Delf Hill Wind Cluster

DELF HILL WIND CLUSTER

Environmental Statement

Rural Wind Farms Ltd

March 2014

Environmental Statement DELF HILL WIND CLUSTER Prepared for:

Rural Wind Farms Ltd

Prepared By: Green Cat Renewables Ltd.

Edinburgh Office Midlothian Innovation Centre Roslin, EH25 9RE

Tel: 0131 440 6150

Checked By: Glen Moon Date: 10/03/14

Approved By: Gavin Catto Date: 14/03/14

Preface This Environmental Statement seeks to assess the environmental effects of the proposed Delf Hill development, which comprises the installation and operation of three wind turbines no greater than 126m to blade tip height.

This is an Environmental Statement for the purposes of the Planning EIA Regulations (the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations 2011) covering the major environmental effects arising from this proposal.

Table of Contents

1 Project Summary ...... 1 1.1 Introduction ...... 1 1.2 Background ...... 1 1.3 Benefits of the Project ...... 1 1.4 Scope of the Environmental Statement...... 2 2 The Proposed Development ...... 3 2.1 Location ...... 3 2.2 Site Layout ...... 4 2.3 Community Consultation ...... 5 2.4 About the Site ...... 5 2.5 Description of the Proposed Wind Turbines ...... 9 2.6 Associated Infrastructure...... 11 2.7 Grid Connection ...... 14 2.8 Site electrical works ...... 14 2.9 Construction Programme ...... 15 2.10 Traffic and Transportation ...... 16 2.11 Decommissioning ...... 20 3 Planning and Environmental Policy Context ...... 21 3.1 International and EU Context ...... 21 3.2 UK National Context...... 21 3.3 National Planning Policy Framework (2012)...... 24 3.4 National Energy Policy Statements ...... 25 3.5 Local Context ...... 25 3.6 Conclusion ...... 32 4 Local Economic Benefits ...... 35 4.1 Construction / Decommissioning Phase Benefits ...... 35 4.2 Operational Phase Benefits ...... 35 4.3 Community Benefit ...... 36 5 Project Design Considerations ...... 37 5.1 Site Selection ...... 37 5.2 Site Design Process ...... 37 5.3 Key Considerations ...... 38 5.4 Design Evolution ...... 41 5.5 Summary ...... 45 6 Ecology and Ornithology ...... 47 6.1 Introduction ...... 47 6.2 Regulations and Guidance ...... 47 6.3 Characterisation of Effects/Magnitude of Effect ...... 50 6.4 Phase 1 Habitat Surveys ...... 55 6.5 NVC Survey ...... 58 6.6 Ornithology ...... 58 6.7 European Protected Species (EPS) Survey and Mammal Surveys ...... 62 6.8 Assessment of Impacts ...... 69 6.9 Summary of Impacts ...... 71 6.10 Conclusion ...... 73

6.11 References ...... 73 7 Landscape and Visual Impact ...... 75 8 Noise ...... 127 9 Cultural Heritage/Archaeology ...... 149 9.1 Introduction ...... 149 9.2 Aims and Objectives ...... 151 9.3 Methodology ...... 151 9.4 Baseline Information ...... 161 9.5 Development Impacts and Mitigation ...... 169 9.6 Summary and Conclusions ...... 186 9.7 References ...... 187 10 Surface and Groundwater Hydrology ...... 191 10.1 Introduction ...... 191 10.2 Potