over-predict than under-predict noise levels. the UK, and only for between 7% and 15% of the time. It also states that the causes of AM are 11.2.2Consultationnot well understood as yet, and that prediction of the effect is not currently possible. The study A worst-case scenario in terms of noise emission from the proposed turbines has been recommends against further research into the phenomenon at this stage, and no revision to the assessed. A number of different turbine models within the application size range (up to 125m current guidelines (ETSU-R-97) on windfarm noise assessment is recommended. height to blade tip) have been identified as likely to be available, as shown in Table 11.1. These differ in the way the noise levels vary with wind speeds, and no single turbine consistently has ETSU W/13/00385/REP: A Critical Appraisal the highest noise emissions throughout the assessment wind speed range (cut-in to 12ms-1 RE 11 This document is discussed in Section 11.3.2 under Prediction of Noise Levels. 10 m AGL ). Table 11.1 details the turbines likely to be available for use on the site within the range and their sound power level variation with respect to wind speed (obtained from manufacturers’ data), and the sound power levels assumed for the purposes of assessment. Consultation was carried out with Daventry District Council’s Environmental Health Department to agree the assessment methodology and ofbaseline Windfarm monitoring Noise Propagation locations. The following points To account for this variation in the assessment, an ‘assessment envelope’ has been defined, which incorporates the maximum sound power level of the available turbines at each integer were agreed: -1 wind speed between 4 and 12 ms (RE 10m AGL), with an addition of 1dB(A) to allow for Background monitoring should be taken in accordance with chapter 7 ETSU-R-97 and with potential future alterations in the available turbines or their noise emissions. regard to appendix C of the same document; It is important the sites located are representative of the most sensitive receptor, and It is standard practice to predict noise levels for a reference wind speed and to adjust these for consideration must be given to the specific locations chosen; other wind speeds, according to the variation in sound power level with wind speed. The noise spectrum for the RePower MM82 Evolution wind turbine model at a wind speed of 10ms-1 has

8 ‘The measurement of low frequency noise at three UK wind farms’, Hayes Mckenzie, The Department for Trade and Industry, URN 06/1412, 2006 9 10 ‘Research into aerodynamic modulation of wind turbine noise’. Report by University of Salford, The Department for Business, Enterprise and ISO 9613-2: 1996 Acoustics – Attenuation of sound During Propagation Outdoors – part 2: General Method of Calculation. 11 Regulatory Reform, URN 07/1235, July 2007. 12 metres per second, with reference to 12m above ground level

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 11-2 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 11: Noise

been used as the source for modelling purposes. Noise emission data for this turbine is where the background noise level is less than 38dB(A). Where background noise levels exceed contained within Section 11 of the Technical Appendix. 38dB(A) the limit is set to 5dB(A) above the background noise level.

Turbine selection will be subject to a competitive procurement process. Hence at this stage, it is The noise limits derived from ETSU-R-97 for this assessment are therefore: not possible to define which of the listed turbines would be installed. A warranty will be sought from the manufacturer of the actual turbine selected for construction that noise emissions will Daytime: The higher of 35dB(A) or 5dB(A) above the derived quiet daytime background not exceed those assessed, i.e. those detailed under ‘Assessment Envelope’ in Table 11.1. noise level; and Night-time: The higher of 43dB(A) or 5dB(A) above the derived night-time background noise Table 11.1: Noise Emissions, up to 90 m Rotor Turbines level. Wind Speed at 10m AGL, ms-1 Turbine 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 There is also provision for an increase in the fixed lower limit value where the owner / occupier Model Sound Power Level, dB(A) of the property has a financial interest in the proposed windfarm. In this situation, the limit for Vestas V90 97.0 102.0 104.4 104.4 104.4 104.0 104.1 104.9 105.7 both daytime and night-time becomes the higher of 45dB(A) or 5dB(A) above the derived (Mode 3) background noise level for the relevant period. Nordex N90 94.0 98.0 101.0 103.0 104.0 104.5 104.8 105.0 105.0 105.0 Construction Noise Repower The principal UK guidance on noise from construction activities is contained in BS 522812. This MM82 101.7 104.5 105.0 105.0 105.0 105.0 105.0 105.0 Evolution standard provides information on: 96.3 100.7 103.3 104.0 104.0 104.0 E82 Legislation affecting noise from construction sites; Nordex Methods of controlling construction noise; and 98.0 100.5 102.5 103.0 103.5 104.0 104.0 104.5 105.0 N80 A method for calculating the likely levels of noise resulting from construction activities. Enercon 90.8 93.6 98.8 100.9 102.1 103.0 103.0 E 70 2.0MW The disturbance or annoyance caused by construction noise is dependent on a number of Enercon 90.8 93.6 98.8 101.4 103.2 105.0 105.0 factors, including: E 70 2.3MW Assessment 95.0 99.0 102.7 105.5 106.0 106.0 106.0 106.0 106.0 106.0 The time of day that the noise occurs; Envelope Its duration, in terms of both the number of hours per day and the overall duration; The level of noise produced; Noise Limits The level of existing background noise in the area; Separate noise limits apply for quiet day-time and night time, as outlined below. The character of the noise (particularly if it contains strong impulsive or tonal elements); and The attitude of the affected persons to the source of the noise. Quiet daytime is defined in ETSU-R-97 as 18:00 – 23:00 every day, as well as 13:00 – 18:00 on Saturday and 07:00 – 18:00 on Sundays. During these periods, the guidance prioritises the Rather than specifying limits on acceptable levels of construction noise, BS 5228 advocates an protection of outdoor amenity for residents, by applying noise limits that would not significantly approach based on the use of best practice working measures to minimise, as far as is affect the enjoyment of areas such as gardens. reasonably practicable, the adverse effects of construction noise. Therefore, rather than assessing the effects of construction noise in terms of noise level, it is proposed to adopt the ETSU-R-97 proposes the adoption of a site standard of 5dB(A) above the prevailing wind mitigation measures detailed in Section 11.6.1, which are considered to be best practice, as varying background noise level. advocated in BS 5228.

In addition to the limit of 5dB(A) above background, an allowance is included for a fixed limit to 11.2.4Significance Criteria be applied at wind speeds or locations where background noise levels are low. Where the quiet daytime background noise level is less than 30-35dB(A), the limit is defined as 35-40dB(A). The It is reasonable to assume that guideline values would not be set at levels that could be quiet daytime limit also applies to all other daytime periods, with the limits based on the quiet considered to cause significant effects at receptors. Predicted wind turbine noise levels in excess daytime background noise level. of the ETSU-R-97 limits are therefore considered significant. Noise levels lower than these limits are considered not significant. Different standards apply at night, where sleep disturbance is the primary concern rather than the requirement to protect outdoor amenity. Night-time is considered to be all periods between 23:00 and 07:00. A limit of 43dB(A) is recommended for night-time at wind speeds or locations 12 BS 5228:1997: Noise and vibration control on construction and open sites.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 11-3 Brixworth Windfarm EnvironmentalDescription Statement Chapter 11: Noise

11.3 BASELINE DESCRIPTION Table 11.2: Baseline Noise Monitoring Locations Location Reasons for Choosing Location 11.3.1Identification of Potential Receptors Lodge Farm Lodge Farm is the closest property to the proposed turbine positions and has limited vegetation surrounding the monitoring location. The property is also in A noise contour plot (Figure 11.1) was prepared for the 7 turbine layout presented in the close proximity to the A508, allowing for a representation of background traffic Scoping Report for the Brixworth Windfarm (titled “Lodge Farm Windfarm Scoping Report”), noise at this location. based upon the maximum sound power level in the ‘Assessment Envelope’ as detailed in Table 9 Manor Road, The property is situated on the edge of Hanging Haughton with a clear line of 11.1. A similar plot for the final proposed layout of 6 turbines (as described in Chapter 3: Project Hanging Haughton sight to the proposed turbines, thus giving an indicative view of ‘worst case’ of this ES) is presented in Figure 11.2. within the village. Horton House, Silver Horton House is situated in a sheltered location away from main A roads, The lowest wind turbine noise limit applicable under the terms of ESTU-R-97 is 35dB(A) Street, Brixworth giving indicative background noise levels for the settlement of Brixworth. Clearview Farm Clearview Farm is surrounded by tall coniferous hedges, sheltering against LA90,10min, therefore only areas where the predicted levels of wind turbine noise may exceed this level have been specifically considered in the assessment. Elsewhere, the wind turbine noise wind noise. Monitoring equipment was placed away from farmyard machinery. levels would be lower than the most stringent level applicable. 11.3.3Baseline Noise Survey Potential noise-sensitive receptors (houses, built-up areas, etc.) within the area shown to Baseline (background) noise measurements were carried out at the four locations detailed in potentially receive wind turbine noise levels in excess of 35dB(A) were identified through the Table 11.2 and shown in Figure 11.1 for a period of 16 days, between the 3rd and 19th of June examination of Ordnance Survey 1:25,000 scale digital mapping, and freely available, on-line 2008. The survey was carried out in accordance with the method specified in ETSU-R-97. The aerial photography. Receptor locations were confirmed through site visits. The following following specific measures ensure this compliance: potentially noise-sensitive locations (as shown in Figure 11.1) were identified: Type 1 measuring equipment, equipped with suitable windshields, was used, which was Lodge Farm; calibrated at the start of the survey, and calibration checked at weekly battery changes and Brixworth Village, northern end of village; at the end of the survey. No significant calibration drift occurred. Glebe Farm / Station Road Area; and Measurements were performed at a height of 1.3m AGL, in free-field conditions, i.e., a Hanging Houghton Village. minimum of 3.5m and, where possible, more than 10m from any reflective surface other than the ground. Comparison of Figures 11.1 and 11.2 shows that removal of the southernmost turbine results in Background noise levels were recorded at continuous 10-minute intervals, as LA90, 10min. a reduction in the predicted levels of wind turbine noise at Brixworth to below 35dB(A). Wind speeds were measured simultaneously at a height of 10m AGL at a location However, as this area was initially identified as being within the area of interest, the assessment representative of the proposed turbine locations (national grid reference SP 750728). The also addresses potential noise effects here. location of the wind speed measuring mast is shown in Figure 11.1. A rain gauge was installed at the wind mast to record periods of rainfall, as ETSU-R-97 11.3.2Selection of Baseline specifies that noise measurements from periods of heavy rain should not be used. Significant rainfall (greater than 0.1 mm/hour) was recorded on the evening and night of June 3rd to 4th, Due to the number of residential properties present within the Brixworth Village, Station Road th th th th and Hanging Houghton Village areas, it was neither feasible nor considered necessary to carry the night of June 11 to 12 , and the night of June 18 to 19 . Measurements during these out baseline noise monitoring at every property. Instead, monitoring was carried out at one periods have therefore been excluded. Noise Survey Locations representative location within each area. This approach is in accordance with standard practice An equivalent of a minimum of one week of data was obtained for each monitoring location, in environmental noise assessments and with ETSU-R-97 and was agreed during consultation after exclusions are taken into account. In practice, this minimum was comfortably exceeded. with Daventry District Council’s Environmental Health Department. Table 11.3 presents more detail of the noise monitoring locations. Survey record sheets and Parish Councils within the areas of Brixworth and Hanging Houghton were contacted to request equipment calibration certificates are included in the Noise Technical Appendix (ES Volume II, assistance in identifying suitable locations. Copies of correspondence are included in section 11 Section 11). of the Technical Appendix. Other contacts were provided by the site’s landowners.

The monitoring locations employed are shown in Figure 11.1 and detailed in Table 11.2 along with the justification for their use.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 11-4 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 11: Noise

Table 11.3: Baseline Noise Survey Table 11.4: Derived Background Noise Levels Location Grid Description of Monitoring Noise Sources Present Wind Speed at 10m AGL, ms-1 Reference Location 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lodge Farm 475483, Edge of back garden, opposite Road noise (A508), farm activity Background Noise Level, LA90,10min, dB(A) 272521 house, open fields behind. (little evidence of this during Quiet Daytime visits), car restoration in farm Lodge Farm 34.3 35.7 37.5 39.4 41.3 43.0 44.1 44.2 42.9 39.7 buildings to east. 9 Manor Road, 9 Manor Road, 475191, Back garden of property (to Birds, Minor road outside house, Hanging 33.3 33.5 34.6 37.0 40.5 44.6 48.5 51.0 50.5 44.9 Hanging 273699 south) overlooking the windfarm dogs. Haughton Haughton site. Horton House, Horton House, 474912, On lawn towards corner of back Birds (Dawn Chorus “noisy”), road Silver Street, 33.0 33.4 34.3 35.8 37.8 40.1 42.0 42.8 41.4 36.7 Silver Street, 271163 garden. Garden walled on all sides noise (small road on other side of Brixworth Brixworth (2m high). house), trees. Clearview 33.0 33.5 34.8 37.0 39.7 42.7 45.3 46.7 45.9 41.8 Clearview 473823, On lawn to side of house. Garden Birds, road noise, dogs, yard Farm Farm 271780 has tall coniferous hedges on 2 traffic (HGVs), horses, cows, Night-time (all data) sides, house on one side and open trees. Lodge Farm 27.0 28.6 30.7 33.6 37.5 37.5 37.5 37.5 37.5 37.5 to the other. 9 Manor Road, 11.3.4Background Noise Levels Hanging 26.6 27.8 30.4 35.9 42.6 42.6 42.6 42.6 42.6 42.6 Haughton The measured background noise levels and wind speeds have been correlated and sorted into Horton House, quiet daytime and night-time periods. Periods when significant rainfall occurred were discarded. Silver Street, 26.2 27.3 29.1 31.7 35.0 35.0 35.0 35.0 35.0 35.0 Regression analysis was carried out to fit ‘derived background noise level’ curves to the data. It Brixworth Clearview was found that, in most cases, fourth-order polynomials provided a good fit to the data, and a 27.1 28.4 30.6 33.6 37.4 37.4 37.4 37.4 37.4 37.4 conservative relationship between wind speed and background noise level. Where lower order Farm polynomials have been used, this is because use of higher order curves provided little Night-time (excluding dawn chorus) discernible improvement in either the fit to the data or the conservatism of the analysis. In one Lodge Farm 25.2 26.9 30.0 33.4 35.2 35.2 35.2 35.2 35.2 35.2 case, a 5th order polynomial was used, as this avoided a curve which rose steeply at the upper 9 Manor Road, Hanging 21.2 23.9 28.7 34.5 38.9 38.9 38.9 38.9 38.9 38.9 end of the range of measured wind speeds. Haughton Horton House, Night-time datasets were examined for evidence of elevated noise levels that could have been Silver Street, 23.0 24.1 25.9 28.2 31.1 31.1 31.1 31.1 31.1 31.1 attributable to the dawn chorus. This is commonly evident as significantly elevated background Brixworth noise levels occurring for several hours after sunrise. It was found that the measured Clearview 22.1 24.6 28.4 31.4 30.5 30.5 30.5 30.5 30.5 30.5 background noise levels showed abrupt increases at around 04:30 on most days. Separate Farm datasets were prepared, including and excluding data from these periods.

Table 11.4 details the derived background noise levels obtained for quiet daytime, all night-time measurements and night-time excluding dawn chorus periods. Night-time background noise levels have been assumed to remain constant above 7ms-1, due to the lack of available measurement data for these wind speeds. This is a conservative assumption, as background noise levels are generally held to increase with increasing wind speeds.

As can be seen, the derived night-time background noise levels are several decibels lower when the time periods relating to possible dawn chorus effects are excluded. This may not be entirely due to the effect of the dawn chorus, however, as other noise sources, such as road traffic noise, typically increase in the hours prior to 07:00.

Charts 11.1 to 11.8 present this data graphically.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 11-5 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 11: Noise

11.3.5Noise Limits Table 11.5 details the noise limits calculated from the derived background noise levels, as detailed in Section 11.2.3 Noise Limits. The night-time limits have been based conservatively on the derived night-time background noise levels, excluding the effects of the dawn chorus. The limits are shown graphically in Charts 11.1 to 11.8.

Table 11.5: Noise Limits Wind Speed at 10m AGL, ms-1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Noise Limit, LA90,10min, dB(A) Quiet Daytime Lodge Farm 39.3 40.7 42.5 44.4 46.3 48.0 49.1 49.2 49.2 49.2 9 Manor Road, Hanging 38.3 38.5 39.6 42.0 45.5 49.6 53.5 56.0 56.0 56.0 Haughton Horton House, Silver Street, 38.0 38.4 39.3 40.8 42.8 45.1 47.0 47.8 47.8 47.8 Brixworth Clearview 38.0 38.5 39.8 42.0 44.7 47.7 50.3 51.7 51.7 51.7 Farm Night-time Lodge Farm 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 9 Manor Road, Hanging 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.9 43.9 43.9 43.9 43.9 43.9 Haughton Horton House, Silver Street, 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 Brixworth Clearview 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 Farm

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 11-6 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 11: Noise

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 11-7 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 11: Noise

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 11-8 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 11: Noise

Table 11.6: Noise Assessment Locations 11.4 INFORMATION GAPS Grid Distance to Location Description Reference Nearest Turbine As previously discussed, night-time noise measurements relating to wind speeds greater than Assessment Location at northwest edge of -1 1200m 7ms were not obtained during the baseline noise survey. As a conservative assumption, it has Brixworth 1 474671, 271228 Brixworth. Joint closest point in village to wind (Turbine 6) been assumed that background noise levels, and therefore also the noise limits, would remain turbine locations. constant above this wind speed. Assessment Location at northeast edge of 1170m Brixworth 2 474864, 271237 Brixworth. Joint closest point in village to wind (Turbine 6) 11.5 ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL EFFECTS turbine locations. Closest residential property to wind turbine 860m Glebe Farm 474022, 271825 11.5.1Potential Const locations in Glebe Farm area. (Turbine 4) Closest property on edge of Hanging Houghton As previously discussed, rather than specifying limits on acceptable levels of construction noise, Hanging 910m 475325, 273624 (other than monitoring location) to wind BS 5228 advocates an approach based on the use of best practice working measures to Houghton (Turbine 5) turbine locations. minimise, as farruction as is reasonablyEffects practicable, the adverse effects of construction noise. Closest residential property to wind turbine 525m Therefore, rather than assessing the effects of construction noise in terms of noise level, it is Lodge Farm 475414, 272575 locations in Lodge Farm area. (Turbine 6) proposed to adopt the mitigation measures detailed in Section 11.6.1, which are considered to 9 Manor Rd Baseline noise monitoring location. Closest 970m be best practice, as advocated in BS 5228. Hanging 475191, 273699 house in village to wind turbine locations. (Turbine 3) Houghton 11.5.2Potential Operation Horton 1250m House, Silver 474912, 271163 Baseline noise monitoring location. Figure 11.2 presents a noise contour plot for the application layout. This is based upon the (Turbine 6) maximum sound power level of 106.0dB(A) specified in the Assessment Envelope detailed in St, Brixworth Clearview 1000m Table 11.1. The noise alcontours Effects sho wn relate to down-wind, i.e. worst-case, noise levels. 473823, 271780 Baseline noise monitoring location. Farm (Turbine 4) Closest residential property to wind turbine 880 m Predicted noise levels have also been calculated for individual properties and built-up areas Station Road 474200, 271721 locations in Station Road area. (Turbine 4) shown in Figure 11.2 to potentially receive wind turbine noise levels of 35dB(A) L or A90,10min greater. In each case, a point likely to receive the highest level of turbine noise within the particular area has been used in the assessment, i.e. the worst-case scenario for each location has been assessed.

For the reasons discussed in Section 11.3.1, Brixworth village has been included in the assessment, although Figure 11.2 indicates that noise levels in this area would be below 35dB(A) LA90,10min and would therefore comply with the requirements of ETSU-R-97. Table 11.6 details the assessment locations, which are addressed below.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 11-9 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 11: Noise

Lodge Farm Table 11.7 details the predicted noise levels, limits and the difference (margin) between the predictions and the limits for Lodge Farm. Negative values for the margin indicate that the predictions are below the limits. The assessment is also illustrated graphically in Charts 11.9 and 11.10.

Table 11.7: Operational Noise Assessment, Lodge Farm Wind Speed at 10m AGL, ms-1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

LA90,10min, dB(A) Predicted Noise Level 30.3 34.3 38 40.8 41.3 41.3 41.3 41.3 41.3 41.3 Daytime Limit 39.3 40.7 42.5 44.4 46.3 48 49.1 49.2 49.2 49.2 Night-time Limit 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 Daytime Margin -9.0 -6.4 -4.5 -3.6 -5.0 -6.7 -7.8 -7.9 -7.9 -7.9 Night-time Margin -12.7 -8.7 -5.0 -2.2 -1.7 -1.7 -1.7 -1.7 -1.7 -1.7

As can be seen, the predicted noise levels are lower than the limits in all cases. The effects of operational noise at Lodge Farm are therefore considered to be not significant.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 11-10 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 11: Noise

Hanging Houghton Table 11.8 details the predicted noise levels, limits and the difference (margin) between the predictions and the limits for Hanging Houghton and for 9 Manor Road. Negative values for the margin indicate that the predictions are below the limits. The assessment is also illustrated graphically in Charts 11.11 and 11.12.

Table 11.8: Operational Noise Assessment, Hanging Houghton Wind Speed at 10m AGL, ms-1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

LA90,10min, dB(A) Daytime Limit 38.3 38.5 39.6 42.0 45.5 49.6 53.5 56.0 56.0 56.0 Night-time Limit 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.9 43.9 43.9 43.9 43.9 43.9 Hanging Houghton Predicted Noise Level 26.0 30.0 33.7 36.5 37.0 37.0 37.0 37.0 37.0 37.0 Daytime Margin -12.3 -8.5 -5.9 -5.5 -8.5 -12.6 -16.5 -19.0 -19.0 -19.0 Night-time Margin -17.0 -13.0 -9.3 -6.5 -6.9 -6.9 -6.9 -6.9 -6.9 -6.9 9 Manor Road Predicted Noise Level 26.3 30.3 34.0 36.8 37.3 37.3 37.3 37.3 37.3 37.3 Daytime Margin -12.0 -8.2 -5.6 -5.2 -8.2 -12.3 -16.2 -18.7 -18.7 -18.7 Night-time Margin -16.7 -12.7 -9.0 -6.2 -6.6 -6.6 -6.6 -6.6 -6.6 -6.6

It has been assumed that the background noise levels obtained at 9 Manor Road are representative of those in Hanging Houghton generally. It should also be noted, however, that the predicted noise levels for both 9 Manor Road and Hanging Houghton are lower than all of the noise limits for other locations.

As can be seen, the predicted noise levels are lower than the limits in all cases. The effects of operational noise at Hanging Houghton and 9 Manor Road are therefore considered to be not significant.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 11-11 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 11: Noise

Brixworth Table 11.9 details the predicted noise levels, limits and the difference (margin) between the predictions and the limits for Brixworth and for Horton House, Silver Street. Negative values for the margin indicate that the predictions are below the limits. The assessment is also illustrated graphically in Charts 11.13 and 11.14.

Table 11.9: Operational Noise Assessment, Brixworth Wind Speed at 10m AGL, ms-1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

LA90,10min, dB(A) Daytime Limit 38.0 38.4 39.3 40.8 42.8 45.1 47.0 47.8 47.8 47.8 Night-time Limit 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 Brixworth 1 Predicted Noise Level 24.1 28.1 31.8 34.6 35.1 35.1 35.1 35.1 35.1 35.1 Daytime Margin -13.9 -10.3 -7.5 -6.2 -7.7 -10.0 -11.9 -12.7 -12.7 -12.7 Night-time Margin -18.9 -14.9 -11.2 -8.4 -7.9 -7.9 -7.9 -7.9 -7.9 -7.9 Brixworth 2 Predicted Noise Level 22.9 26.9 30.6 33.4 33.9 33.9 33.9 33.9 33.9 33.9 Daytime Margin -15.1 -11.5 -8.7 -7.4 -8.9 -11.2 -13.1 -13.9 -13.9 -13.9 Night-time Margin -20.1 -16.1 -12.4 -9.6 -9.1 -9.1 -9.1 -9.1 -9.1 -9.1 Horton House, Silver Street, Brixworth Predicted Noise Level 22.3 26.3 30 32.8 33.3 33.3 33.3 33.3 33.3 33.3 Daytime Margin -15.7 -12.1 -9.3 -8.0 -9.5 -11.8 -13.7 -14.5 -14.5 -14.5 Night-time Margin -20.7 -16.7 -13.0 -10.2 -9.7 -9.7 -9.7 -9.7 -9.7 -9.7

It has been assumed that the background noise levels obtained at Horton House are representative of those in Brixworth generally. It should be noted, that these, and the associated limits, are the lowest applied at any location in this assessment.

As can be seen, the predicted noise levels are lower than the limits in all cases. The effects of operational noise at Brixworth and Horton House are therefore considered to be not significant.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 11-12 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 11: Noise

Clearview Farm Table 11.10 details the predicted noise levels, limits and the difference (margin) between the predictions and the limits for Clearview Farm. Negative values for the margin indicate that the predictions are below the limits. The assessment is also illustrated graphically in Charts 11.15 and 11.16.

Table 11.10: Operational Noise Assessment, Clearview Farm Wind Speed at 10m AGL, ms-1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

LA90,10min, dB(A) Predicted Noise Level 25.2 29.2 32.9 35.7 36.2 36.2 36.2 36.2 36.2 36.2 Daytime Limit 38 38.5 39.8 42 44.7 47.7 50.3 51.7 51.7 51.7 Night-time Limit 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 Daytime Margin -12.8 -9.3 -6.9 -6.3 -8.5 -11.5 -14.1 -15.5 -15.5 -15.5 Night-time Margin -17.8 -13.8 -10.1 -7.3 -6.8 -6.8 -6.8 -6.8 -6.8 -6.8

As can be seen, the predicted noise levels are lower than the limits in all cases. The effects of operational noise at Clearview Farm are therefore considered to be not significant.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 11-13 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 11: Noise

Glebe Farm and Station Road In the case of these properties, the lowest background noise levels obtained during the survey (those from Horton House, Silver Street, Brixworth) have been applied.

Table 11.11 details the predicted noise levels, limits and the difference (margin) between the predictions and the limits for Glebe Farm and Station Road. Negative values for the margin indicate that the predictions are below the limits. The assessment is also illustrated graphically in Charts 11.17 and 11.18.

Table 11.11: Operational Noise Assessment, Glebe Farm and Station Road Wind Speed at 10m AGL, ms-1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

LA90,10min, dB(A) Daytime Limit 38.0 38.4 39.3 40.8 42.8 45.1 47.0 47.8 47.8 47.8 Night-time Limit 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 Glebe Farm Predicted Noise Level 26.5 30.5 34.2 37.0 37.5 37.5 37.5 37.5 37.5 37.5 Daytime Margin -11.5 -7.9 -5.1 -3.8 -5.3 -7.6 -9.5 -10.3 -10.3 -10.3 Night-time Margin -16.5 -12.5 -8.8 -6.0 -5.5 -5.5 -5.5 -5.5 -5.5 -5.5 Station Road Predicted Noise Level 26.4 30.4 34.1 36.9 37.4 37.4 37.4 37.4 37.4 37.4 Daytime Margin -11.6 -8.0 -5.2 -3.9 -5.4 -7.7 -9.6 -10.4 -10.4 -10.4 Night-time Margin -16.6 -12.6 -8.9 -6.1 -5.6 -5.6 -5.6 -5.6 -5.6 -5.6

As can be seen, the predicted noise levels are lower than the limits in all cases. The effects of operational noise at Glebe Farm and Station Road are therefore considered to be not significant.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 11-14 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 11: Noise

11.6.3Decommissioning 11.5.3Potential Decommissioning Effects Noise during decommissioning is likely to be similar in character to that during construction, In a similar way to construction, noise during decommissioning will be managed to ensure compliance with best practice, legislation and guidelines current at the time. albeit of a shorter duration. Similar measures to those applied during construction will be Mitigation Measures employed to ensure compliance with the standards or guidance relevant at the time. 11.7 RESIDUAL EFFECTS 11.6 MITIGATION 11.7.1Construction Effects 11.6.1Construction Mitigation Measures The proposed mitigation measures will ensure that noise during construction is managed as far The following good practice measures will be required of all contractors during construction: as is reasonably practicable.

Operations shall be limited to times agreed with Daventry District Council Environmental 11.7.2Operational Effects Health Department. The site contractors shall publicise the programme (in local newspapers, through mailings to local residents, through an on-site information board at the site access, As there are no operational mitigation measures required or proposed, residual effects during and on the Developer’s website) for the commencement and duration of operations, provide operation would be unchanged from those assessed, i.e. not significant. details of the project programme and provide named contacts for daytime and out of hours. A community liaison group, comprising representatives from the nearest communities and 11.7.3Decommissioning Effects the Developer, shall meet regularly prior to and during the construction period to facilitate communication between the parties and ensure that opportunities are taken to minimise The proposed mitigation measures will ensure that noise during decommissioning is managed noise nuisance through effective project management. as far as is reasonably practicable. The site contractors shall prepare detailed method statements for each construction activity, 11.8 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS which will include identification of potentially noisy operations and details of noise control measures to be adopted, to be available for inspection by Daventry District Council’s No cumulative impacts are predicted for the proposed development. Environmental Health Department. The contractors shall be required to select the quietest item of suitable plant available for all site operations where practicable. 11.9 SUMMARY OF EFFECTS The work programme on site will also be phased to reduce the combined effects arising from Table 11.12 Summary of Effects Table several noisy operations. Where necessary and practicable, noise from fixed plant and Potential Effect Mitigation Residual Effect equipment shall be contained within suitable acoustic enclosures or behind acoustic screens. Construction Effects All sub-contractors appointed by the main contractor shall be formally and legally obliged, Noise During Construction Managed through Best Practice in Managed as far as is through contract, to comply with all environmental noise conditions. accordance with BS 5228:1997. reasonably practicable. Operational Effects Where practicable, night time working will not be carried out. However, any plant and Effects on all nearby residential Manufacturer’s warranty that No significant effects. equipment required for operation at night (23:00 - 07:00) shall be mains electric powered properties comply with ETSU-R- turbine noise emissions will not where practicable. Any night-time lighting rigs, pumps or other equipment shall be powered 97 and are therefore assessed exceed those assessed. No using mains electricity or silenced and suitably shielded to ensure compliance with World as not significant. additional mitigation required. Health Organisation (WHO) night-time noise criteria at the nearest residential properties, Decommissioning Effects assuming open windows. Noise during decommissioning Managed through best practice or Managed as far as is other guidance or legislation reasonably practicable. 11.6.2Operational Mitigation Measures relevant at the time.

As previously stated, the manufacturer of the specific model of wind turbine procured for use on 11.10 STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE site will be required to provide a warranty that noise emissions will not exceed those assessed An assessment of the potential effects of noise during construction, operation and in this chapter. decommissioning of the proposed Brixworth Windfarm has been carried out.

As the potential operational noise effects have been assessed as not significant in all cases, no Construction noise will be managed through Best Practice measures, in accordance with BS operational mitigation measures are considered necessary. 5228:1997. This will ensure that any noise that occurs during construction will be managed as far as is reasonably practicable.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 11-15 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 11: Noise

Noise during operation has been assessed as being in compliance with the requirements of ETSU-R-97, The Assessment and Rating of Noise from Wind Farms, and is therefore considered LAeq,t: This term is known as the A-weighted equivalent, continuous sound pressure level for a to be not significant. period of time, t. It is similar to an average, and represents the sound pressure level of a sound of continuous intensity that would result in an equal quantity of sound energy as a sound which Best Practice measures will be employed during decommissioning to ensure compliance with varies in intensity. legislation and guidance relevant at the time. Low frequency noise: Noise at the lower end of the range of audible frequencies (20Hz – 20kHz). Usually refers to noise below 250Hz. Should not be confused with infrasound, which is 11.11 GLOSSARY sound below the lowest audible frequency, 20Hz.

The following items of acoustic terminology may have been referred to in the preceding Noise: Unwanted sound. May refer to both natural (e.g. wind, birdsong etc) and artificial chapter. Terms in italics are defined elsewhere in the glossary. sounds (e.g. traffic, noise from wind turbines, etc)

AGL: Above Ground Level Noise contour plot: A diagram showing lines of equal sound levels (isobels) in a similar manner to height contours on an Ordnance Survey map or isobars (lines of equal pressure) on a Background Noise: The background noise level is the under lying level of noise present at a weather map. particular location for the majority (usually 90%) of a period of time. As such it excludes any short-duration noises, such as individual passing cars (but not continuous traffic), dogs barking Noise sensitive receptors: Locations that may potentially be adversely affected by the or passers-by. Sources of background noise typically include such things as wind noise, traffic addition of a new source of noise. Can include residential properties, outdoor areas and and continuously operating machinery (e.g. air conditioning or generators). sensitive species.

Decibel (dB): The decibel is the basic unit of noise measurement. It relates to the pressure Sound power (W): The sound energy radiated per unit time by a sound source, measured in created by the sound (Sound Pressure Level) and operates on a logarithmic scale, ranging watts (W). upwards from 0dB. 0dB is equivalent to the normal threshold of hearing at a frequency of 1000Hz. Each increase of 3dB on the scale represents a doubling in the Sound Pressure Level, Sound power level (Lw): Sound power measured on the decibel scale, relative to a reference and is typically the minimum noticeable change in sound level under normal listening conditions. -12 value (Wo) of 10 W. For example, while an increase in noise level from 32dB to 35dB represents a doubling in sound pressure level, this change would only just be noticeable to the majority of listeners. Sound pressure (P): The fluctuations in atmospheric pressure relative to atmospheric pressure, measured in Pascals (Pa). dB(A): Environmental noise levels are usually discussed in terms of dB(A). This is known as the A-weighted sound pressure level, and indicates that a correction factor has been applied, Sound pressure level (Lp): Sound pressure measured on the decibel scale, relative to a sound which corresponds to the human ear’s response to sound across the range of audible pressure of 2 x 10-5 Pa. frequencies. The ear is most sensitive in the middle range of frequencies (around 1000-3000 Hertz (Hz)), and less sensitive at lower and higher frequencies. The A-weighted noise level is Tonal element: A characteristic of a sound where the sound pressure level in a particular derived by analysing the level of a sound at a range of frequencies and applying a specific frequency range is greater than in those frequency ranges immediately above higher or lower. correction factor for each frequency before calculating the overall level. In practice this is This would be perceived as a humming or whining sound. carried out automatically within noise measuring equipment by the use of electronic filters, which adjust the frequency response of the instrument to mimic that of the ear. Vibration: In this context, refers to vibration carried in structures such as the ground or buildings, rather than airborne noise. Façade: A façade noise level is one measured at, or very close to, the façade of a building. These are typically 3dB higher than free-field levels, due to reflection.

Free Field: This term refers to a location where the propagation (movement) of sound is not affected by the presence of obstacles or surfaces which would cause reflections (echoes).

Frequency: The frequency of a sound is equivalent to its pitch in musical terms. The units of frequency are Hertz (Hz), which represents the number of cycles (vibrations) per second.

LA90,t: This term is used to represent the A-weighted sound pressure level that is exceeded for 90% of a period of time, t. This is used as a measure of the background noise level.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 11-16 Key

Scoping Turbine Locations

Suggested Monitoring Locations

Houses Predicted Noise Level LA90,10min 30 dB(A)

35 dB(A)

40 dB(A)

45 dB(A)

50 dB(A)

55 dB(A)

Industrial Areas

Settlements

Noise contours calculated according to ISO 9613-2:1996, assuming ground of intermediate acoustic absorbency (ground factor = 0.5) and omitting barrier attenuations. Calculation carried out on 25m vertical grid at height of 2.0m AGL, based on OS LandForm Panorama contour data.

Sources assumed to be RePower MM82 wind turbines with hub height of 74m and maximum Sound Power Level of 106 dB(A), allowing 1 dB margin on manufacturer's warranted data.

1:15,000 Scale @ A3

0 250 500 m

Noise Contour Plot: Scoping Layout Figure 11.1 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Reproduced under licence from Ordnance Survey digital map data. CrownAll rights Copyright. reserved. Licence number 0100031673

Key

Proposed Turbine Locations

Noise Monitoring Locations

9 Manor Rd Wind Monitoring Position Hanging Houghton Noise Assessment Locations Predicted Noise Level LA90,10min 30 dB(A) 1 35 dB(A)

3 40 dB(A)

45 dB(A) 5 50 dB(A) 2 55 dB(A)

4 Lodge Farm

6

Noise contours calculated according to ISO 9613-2:1996, assuming ground of intermediate acoustic absorbency (ground factor = 0.5) and omitting barrier attenuations. Calculation carried out on 25m vertical grid at height of 2.0m AGL, based on OS LandForm Panorama Glebe Farm contour data. Clearview Farm Station Road Sources assumed to be RePower MM82 wind turbines with hub height of 74m and maximum Sound Power Level of 106 dB(A), allowing 1 dB margin on manufacturer's warranted data.

1:15,000 Scale @ A3 Brixworth 1 Brixworth 2 Horton House 0 250 500 m

Noise Contour Plot: Assessment Layout Figure 11.2 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Reproduced under licence from Ordnance Survey digital map data. CrownAll rights Copyright. reserved. Licence number 0100031673

Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 12: Aviation and Existing Infrastructure

Consultee Summary of Response infrastructure identified within the site boundary and no construction anticipated 12. EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE within specified buffer zones. ntl:telewest No response received. 12.1 INTRODUCTION Ofcom Identified three fixed civil microwave links within the vicinity of the site (2 Orange links and 1 T-Mobile link) and provided operator contact details. Orange Details of one microwave link provided by Orange. The development is unlikely This chapter of the Environmental Statement (ES) describes and assesses the potential effects to affect Orange’s operations. of the proposed windfarm on: Severn Trent Water No response received. Sywell Aerodrome No response received. Television and telecommunications; T-Mobile Details of one link identified by Ofcom were provided. Consideration given Aviation; and during the turbine layout and spacing design (nearest turbine is 180m). The Existing Infrastructure. development is unlikely to affect T-Mobile’s operations.

Effects on public roads are discussed in Chapter 14: Traffic and Transport of this ES. 12.2.1Legislation and Guidance There are a number of documents which provide guidance on aviation and telecommunications 12.2 CONSULTATION considerations for windfarm developments. These include:

Consultation has been carried out with the main communications and utility providers in the Wind Energy and Aviation Interests – Interim Guidelines. Wind Energy, Defence and Civil area and statutory aviation consultees as shown in Table 12.1. Aviation Interests Working Group; Best Practice Guidelines for Wind Energy Development, British Wind Energy Association Table 12.1 Summary of Consultation (BWEA); Consultee Summary of Response Planning Policy Guidance 8 (PPG8): Telecommunications; Anglian Water One scanning telemetry link identified by Anglian Water. A study has been commissioned to determine the extent and location of the link. Plan extract BBC, Ofcom (2001), The impact of Large Buildings and Structures (including windfarms) on provided shows no potable water supply or other underground plant within the Terrestrial Television Reception; and proposed development boundary. Ofcom (2002), Guidelines for Improving Digital Television and Radio Reception. Arqiva Indicated that the development is unlikely to affect any UHF broadcast feeds operated in the area. BBC Online Reception The proposed windfarm would be likely to affect 8 homes for whom there is no 12.3 METHODOLOGY Tool1 alternative off-air service. British Telecom No links identified by Ofcom. Details of underground plant running along the Baseline conditions for microwave links and utilities have been identified by Arcus through road to the east of the site. No infrastructure identified within the site boundary consultation. Potential effects have been assessed through consultation and desk based and no construction anticipated within specified buffer zones. assessment. Where feasible, the baseline information has been used to inform the layout design Cable and Wireless No links identified by Ofcom. Identified that no plant exists in proximity to the development. in such a way as to minimise impacts on existing infrastructure. Coal Authority No response received. Recommended that Sywell Aerodrome be contacted directly with details of the Baseline conditions and potential effects for MoD and civil aviation interests have been Civil Aviation Authority proposal. established through desk based assessment and consultation. CSS Spectrum Indicated that there are Anglian Water and Severn Trent Water links in the Management Services vicinity of the site. (CSS) 12.4 BASELINE CONDITIONS Joint Radio Company Identified one link to the north of the development and indicated that the link is (JRC) unlikely to be affected. The following installations and systems have been identified. MoD Defence Estates Identified no objection to the development at consultation in July 2008. 12.4.1Television and Telecommunications National Air Traffic Site is within an area where the turbines are not likely to interfere with the Service En. Route Ltd. operational infrastructure of NERL. (NERL)2 Consultation with the BBC via the online assessment tool identified four transmitters that could National Grid Wireless In an area for which Arqiva has responsibility. potentially be affected by the wind turbines, details of which are provided in Table 12.2. National Grid Negligible risk identified with respect to operational electricity and national gas transmission network. Plan extract provided shows presence of a medium pressure gas main running along the road to the east of the site. No

1 BBC Online Reception Tool - http://windfarms.kw.bbc.co.uk/cgi-bin/rd/windfarms/windfarm.cgi 2 NERL pre-planning consultation tool - http://www.bwea.com/aviation.nats.html

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 12-1 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 12: Aviation and Existing Infrastructure

Table 12.2 Local Television Transmitters Any effects that do arise are likely to be caused by tall cranes. Such cranes are likely to be in Name NGR Power Distance (km) the vicinity of the wind turbines when erected, and are likely to have effects similar to those of Waltham C5 SK809233 250kW 50.5 NE the wind turbines. The cranes are temporary structures that will not be erected for long periods Lichfield C5 TF185053 1000kW 67 NW of time. As a result any effects during construction are likely to be similar in nature but of a Sandy Heath TL530488 20kW 52 SW smaller magnitude than operational effects. Sutton Coldfield SK113003 1000kW 69 NW Effects on existing utilities during construction can include disturbance to infrastructure and Ofcom manages fixed microwave links across the UK on behalf of individual telecommunication associated services where infrastructure is in close proximity to construction areas. All turbines, turbine bases and ancillary structures are outwith exclusion zones outlined by National Grid and organisations. Three microwave links were identified by Ofcom as being in the vicinity of the 5 proposed windfarm, 2 Orange links and 1 T-Mobile link. Details of the links were collected the United Kingdom Onshore Pipeline Operators’ Association (UKOPA) . There is no other known through consultation with the link operators. infrastructure on the site that is likely to be affected by the construction of the development. The accurate location of all services will be re-checked pre-construction with the various The JRC and CSS manage scanning telemetry links throughout the UK on behalf of individual utilities. operators. The JRC identified one link to the north of the development and indicated that the link is unlikely to be affected. They therefore identified no foreseeable problems as a result of 12.6.2Potential Operation the development. CSS initially indicated that there were two UHF links (operated by Anglian 12.6.2.1 Television and Telecommunication Water and Severn Trent Water) in the area for which they had safeguarding responsibility, which could be affected by the proposal. Wind turbines and otheral Effectsstructures have the potential to create interference with television and telecommunication transmissions. Interference to television reception can occur in any direction 12.4.2Aviation within 500m of a turbine (reflection zone), or within 5km of a turbine in the line of sight 6 The only civil airport within the 30km consultation zone3 is Sywell Aerodrome, which is 10km SE between transmitter and receiver (shadow zone) . of the proposed development. It is important to recognise that if properly mitigated, effects on telecommunications, television 12.4.3Utilities and radio broadcasting links or scanning telemetry are not a significant constraint to windfarm development. Terrestrial television transmissions for domestic reception within the UK are the A Northern Gas Networks medium pressure gas pipeline, operated by National Grid, has been joint responsibility of the BBC and Ofcom. Distribution links and other communication links are identified in the vicinity of the site. This runs parallel to the A508 to the east of the site and is provided and operated on behalf of the broadcasters by National Grid Wireless and Arqiva. shown in Figure 12.1. The proposed windfarm lies within an area under the BBC’s jurisdiction, with responsibility for ensuring the integrity of Re-Broadcast Links with Arqiva. At the moment, digital and analogue 12.5 INFORMATION GAPS signals are broadcast simultaneously. Starting in 2008 the UK analogue television broadcasts will be phased out, region by region, to be replaced by digital transmissions. The process of Anglian Water was commissioned in early June 2008 to undertake a microwave and UHF impact switchover will be complete by 2012. Anglia, who are responsible for broadcasting in assessment on the Anglian Water link identified through initial consultations. To date Anglian Northamptonshire, will complete the switch over in 20117, after which viewers without digital Water have not yet completed their analysis. To date Severn Trent have not responded to receivers will be faced with a blank screen. As digital TV greatly compresses sound and pictures requests for information regarding the link they operate. No other information gaps have been in order to be transmitted on the digital signal, this means that several television channels can encountered. be transmitted using the same amount of space of just one analogue channel. This makes it a much more effective way to transmit television signals. Digital television transmission reception 12.6 ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS does not generally suffer from ghosting caused by minor reflections of the signal, but sudden picture degradation may occur in extreme circumstances due to signal reflections. 12.6.1Potential Const Ofcom has identified no links belonging to Arqiva in the vicinity of the proposed development; The British Wind Energy Association and Ofcom Guidance advise that the effects of construction hence the windfarm is unlikely to affect Arqiva’s UHF re-broadcast links. The BBC Windfarm 4 and decommissioningruction should Effects not be assessed, and it is not standard practice to do so . planning tool advised that reception at up to 8 homes with no alternative off-air service may be adversely affected by the proposed windfarm. Signals broadcast from Waltham, Waltham C5,

3 Wind Energy and Aviation – Interim guidelines. Working Group for Wind Energy, Defence and Civil Aviation Interests - 5 http://www.bwea.com/pdf/Wind-Energy-and-aviation-interim-guidelines.pdf http://www.ukopa.co.uk/publications/pdf/SitingWindTurbines.pdf 4 6 Best Practice Guidelines for Wind Energy Development, British Wind Energy Association (BWEA) - The Impact of Large Buildings and Structure (Including Windfarms) on Terrestrial Television Reception. 7 http://www.bwea.com/ref/bpg.html http://www.digitaluk.co.uk/when

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 12-2 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 12: Aviation and Existing Infrastructure

Litchfield C5, Sandy Heath and Sutton Coldfield transmitters could potentially be affected where constructed and is operating, as individual turbines can actually improve signal reception to they are obstructed by the windfarm. In reality, the switch to digital broadcasting is likely to individual aerials as well as degrade received signals. reduce the number of homes affected as a result of the windfarm. Mitigation measures can include straightforward solutions such as improving the receiving Ofcom identified three fixed links (2 Orange and 1 T-Mobile link) in the vicinity of the proposed aerial, changing aerial height, replacing the aerial, retuning television receivers or providing the windfarm, as outlined in section 12.5.1. These links and any required separation distances have affected households with an alternative source of suitable television signals off-air from a been considered during layout design and both operators confirmed that the development is different transmitter. For homes with no alternative off-air service solutions can include provision of satellite or cables services to affected households. Anglian Water was commissioned in early June 2008 to undertake a microwave and UHF impact assessment on the Anglian Water link identified through initial consultations. This assessment is Any planning consent is likely to include a condition that any effects on television reception that to determine the potential impact of the proposed windfarm on the link. To date Anglian Water arise as a result of the windfarm will be remedied and paid for by the Developer. have not yet completed their analysis. To date Severn Trent have not responded to requests for information regarding the link they operate. Embedded mitigation in the form of site design will result in no effects on microwave telecommunication links as a result of the proposed windfarm. 12.6.2.2 Aviation If an issue with their communication link is highlighted by the Anglian Water assessment, a Theaerodrome MoD and licensee CAA have of beennon-radar consulted equipped via the lice consultation pro-forma, which is used to identify further detailed survey would be agreed with Anglian Water, to find an alternative feed. One receptors1100m withinthat may 5km potentially of the pr be affected by the development. The MoD confirmed that they mitigation option could be the installation of a passive or active repeater to take the link around had no objections to the development. The MoD has been re-consulted with the final turbine the windfarm site. Following the grant of a successful planning consent and prior to coordinates and they have again confirmed that the proposed windfarm is unlikely to affect construction of the windfarm, necessary technical surveys would be undertaken to refine MoD operations. mitigation solutions. oposed wind turbine development CAA Policy and Guidance On Wind Turbines8 nsedstates aerodromes “Developers with will runwaysbe referred of less to thanthe 12.6.2.4 Aviation

.” Sywell Aerodrome has a 909m The Ministry of Defence would be advised before construction commences of the location and licensed runway. Although outwith of the recommended 5km consultation zone, Sywell size of the proposed turbines, so that military air crew can be advised of the potential Aerodrome has been consulted but to date no response has been received. obstruction.

12.6.2.3 Utilities 12.7.2Utilities

No effect is anticipated on existing utilities. Actual position of mains, pipes and services will be verified before construction or excavation work is commenced. Best practice measures in accordance with Health and Safety Executive’s 12.6.3Potential Decommissioning Effects publication HSG47 “Avoiding Danger from Underground Services” will be adhered to during construction. Potential decommissioning effects are likely to be similar in nature to those encountered during construction, only of less significance. It is therefore considered that there will be no 12.8 RESIDUAL EFFECTS foreseeable additional effects beyond those discussed in section 12.6.1 which arise as a result of decommissioning. No significant effects are predicted after mitigation.

12.7 MITIGATION 12.9 SUMMARY OF EFFECTS

12.7.1Television and Telecommunication A summary of the potential effects, mitigation and residual effects discussed in this chapter is included in Table 12.3. Any adverse impacts with regard to television reception interference can be resolved through technical solutions that will be agreed between Bolsterstone Plc and the local planning authority. Whilst such mitigation measures may be required to alleviate any television interference, these should only be assessed and considered once the entire site has been

8 CAA Policy and Guidance On Wind Turbines - http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/Cap764.pdf

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 12-3 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 12: Aviation and Existing Infrastructure

Table 12.3 Summary of Effects Potential Effect Mitigation Residual Effect Construction Effects Interference to No mitigation required (see operational mitigation for No significant effect telecommunications caused telecommunications below). by tall cranes on site Aviation MoD will be advised of turbine locations and height No significant effect prior to construction. Damage to Utilities Location and nature of utilities taken into account No significant effect during site design. Appropriate construction methods and on-site safety procedures to be agreed with NGN and followed during construction. Operational Effects Interference to Windfarm designed to avoid impacts upon links. No significant effect Telecommunications Appropriate mitigation e.g. re-routing the link will be agreed in relation to the Anglian Water telemetry link. Television reception – 8 Any effects can be resolved through technical solutions No significant effect houses including change in aerial height, replacement and retuning of aerials or provision of satellite or cable services. Any remedial measures would be funded by the developer. Utilities Location and nature of utilities taken into account No significant effect during site design.

12.10 STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE

Where effects have been predicted various mitigation measures and technical solutions have been identified and are proposed. All mitigation measures would be funded by the developer.

With mitigation the proposed Brixworth Windfarm is not predicted to have a significant effect on existing infrastructure including telecommunications, television reception, aviation and utilities.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 12-4 1 Key

Proposed Turbine Locations

Anemometer

3 Substation/Control Building

Culverts

Track Layout

Medium Pressure Gas Pipeline

Site Boundary

Construction Compound 5

Crane Hardstandings

2

4

6

1:5,000 Scale @ A3

0 125 250 m

Location of Medium Pressure Gas Pipeline Figure 12.1 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Reproduced under licence from Ordnance Survey digital map data. CrownAll rights Copyright. reserved. Licence number 0100031673

Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 13: Other Issues

Table 13.1 Comparisons of annual CO2 emission reductions from fossil fuel sources 13 OTHER ISSUES Windfarm capacity Gas comparison of Average Fossil fuels Coal comparison of CO2 displaced comparison of CO2 CO2 displaced 13.1 INTRODUCTION (tonnes) displaced (tonnes) (tonnes) 12MW 10,118 16,975 25,186 This chapter of the Environmental Statement (ES) describes and assesses: Brixworth Windfarm could supply enough energy for 6,262 homes2. Air Quality and Climate effects; Health and Safety; 13.2.3 CO 2 Emissions Lifecycle Effects of Weather; and CO emissions will also result throughout the entire life of a windfarm including construction, Shadow Flicker effects. 2 maintenance and decommissioning such as from steel and cement production and transport. 13.2 AIR QUALITY AND CLIMATE However such emissions are involved in building any conventional electricity plant. Conventional fossil fuelled electricity plants have the additional CO2 emissions from 13.2.1 Construction procurement and burning of fossil fuel energy sources during operation which increases their impact. The movement of vehicles and plant on site would create exhaust emissions. In addition, The Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology (October 2006) compared the life cycle construction activities could create a dust nuisance in dry, windy conditions. Given the short 3 term nature of the construction period, the limited area to be developed within the context of CO2 emissions of different electricity generation systems used in the UK . This found that coal the large-scale nature of the site, and the distances to the nearest residential properties, burning power systems have the largest carbon footprint of all the electricity generation impacts on local air quality are likely to be negligible. systems analysed having up to 1000g of CO2 equivalent per kilowatt hour (kWh) of generation (1000gCO2eq/kWh). The carbon footprint of fossil fuelled power plants is dominated by During dry, windy conditions, if the potential for dust nuisance at nearby properties exists, emissions during their operation. water sprays will be used to dampen down and control dust. Such working practices will be controlled through appropriate construction method statements such as road sweeping and any In contrast it finds that electricity from wind energy has one of the lowest carbon footprints imposed planning conditions. with nearly all the emissions arising during the manufacturing and construction phases such as from the production of steel and concrete which account for 98% of the total life cycle CO2 13.2.2 Operation emissions. The carbon footprint for onshore wind energy is given as only 4.64gCO2eq/kWh.

Wind turbines create no atmospheric pollution during operation. Brixworth Windfarm has the Even when taking account of the full life cycle emissions of CO2, a windfarm therefore emits far less CO per unit of energy from construction, maintenance and operation than conventional potential to displace electricity generated from fossil fuels and consequently prevent CO2 from 2 fossil fuelled electricity plants such as coal, oil and gas. being released. The actual amount of CO2 released through electricity generation in the UK relates directly to the generating plant in use at any given time. This mix changes on a daily basis and will change in the future as UK generating plant is replaced and as a consequence it 13.3 HEALTH AND SAFETY is not possible to predict exactly how much CO2 release the windfarm will prevent over its lifetime. A comprehensive health and safety assessment would be carried out prior to construction by the selected contractor in accordance with legislation. The information presented within this ES The BERR Energy Trends March 20081: Carbon Dioxide Emissions by Fuel estimates that when provides an outline of the issues to be addressed. major power producers are generating electricity from gas 366 tonnes of CO2 are released each gigawatt hour (GWh); this is increased to 911 tonnes/GWh when generation is from coal. The 13.3.1 Design and Construction average CO release from the fossil fuel mix, which also includes oil, is 614 tonnes per GWh. 2 The layout and design of the windfarm takes into account the following health and safety considerations: On this basis Table 13.1 shows a range of tonnes of CO2 that could be displaced by the proposed Brixworth Windfarm annually, with the minimum resulting from gas CO emissions 2 Site boundaries; displaced, and the maximum from coal CO2 emissions displaced, and the actual figure likely to be somewhere in between the two. 2 Based on a windfarm of 12MW (assuming a capacity factor of 26.3%) and an average electricity consumption in the East Midlands in 2006 of 4415kWh (Digest of UK Energy Statistics,www.berr.gov.uk/energy/ statistics/ regional/regional-local-electricity/ page36213.html). It should be noted that the number of homes supplied will vary depending on site wind speeds and household electricity consumption. 1 3 Department for Business Enterprise & Regulatory Reform BERR Energy Trends March 2008. National Statistics Publication. Pg. 22. Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology postnote October 2006 Number 268. Carbon Footprint of .

Bolsterstone Plc Electricity Generation August 2008 13-1 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 13: Other Issues

Location and prevention of contact with underground and overhead services; The principal contractor will be responsible for carrying out regular risk assessments for all Public access and safety; operations that have an inherent risk of severe injury; and Other structures on site; The designers and the principal contractor will liaise in order to produce risk assessments Access and egress; for all remaining residual risks involving the day-to-day running and maintenance operations Traffic control; and eventual decommissioning of the windfarm. Stability of slopes; and Effects of the design life of the structures. 13.3.3 Health and Safety File

The construction of the site would be managed in accordance with the Health and Safety at A competent adequately resourced site supervisor would be appointed for the works. All Work Act 1974 and would comply with the relevant Health and Safety Regulations including: relevant information relating to health and safety would be passed on to the site supervisor. The site supervisor will notify the relevant safety authorities (HSENI) and prepare the pre- The Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations SI 1999 No. 3242; tender health and safety plan and ensure that a construction phase health and safety plan is Health and Safety (First Aid) Regulations SI 1981 No. 917; adequately developed. The site supervisor will collate information from the designers and The Work at Height Regulations 2005; principal contractor to produce a health and safety file for the project. The Reporting of Injuries, Diseases & Dangerous Occurrences Regulations SI 1995 No. 3163; The site health and safety file will be completed as soon as is possible after the construction of The Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations SI 1992 No. 3004; the windfarm. It will contain all relevant health and safety information relating to the windfarm Construction (Design and Management) Regulations SI 1994 No. 3140; in relation to the day to day running and maintenance operations and eventual The Construction (Health, Safety & Welfare) Regulations SI 1996 No. 1592; decommissioning of the windfarm. It is the owner’s duty to hold and make available any Electricity at Work Regulations SI 1989 No. 635; information contained in the file to anyone who would need such information. The Noise at Work Regulations SI 1989 No. 1790; Personal Protective Equipment at Work (PPE) Regulations SI 1992 No. 2966; 13.3.4 Operation The Manual Handling Operations Regulations SI 1992 No. 2793; The Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations SI 1998 No. 2306; A Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system monitors the windfarms Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations SI 1998 No. 2307; performance and should a fault occur a message is automatically sent to the engineer’s phone Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations SI 2002 No. 2677; preventing emergency situations from occurring. The Electricity Safety, Quality and Continuity Regulations SI 2002 No. 2665; Warning signs and security infrastructure would be in place around the substation and control Confined Spaces Regulations SI 1997 No. 1713; building to ensure public safety. The Construction (Head Protection) Regulations SI 1989 No. 2209; and The Health and Safety (Safety Signs and Signals) Regulations SI 1996 No. 341. 13.3.5 Driver Distraction

The site would operate to the BWEA Guidelines for Health and Safety in the Wind Energy 5 4 PPS22 states that wind turbines should not be treated any differently from other distractions a driver Industry . Potentially hazardous areas such as foundation excavations would be fenced and must face and should not be considered particularly hazardous. Drivers are faced with a number of signed as appropriate. varied and competing distractions during any normal journey, including advertising hoardings deliberately designed to attract attention. PPS22 goes on to state that there are now a large number of windfarms 13.3.2 Risk Assessment adjoining or close to road networks and there has been no history of accidents on any of them.

In order to effectively guard against the risk of accidents, a clear system of identifying hazards Planning for Renewable Energy: A Companion Guide to PPS226 states that it may be advisable and implementing effective control measures would be put into place. The most effective for wind turbines to be located tip height distance from roads so as to achieve maximum manner of achieving this is through clear concise risk analysis. safety. All turbines at Brixworth Windfarm are located at a much greater distance than this from public roads, the nearest turbine being approximately 260m from the A508. This will take place at three different levels during the development of the windfarm:

Designers will undertake a design review to design out in so far as is practicable any risks associated with the project. Those risks that cannot be designed out will be highlighted to the principal contractor within a pre-tender health and safety plan in the form of clear concise risk assessments; 5 PPS22 Planning Policy Statement 22 Planning for Renewable Energy a Companion Guide, 2004. Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. 6 ODPM, “Planning for Renewable Energy: A Companion Guide to PPS22” 4 Guidelines for Health & Safety in the Wind Energy Industry April 2005. http://www.bwea.com/pdf/HSGuidelines.pdf http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/planningrenewable , 2004

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 13-2 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 13: Other Issues

13.4 EFFECTS OF WEATHER flickering light that is usually between 3 - 50 Hertz (Hz)8. The frequencies of flicker caused by modern wind turbines (less than 1 Hz) are well below the frequencies known to trigger effects Due to the exposed nature of windfarm sites, wind turbines are designed to withstand extreme in these individuals. weather conditions. 13.5.2 Guidance and As The turbines are fitted with sensors which will automatically shut down and brake the turbines should very high wind speeds occur which exceed safe operating limits. This prevents excessive 13.6.2.1 Relevant Guidance wear on the gear box. sessment Methodology Planning for Renewable Energy, A Companion Guide to PPS22 has been considered in carrying The turbines are also equipped with lightning protection equipment. If lightning occurs this out this assessment. The Companion Guide document was published by the Office for the equipment effectively and safely conducts the lighting strike into the earth. Deputy Prime Minister in 2004 to provide additional information to assist in the implementation of Planning Policy Statement 22: Renewable Energy (PPS22). The Guide provides additional In certain meteorological conditions, such as still, cold weather, it is possible for ice to form on technical information on a range of renewable energy technologies, including onshore wind the rotor blades. If this occurs, two types of risk may result: power, which is universally applicable.

Ice fragments thrown from the rotor; and The Companion Guide describes the conditions in the UK under which flicker may occur and Ice fall from the turbines while shut down. states that the effect diminishes with distance, and that “flicker effects have been proven to occur only within ten rotor diameters of a turbine”9. It also confirms that effects only occur Ice throw has been noted as a risk in very cold conditions for example in the high latitudes of within 130 degrees either side of north relative to the turbines. Scandinavia or the very high altitudes in Europe. Ice fall occurs if ice accumulates on the turbine and falls to the ground when it melts. This would occur when the temperature warms 13.6.2.2 Assessment Methodology following a period of extreme cold weather conditions. Properties with the potential to be affected by shadow flicker have been identified by mapping Due to the more temperate climate of the United Kingdom, it is considered that suitable the area around each proposed turbine locations within a distance of ten rotor diameters and weather conditions for occasional icing occur for less than 1 day per year7 in this part of 130 degrees either side of north (the ‘shadow flicker study area’) using GIS (Geographical England. Information System). The resulting map showing this (Figure 13.1) was then used to identify properties (as shown on Ordnance Survey 1:25,000 scale digital mapping) within the shadow Despite the low risk, turbines would be fitted with vibration sensors which detect any imbalance flicker study area. A single property was identified for further analysis. which might be caused by icing, in which case the affected turbines would be shut down. A recognised computer software package10 was then used to calculate theoretical specific times Operational procedures would also be put in place to ensure the safety of both workers and the and durations of flicker effects for each property. Details of assumptions made about the public in relation to ice throw and ice fall. Procedures would include turbine shutdown and properties are given in section 13.6.3 Baseline Description. warning signage. This software creates a mathematical model of the proposed wind farm development site and 13.5 SHADOW FLICKER its surroundings, based on:

13.5.1 Introduction Turbine locations, hub height and rotor diameter; Topography (obtained from Ordnance Survey LandForm Panorama elevation data on 50m Shadow flicker is an effect that can occur when the shadow of a moving wind turbine blade horizontal grid); and passes over a small opening (window), briefly reducing the intensity of light within the room, Latitude and longitude of the development site (used in calculating the position of the sun in and causing a flickering to be perceived. relation to time of day and year).

The likelihood and duration of this occurring depends upon certain combinations of relative A cut-off distance of 900 m (10 rotor diameters) from each turbine was employed during this sun, turbine and window locations, turbine orientation, times of day, days of the year and calculation. weather conditions. Certain worst-case assumptions are made in the calculation, including: The flickering may have the potential to cause disturbance and annoyance to residents if it affects occupied rooms of a house. Persons with photosensitive epilepsy are usually sensitive to

8 Epilepsy Action, http://www.epilepsy.org.uk/info/photo_other.html 9 ODPM, “Planning for Renewable Energy: A Companion Guide to PPS22”, 2004 7 Wind Energy Production in Cold Climates (WECO) ETSU W/11/00452/REP 10 ReSoft, “WindFarm” Release 4.1.1.1

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 13-3 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 13: Other Issues

Weather conditions are such that shadows are always cast during each day of the year i.e. The above assumptions provide a level of accuracy consistent with the assumptions discussed bright sunshine every day; in Section 13.6.2.2 Assessment Methodology. The turbine rotor will always be facing directly towards a given window, maximising the size of the shadow and duration of the effect; 13.5.4 Potential Effects The turbines will always be rotating; and There will not be intervening structures or vegetation (other than topography) that may Table 13.3 details the results of the calculations carried out of the theoretical maximum shadow restrict the visibility of a turbine, preventing or reducing the effect. flicker effects at the identified receptors, and the likely duration (assuming 30% per annum bright sunshine). The above calculations are intended to indicate a theoretical maximum in potential duration of effects and to provide an approximation of the times of day and year rather than a precise Table 13.3 Potential Shadow Flicker Effects prediction. This is considered to be sufficient for the purposes of this assessment. If deemed to Days Max Mean Theoretical Likely be necessary, calculations that are more detailed will be carried out for the purposes of Name Window Orientation per hours hours hours per hours per developing detailed mitigation measures. year per day per day annum annum

In practice, for much of a given year weather conditions will be such that shadows would not 1 North 100 0.68 0.57 57.4 17.2 2 South 56 0.69 0.54 30.0 3.0 be cast, or would be weak and thus would not give rise to flicker effects. In the UK, bright Lodge Farm 3 West 156 0.70 0.56 87.7 26.3 sunshine typically occurs for around 30% of daylight hours per annum. This means that the 4 East 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 computer model calculation most likely overestimates the duration of effects by as much as three times. Other factors such as the potential for screening by vegetation or intervening Charts showing the times of day and year that effects are predicted to occur and a discussion structures and the varying orientation of the turbines due to varying wind direction will also of the results for each window are presented below. reduce or prevent flicker incidence in practice as compared to the theoretical maximum suggested by the calculation. Property 1: Lodge Farm

No guidance is available regarding what levels of shadow flicker may be considered acceptable Chart 13.1 shows the times that shadow flicker have been predicted to occur at Lodge Farm on in the UK. Therefore, in this assessment it has been assumed that any shadow flicker effects a north-facing window. As shown on the graph, effects could occur for occur for during late that are predicted to occur will be significant. evenings from May to August.

13.5.3 Baseline Description

The only residential properties present within the area that shadow flicker may occur are at Lodge Farm. There are two houses at this location, the nearer of which has been considered in the assessment. Effects at the other house would be no worse than at this location and would occur at similar times. The property is detailed in Table 13.2 and shown in Figure 13.1.

Table 13.2 Potential Shadow Flicker Receptors Closest Approx. distance Name Easting Northing Turbine from the Turbine No. (m) Lodge Farm 475414 272575 6 525

The following assumptions have been made:

All windows have been assumed to measure 1 m by 1 m, to be situated at a height of 3.0 m above ground level, to the window’s centre (representing an average of ground and first floor levels) and to be located at the grid reference given in Table 13.2; and Windows facing towards each of the cardinal compass point directions (North, South, East and West) have been modelled, as an approximation. In practice, not all of these directions face the wind farm, and the buildings may not have windows on each facade.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 13-4 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 13: Other Issues

Chart 13.1: Shadow Times at Lodge Farm for a north-facing window Chart 13.3: Shadow Times at Lodge Farm for a west-facing window

Chart 13.2 shows the times that shadow flicker have been predicted to occur at Lodge Farm on 13.5.5 Mitigation a south-facing window. As shown on the graph, effects could occur for short periods during evenings in February to March and October. As the only potentially affected properties are owned by the landowner involved in the windfarm proposal, mitigation at receptor options will be explored with the occupants of the Chart 13.2: Shadow Times at Lodge Farm for a south-facing window properties. These may include measures such as:

Provision of window blinds; and Provision of screening planting to block visibility of the turbines from the houses as well as flicker effects.

If such measures are found to be impracticable or ineffective, then a control system could be employed11 as part of the wider turbine control systems to calculate, in real time, whether shadow flicker may affect a property, based on pre-programmed co-ordinates for the properties and wind turbines, and the intensity of sunlight, as measured by a device attached to a turbine tower. When the control system calculates that the sunlight is bright enough to cast a shadow, and that a turbine shadow falls on a property, it would automatically shut the turbine down, re- starting it when the shadow has moved away from the property. With the agreement of the occupants of the affected houses, it may only be necessary to operate such a system at times when the occupants are present in the house or using affected rooms. It would also be theoretically possible to use this system to prevent moving shadows from wind turbines occurring in garden areas.

13.5.6 Residual Effects

Implementation of the identified mitigation would ensure that shadow flicker effects at the Chart 13.3 shows the times that shadow flicker have been predicted to occur at Lodge Farm on identified properties would be managed so as not to cause undue disturbance or annoyance to a west-facing window. As shown on the graph, effects could occur for short periods during residents, or prevented from occurring. evenings in February to March, May to August and October, coinciding with effects on the south- and north-facing windows.

11An example can be found at: http://www.windtest.de/WTK-Englisch/wtk_index_eng.html

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 13-5 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 13: Other Issues

13.6 SUMMARY OF EFFECTS

A summary of the potential effects, mitigation and residual effects discussed in this chapter is included in Table 13.4.

Table 13.4 Summary of Effects Potential Effect Mitigation Residual Effect Construction Effects Dust Nuisance Use of water sprays and good construction No significant effect practices Site Health & Safety Relevant health & safety regulations and guidelines No significant effect will be followed to ensure safe design and construction of the windfarm. Operational Effects Emissions savings None necessary Positive benefit of emission savings during windfarms 25 year operational lifetime. Site Health & Safety Relevant health & safety regulations and guidelines No significant effect will be followed to ensure safe operation of the windfarm. Driver Distraction None necessary No significant effect Effects of Weather Sensors and protection equipment fitted to No significant effect turbines. Shadow flicker Control at receptor or source as appropriate, No significant effect Decommissioning Effects Site Health & Safety Relevant health & safety regulations and guidelines No significant effect will be followed to ensure safe decommissioning of the windfarm.

13.7 STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE

The Brixworth Windfarm will have a positive benefit of emission savings. Every year of its 25 year operational life it would displace approximately 16,975 tonnes of CO2 (based on an average fossil fuel mix). Even when taking account of the full life cycle emissions of CO2, a windfarm emits far less CO2 per unit of energy from construction, maintenance and operation than conventional fossil fuelled electricity plants such as coal, oil and gas.

Any health and safety risks will be addressed through mitigation measures and normal construction and operational procedures. All relevant legislation will be adhered to during all stages of development. The implementation of current best practice and technology will be used so as to minimise any health and safety risks that might be associated with this project. The implementation of the construction design and management principles will result in a windfarm development, built, operated and maintained to the highest standards of safety.

Brixworth Windfarm would not cause any decrease in highway safety due to driver distraction. Sensors and protection equipment will be fitted to turbines and operational procedures followed to mitigate any safety risks associated with extreme weather.

Any shadow flicker effects that may occur would affect two properties situated in one location. Mitigation will be explored with the occupants of the properties, both of which belong to the landowner with a financial interest in the development, and could be managed to prevent undue annoyance or disturbance to residents, or prevented from occurring, as appropriate.

Bolsterstone Plc August 2008 13-6 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 14: Traffic and Transportation

Guidelines for the Environmental Assessment of Road Traffic, by the Institute of 14. TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION Environmental Management and Assessment (IEMA), 1993; and Guidelines for Traffic Impact Assessment, by the Institution of Highways and Transportation (IHT), September 1994. Transport Assessments principally relate to developments that generate significant long-term 14.1 INTRODUCTION increases in traffic and travel patterns as a result of their function such as retail parks, This Traffic Assessment identifies the potential impacts of increased road traffic expected as a employment and residential developments. This chapter details that the windfarm would not result of the construction, operation and decommissioning of the windfarm. The chapter create any significant long-term traffic movements and therefore, a formal Transport assesses the significance of these effects against recognised guidelines and, where required, Assessment would not be required. However, information normally included within a Transport appropriate mitigation measures are considered. Assessment is provided within this Traffic Assessment. It is considered that the information provided within this chapter is sufficient in addressing the local transport impacts of the 14.2 METHODOLOGY windfarm during construction, operation and decommissioning.

14.2.1 Assessment Methodology 14.3.3 Significance of Effects Methodology The potential traffic impact of the windfarm was assessed by utilising the following approach: The Guidelines for the Environmental Assessment of Road Traffic suggest that two broad principles be used as a screening process to delimit the scale and extent of the assessment. Pre-scoping consultations were undertaken with the local highway authority, These are: Northamptonshire County Council (NCC) and the Highways Agency to establish a view of

regional requirements for the assessments; “include highway links where tra Relevant transport policies were reviewed to establish any local or regional HGV or freight access strategies; heavy goods vehicles would increase by more than 30%); and The traffic study area was defined along the access routes to the site to ensure the assessments were robustly undertaken; include any other specifically sensitive ar ffic flows would increase by more The delivery routes for construction and abnormal loads vehicles were reviewed in order to more.” assess the nature of the highway network and determine the effect on highway layout, improvements and the overall suitability in accommodating the expected vehicles; In addition to the above guidance, Paragraph 3.1.5 of Guidelines for Traffic Impact Assessment Traffic flow and accident data were acquired and reviewed to assess the traffic conditions (TIA) states that:

and composition along the access routes; eas where traffic flowsthan wo 30% (or the number of An outline construction programme and activity schedule was developed to predict the traffic “In the absence of alter that would be generated during construction of the windfarm; adopted policy, the Guidelines therefore recommend Recognised assessment guidelines were used as a base for the analysis of data and impact where one or other of th significance; native guidance from the highway authority uld increase by 10% or An appropriate mitigation strategy was prepared to ensure that any traffic effects were kept to Traffic to and from the development exceeds 10% a minimum; and highway; e following thresholds are exceeded: The operational and decommissioning effects were then reviewed to establish the effect on

the local highway network. Traffic to and from the develop s that a TIA should normally be produced in the form of approved or 14.3 RELEVANT GUIDANCE adjoining highway, where tr in other sensitive locations”. 14.3.1 Policy Where the predicted increase in traffic flow is lower ofthan the theseexisting thresholds two-way thenflow onthe the effect adjoining is ment exceeds 5% of the existing Northamptonshire County Council Local Transport Plan (LTP) 3.2.4.2 encourages heavy goods considered to be low or insignificant.affic congestion exists or will exis vehicles (HGVs) to use core/strategic roads within the county, for example the A14. The LTP recognises that HGVs will use lesser-classed roads for some part of their journeys. These guidelines for TIAs are mainly directed at developments that, when in operation will generate significant traffic flows that will affect the existing road network. Therefore under the TIA guidelines a formal transport assessment is not required for the windfarm as traffic This assessment identifies that construction vehicles would utilise the existing strategic highway t withintwo-way the assessment traffic flow period on the or network and that there would be a minimal impact on these roads. generated during operation and maintenance will not exceed these thresholds as detailed further in this chapter. However, in order to provide a more robust assessment, the thresholds 14.3.2 Assessment Guidance outlined by both guidelines are used within this traffic assessment. To enable the assessment of the potential transport and traffic effects on the local highway network, the following guidance documents have been taken into account:

Bolsterstone August 2008 14-1 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 14: Traffic and Transportation

14.3.4 Consultation The strategic route review involved a detailed site visit along the proposed delivery routes in Apart from the pre-scoping report, no further consultation was undertaking with NCC regarding order to identify potential geometric constraints that would affect the manoeuvring of general the access and routing strategy for the windfarm. As defined further in this chapter, the study HGVs and the TDVs accessing the windfarm, in particular the blade and tower section TDVs. area and access routes would avoid major villages or towns. This review is included within Technical Appendix 14.

The local abnormal loads authorities i.e. The Highways Agency, Network Rail and NCC were 14.5.3 Study Area contacted regarding the structural suitability of delivery routes to the windfarm. The authorities The Study Area was defined as being along the access routes to the site. This would be the A14 responded that, at the time, they are no structural issues with the movements of the wind east and west of the A508 junction and along the A508 north and south of the site. The study turbine sections1. area was not expanded any further as it is expected that construction traffic would disperse and be integrated within the regional highway network without any significant effect. 14.4 AREA OF STUDY 14.6 BASELINE DESCRIPTION 14.4.1 Site

The site is located approximately 1.7km north of Brixworth and immediately west of the A508. 14.6.1 Local Highway Network Access to the site is via several existing farm tracks leading off the A508. The A14 is located The A14 is a trunk road that acts as a regional distributor between Suffolk and Leicestershire. It approximately 6 km north of the site and provides links with the A1 and M1. The site largely is generally characterised by a derestricted 2-lane dual carriageway. The A14 is an established comprises arable land and is crossed by several farm tracks and a watercourse. HGV route. The A508 links Northampton with Market Harborough and consists of a derestricted 2-lane carriageway in the vicinity of the site. 14.5 ACCESS ROUTES 14.6.2 Access Routes and Site Access 14.5.1 Route Review Methodology The routes to the site were assessed for suitability. It was established that the M1, A1, A14 and To define conditions for the proposed windfarm development, in terms of access and A508 would be suitable for the TDVs and general construction vehicles without the need of road transportation, a baseline study comprising of a strategic route review and local delivery route works. The delivery route assessment identified that removal of street furniture would be assessment was undertaken. These studies appraised routes to the site from Northampton, the required at the interchange junctions between the A14 and the A508. In addition, minor A1 and the M1 motorway. widening works would be required at the site entrance.

14.5.2 Abnormal loads and C Building stone would be sourced from local quarries and transported to the site. Routes from Due to the inland location of the site, turbine components would be delivered by sea to a these quarries will converge on the A14 and A508. suitable port and transported via the regional motorway network to Junction 19 of the M1 or the A1/A14 junction. The turbineonstruction delivery Accessvehicles (TDVs) would then utilise the regional strategic It is likely that, where possible, local contractors will be employed during the construction of the highway network via the A14 and A508 leading to the site. An existing track off the A508 would windfarm and will approach the site from a variety of routes, depending on their origin. The be upgraded and used to access the site. In addition to these routes, it is possible that general existing population statistics maps for the region show Northampton and Kettering as the construction and worker vehicles would approach the site from Northampton via the A508. nearest high density centres. It is therefore likely that the majority of site personnel would travel to the site via the A14 and A508. As the precise worker distribution and stone quarries The delivery routes to the site from the motorway are illustrated in Figure 14.1 and detailed as have not yet been determined, a worse case scenario assuming that 100 percent of the (site follows: personnel and construction traffic) vehicles would approach the site via the A14 and A508 from the north and south is used within this assessment. i. From M1 Junction 19 proceed east onto A14; OR The proposed access into the site during construction will be via an upgraded track leading off ii. From A1 proceed west onto A14 at Brampton; the A508, as shown in 14.1. iii. Turn (south) onto A508 (Junction 2 on A14); iv. Turn right (west) into site at Grid Ref. SP 752 727. 14.6.3 Sensitive Receptors A site visit and desktop assessment were undertaken to identify potential sensitive receptors The site entrance location is shown in 3.5a. along the selected access route. No physical sensitive receptors were identified.

Personal Injury Accident data was also requested from the NCC. This information identified that, along the A508 north and south of the site, there were nine reported traffic incidents in the 36

1 months preceding July 2008. Two of these accidents were recorded as serious with one being Vehicles transporting the wind turbine blades, nacelles, tower sections and foundation plates would be attributed to the road layout i.e. brow of a hill. Two accidents also involved slow moving considered abnormal loads due to their lengths, widths and weights.

Bolsterstone August 2008 14-2 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 14: Traffic and Transportation

vehicles being a contributing factor i.e. dangerous overtaking and sudden braking. A detailed Extendable semi-low and platform trailers (i.e. TDVs) with escort vehicle delivering turbine review of the accident data identified that there were no accident clusters and that the recorded components; accidents were all unrelated. It is therefore considered that the information does not highlight Cranes delivered as mobile units and on low-loaders; and any sensitive locations in terms of highway safety. Tankers delivering fuel and water supplies.

14.7 BASELINE TRAFFIC DATA The TDVs will constitute abnormal loads during delivery to the site. Once the component is unloaded, the TDV would be retracted to the size of a standard articulated lorry (approximately 14.7.1 Existing Traffic Flow Data 16.5m in length) and would not require an escort vehicle. Base traffic flow data was obtained from the Highways Agency at two locations along the A14. Classified counts were also undertaken in the vicinity of the site access along the A508. This The main erection crane would be in the region of 400 tonnes lifting capacity. Whilst travelling traffic information was obtained for the typical working hours between 0700 and 1900 hours. to site on public highways, the crane would be de-rigged and its axle weights would be within The traffic data was provided in hourly traffic flows during the year 2008 and summarised in that permissible by current legislation. The width of the crane would be approximately 3m and Table 14.1. the length of the crane would be approximately 18m long. One smaller assisting crane (of 150 – 300 tonnes) will also be required for the blade erection, and assembling of the main lifting Projected baseline traffic flows for the expected year of construction have been calculated from crane. the obtained data by using Department for Transport’s National Road Traffic Flows (NRTF) central-growth (all vehicles) factor. A growth factor of 1.046% was applied to the 2008 base At approximately 70 tonnes, the nacelle would be the heaviest single component; the overall flows to forecast the traffic for the year 2011. Table 14.2 shows the projected base traffic flows, weight of this TDV being in the region of 110-125 tonnes. The longest vehicle that would access which have been used for assessing the significance of the effect of increased traffic along the the site will be the blade TDV. This vehicle would be approximately 48 metres in length. routes. 14.9.2 Public Highway Improvements Table 14.1 – Base 12-hour Traffic Flows (2008) The abnormal loads route assessment identified that minor road improvements would be Classification Traffic Volume required in order to accommodate access by the TDVs. These would involve: Location No. HGVs Total A14 (E) Harrington Not available 40127 The temporary removal of road signs and bollard at the junction between the A14 and A508; A14 (W) Naseby Not available 40283 and A508 Harborough Road (site access) 525 8164 Minor road widening and vegetation clearance along the western side of the carriageway at the site entrance. Table 14.2 - Projected 12-hour Traffic Flows (2011) Classification Traffic Volume Location Figure 3.5a shows the site entrance. These road works would be consented separately and No. HGVs Total agreed with NCC to ensure that road safety is not compromised. No other offsite highway works A14 (E) Harrington - 41973 were identified by the route assessment. A14 (W) Naseby - 42136 A508 Harborough Road (site access) 549 8540 The site access will be designed to NCC standards and would achieve the required visibility splays along the unclassified road. This access would have an over-run area to aid the TDVs manoeuvring and allow them to leave the public highway as quickly and safely as possible. Road 14.8 INFORMATION GAPS signs would be erected to direct construction traffic to this access. In terms of traffic flow information for the highway network surrounding the site; sufficient information has been obtained to allow an appropriate assessment to be made of the potential 14.9.3 Construction Traffic Numbers traffic impacts as a result of the windfarm. The total number of off-site vehicle movements2 generated during the construction of the windfarm is estimated as 9,604 over a 9-15 month period. This figure takes account of all 14.9 TRAFFIC EFFECTS construction vehicles generated by the above works during the construction period and assumes 14.9.1 Construction Traffic an average of one construction personnel per vehicle.

During the 9-15 month construction period, construction personnel would travel to the site by Of the 9604 vehicle movements generated, 3,604 would be as a result of deliveries of private car, light vehicles or minibus. In addition, the following HGVs would access the site: equipment and materials to site (HGVs) with the remaining 6,000 movements being created by site personnel in cars and light vehicles. Low Loaders and flat-bed lorries to deliver rebar, equipment, plant and control building components; Tipper lorries delivering and moving material and stone for access tracks; 2 One movement equals one arrival or one departure

Bolsterstone August 2008 14-3 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 14: Traffic and Transportation

A detailed construction programme has not yet been defined due to the potential onsite the A14 and A508. However, specific mitigation measures are outlined at the end of this chapter earthworks required. However, it is expected that construction of the windfarm would take would aim to reduce the impact of these movements. between 9 and 15 months. Various construction vehicles would access the site at the different stages of construction. The majority of these vehicle movements are expected to occur during 14.10 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS the construction of the access tracks, hard standings and site compound. These would occur during the first few months and would average 20 HGV movements per day. A detailed 14.10.1 Environmental Effects breakdown of the construction vehicles is included within Technical Appendix 3. The guidelines by the IEMA identify that the following environmental effects be considered when assessing the traffic related to a windfarm: During the construction of the each turbine foundation, it is expected that 108 HGV movements (54 concrete deliveries, 54 departures) would occur over a one day period. This would allow the Accidents and Safety; continuous pour of concrete required for the bottom foundations and would occur on six days of Air Pollution; the construction period. These movements would account for 80% of the concrete deliveries Driver Delay; required for the overall foundation construction. The remaining movements expected for the Dust and Dirt; plinth (top foundation) would result in 28 HGV movements (14 concrete deliveries, 14 Ecological Effects; departures) for each turbine. Hazardous loads; Heritage and Conservation; During some activities such as the pouring of the turbine foundations, HGVs transporting Noise; concrete may be required to travel in a convoy. Appropriate mitigation measures are proposed Pedestrian Amenity; further in this chapter. Pedestrian Delay; Vibration; and Approximately 10 construction personnel would be on the site each day resulting in 20 light Visual Effects. vehicle movements per day. Of the above effects, the following are assessed within other chapters of the ES. Based on the vehicle numbers outlined above, the average daily vehicle movements are estimated to be 40 (i.e. 20 HGVs and 20 light vehicles). During the foundation construction, the Ecological Effects; total vehicle numbers would peak to 128 (i.e. 108 HGVs and 20 light vehicles) for one day and Heritage and Conservation; occur six times during the overall construction period. It is unlikely that there will be significant Noise; increases in traffic during the AM and PM peak periods as route management agreements and Air Pollution and Dust; and delivery schedules would seek to reduce the movement of construction vehicles at these times. Visual Effects.

14.9.4 Construction Traffic Impacts No hazardous loads are expected during the construction or operational periods of the windfarm To consider a worse-case scenario, the assessment assumes that all construction traffic would and therefore are not considered within this assessment. travel either east or west along the A14. Percentage increases in traffic in relation to the projected road traffic are summarised in Table 14.3. 14.10.2 Assessment of potential effects 14.10.2.1 Table 14.3 - Summary of Traffic Impact Percentage Accidents and Safety Road Location Daily 12-hour Peak Foundation 10% Overall There are no general thresholds for determining the significance of increased traffic on highway Average Construction Threshold / safety. Professional judgement and experience would be required to determine whether there HGV Total HGV Total 30% HGV would be any detrimental impact as a result of the construction traffic. 20 mvts 40 mvts 108 mvts 128 mvts Threshold A14 (E) Harrington N/A 0.1% N/A 0.3% Below Threshold The average HGVs would only be around two movements per hour. These minimal flows are not considered to have a significant effect on accidents and safety along the delivery routes. Traffic A14 (W) Naseby N/A 0.1% N/A 0.3% Below Threshold control and the use of a banksman at the site entrance would minimise the potential of accidents occurring in the area used most intensely by the construction vehicles. Harborough Road A508 3.7% 0.5% 19.7% 1.5% Below Threshold (site access) 14.10.2.2 Driver Delay The increase in overall volume is not considered to be significant along the delivery route during Traffic delays due to increases by the construction traffic could occur along the delivery routes the general construction period and during the foundation construction. The increases during to the site. the construction of the windfarm would be within the calculated daily traffic variation levels of

Bolsterstone August 2008 14-4 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 14: Traffic and Transportation

The IEMA guidelines note ‘these delays are only likely to be significant when the traffic on the 14.11 POTENTIAL OPERATIONAL EFFECTS network surrounding the development is already at, or close to, the capacity of the system. The predicted levels of traffic associated with the operation and maintenance of the windfarm are summarised in Table 14.4. The A14 is an established HGV route and consists of a dual carriageway, which provides drivers with the opportunity to overtake slow moving HGVs. Delays could occur along the A508 during Table 14.4 - Summary of Vehicle Movements During Operation traffic peak hours particularly during the foundation construction. However, this would only Activity Annual Vehicle Movements Duration occur for six days of the 19-15 month construction period and schedules would be implemented Standard Turbine 12 visits 1 visit per turbine, lasting 5 to avoid these peak hours. Slow moving abnormal loads (turbine sections) could also create Servicing (24 vehicle movements per annum) days delays along the 6km stretch of the A508 between the A14 and the site. An appropriate Unscheduled 6 visits 1 visit per turbine, lasting 1 day schedule would be provided to ensure that concrete and turbine deliveries occur outside of peak Servicing (12 vehicle movements per annum) every 18 months traffic hours along the A508. An appropriate Traffic Management Plan (TMP) would be agreed Repairs to turbines 36 visits 1 visit per turbine between the developer and NCC. This could include a provision for the HGVs and abnormal load (72 vehicle movements per annum) approximately every 2 months vehicles travelling in convoys to reduce the overall time spent on the public highway. In Access Track 4 visits 2 vehicles per day for a period addition, scheduled stops would be made along the A508 to clear any queues forming behind Maintenance (8 vehicle movements per annum) of 2 days once a year

the abnormal load vehicles. Substation 1 visits 1 visit per year maintenance (2 vehicle movements per annum) Some delays could occur at the site entrance due to turning HGVs. An onsite banksman would be available to assist these vehicles and reduce the time spent manoeuvring between the site In addition routine site inspections would be undertaken approximately once a week in a four- and the public highway. Any effect on driver delay would be short-term and the overall effect on wheel drive vehicle to ensure that the turbines are operating at their maximum efficiency. driver delay is not considered to be significant. In the unlikely event that all of the above events occur on the same day vehicle movements 14.10.2.3 Fear, Intimidation and Pedestrian Amenity would not be expected to exceed 12 movements per day. The effect of the operational traffic Traffic volume, composition and speeds, pedestrian footways and crossings all contribute to the falls substantially below the guidance thresholds and is considered to be insignificant. level of general pleasantness, fear and intimidation experienced by pedestrians and other vulnerable road users. 14.12 POTENTIAL DECOMMISSIONING EFFECTS At this stage, it is not possible to forecast the traffic impact during decommissioning of the The HGVs accessing the site would average around two movements per hour and up to eight windfarm. This would be due to the baseline data no longer being valid (25 years). However, movements per hour during the foundation construction. These movements are considered to prior to decommissioning of the windfarm a further traffic assessment will be undertaken and have a minor affect on fear and intimidation. The overall effect is therefore not considered to be traffic management procedures agreed with the local authority. The levels of traffic associated significant. with the decommissioning will be lower than those during construction since the concrete turbine bases will be left in situ and access tracks left to be naturally overgrown. In addition 14.10.2.4 Pedestrian Delay long tower sections could be cut up on site prior to removal to reduce the need for Changes in traffic volume, composition and speeds contribute to the ability of pedestrians transportation of abnormal length loads. crossing the road. No major pedestrian desire lines were identified along the A508 in the vicinity of the site where the majority of vehicle movements would occur. 14.13 MITIGATION

The low numbers of HGV movements is unlikely to have an effect on the delay experienced by 14.13.1 Construction Mitigation Measures pedestrians along the delivery routes. The overall effect is not considered to be significant. In order to reduce traffic impacts from construction of the proposed windfarm, construction personnel would be encouraged to car-share or utilise company shuttles where practicable. 14.10.2.5 Severance This would be estimated to increase the occupancy rate for construction personnel to an The IEMA guidelines note that ‘Severance is the perceived division that can occur within a average of around 2.53 persons per vehicle, equivalent to reducing the number of vehicle community when it becomes separated by a major traffic artery’. movements associated with personnel by approximately 60%.

The delivery route to the site goes through the villages of Maidwell and Lamport along an A traffic management plan will be drawn up by the developer and the relevant contractor, and existing major highway link. The low vehicle flows expected would represent a minimal increase agreed with NCC. Potential management measures to mitigate the impacts could include: in traffic along this road and would be within the daily traffic variation levels of the A508. The effect of severance is therefore considered to be negligible.

3 National Travel Survey 2006 - http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/statistics/datatablespublications/personal/mainresults/nts2006/

Bolsterstone August 2008 14-5 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 14: Traffic and Transportation

Restrictions and approved access routes for construction vehicles only along the A14 and Replacement of existing turbine and plant will involve processes similar to the initial A508; commissioning. Removal and replacement of street furniture such as road signs as identified by the route assessment. Appropriate temporary measures would be undertaken to ensure that road The existing baseline data is unlikely to be relevant during decommissioning and therefore a safety is not compromised; suitable traffic review and traffic management plan would be prepared for the decommissioning Temporary or permanent road signage along the A508 in the vicinity of the site. These signs process to ensure that traffic impacts are minimised. would warn road users of turning HGV traffic; Arrangements with the police for escort of turbine loads to the site. Timings would be agreed 14.14 RESIDUAL EFFECTS with NCC and the police; Advanced notification to the general public warning of turbine component transport 14.14.1 Construction Effects movements; Given the nature of the increase in traffic being short-term, the mitigation measures described Informative road signage warning other users of turbine components transport movements above, will ensure that there would be minimal residual effects. A summary justification is as and construction traffic; follows: Improvements involving road widening and junction visibility improvements at the site entrance; A traffic management plan will minimise the effects during construction; The sheeting of tipper lorries to reduce the risk of dust and stone being shed onto the The delivery route being established HGV routes; highway; The A14 and A508 having sufficient capacity to cater for the predicted traffic levels during Wheel cleaning / dirt control measures and arrangements for continual road maintenance construction; and cleaning e.g. appropriate resurfacing following completion of construction and road Average traffic level increases will be within the daily variation levels experienced along the sweeping along the A508 in the vicinity of the site access; A14 and A508; and Specific timing of deliveries outside of peak hours; and The increase in traffic during construction would be temporary with the highest levels Provision of temporary signs, a banksman and traffic control where necessary. occurring over a one day period on six separate occasions.

The route used to transport turbine components to the site would utilise the nearest appropriate The environmental effects identified would be managed through the mitigation measures port as directed by the DfT and the turbine manufacturer. Disruption across the greater highway discussed, so ensuring that all effects are not significant. network would be reduced by using the nearest port. 14.14.2 Operational Effects 14.13.2 Operational Mitigation Measures There will be residual effects on the existing road network from the operation of the windfarm As previously identified, the traffic generated during operation and maintenance of the but they will be negligible and not significant. windfarm will not have a significant effect on the existing road network. The occasional replacement blade or abnormal load may be required; however, these occurrences are rare and 14.14.3 Decommissioning Effects would not have a significant impact on the public highway. The decommissioning effects should be similar in nature to the construction effects but their intensity will be greatly reduced as the majority of the construction traffic is created by the Suitable signage will be erected along the A508 advising of the access to the windfarm. No construction of the access track, which will mostly remain intact irrespective of decommissioning other specific mitigation measures would be required during operation of the windfarm, due to options and long loads would be cut up and dismantled on site prior to transportation. the low numbers of operational vehicle movements. 14.15 SUMMARY OF EFFECTS Access within the site will be controlled and adhere to appropriate strategies for public safety. The condition of the access tracks, culverts and other elements will be inspected regularly to A summary of the potential effects, mitigation and residual effects defined within this chapter reduce the risk of failure that may result in damage to the local environment. are summarised in Table 14.5.

14.13.3 Decommissioning Mitigation Measures

Decommissioning of the windfarm would comprise of either complete removal of the facility or

replacement of turbines to extend the operational life of the facility.

Where complete decommissioning is proposed the turbines and all associated above ground

equipment will be completely removed. Turbine towers and blades are likely to be dismantled

into smaller sections prior to their removal to ease transport requirements.

Bolsterstone August 2008 14-6 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement Chapter 14: Traffic and Transportation

Table 14.5 - Summary of Effects Mitigations measures such as specific timing of deliveries, travelling in convoys, road signage Potential Effect Mitigation Residual Effect and the use of a banksman would reduce the impact on the highway network. Construction Effects Short-term increase in Traffic management plan to be agreed. Minor short-term effect. Traffic generated during decommissioning of the windfarm is likely to be lower than the levels number of HGVs on A508 The limited use of vehicle convoys to associated with construction and will be the subject of a further traffic management plan. reduce the effect of pedestrian Decommissioning traffic would therefore be not significant. An appropriate traffic assessment intimidation and driver delay. Possible would be undertaken prior to the decommissioning of the windfarm. road signage to be agreed with NCC.

Short-term increase in Timings to be scheduled outside of peak No significant effect. overall traffic on A14 and traffic hours. Traffic management to be A508 agreed. Traffic delays due to Traffic management and timings of No significant effect. abnormal load movement. deliveries to be agreed with NCC and local police. Deliveries to travel in convoys and be scheduled outside peak traffic hours. Passing places to be utilised Operational Effects Increase in traffic along Appropriate access signage to be agreed No significant effect. A14 and A508. with NCC. Decommissioning Effects Increase in traffic along Management plan to be carried out prior As per construction effects. A14 and A508. to works being carried out.

14.16 STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE This chapter reviews the existing traffic conditions within the study area that would be affected during construction of the Brixworth windfarm.

A strategic route review was undertaken and identified that only minor road works would be required to deliver the wind turbine sections to the site. It also identified that the greater highway network is suitable in accommodating the sizes and volume of the expected construction lorries. These construction vehicles would use established HGV routes to access the site i.e. the A14 and A508.

This traffic assessment concludes that there would be short term increases in traffic levels on the delivery routes to the windfarm. In accordance with the IEMA significance criteria these increases are judged to be temporary minor. Although there will be an increase in HGV movements in the vicinity of the site, the overall effects of overall traffic movements is not significant. During the turbine foundations construction, there would be approximately 108 HGV movements across the highway network over a one day period. This would only occur on six days of the 9-15 month construction phase. These vehicle numbers would be below the threshold identified by the IEMA.

Abnormal load vehicles would be normally timed during off-peak periods in order to avoid creating delays and contributing to congestion along the A508. The times of these movements would be agreed with the police and NCC.

Traffic generated during the operation and maintenance of the windfarm would be minimal and would have an immaterial effect on the capacity of the A14 and A508. This would not result in any significant effects.

Bolsterstone August 2008 14-7

470000

Key 280000 280000 Proposed Turbine Locations

Site Boundary

Proposed Access Route

To A1 To M1

1:40,000 Scale @ A3

012km

Proposed Route for Turbine Delivery Figure 14.1 Brixworth Windfarm Environmental Statement 470000 Reproduced under licence from Ordnance Survey digital map data. CrownAll rights Copyright. reserved. Licence number 0100031673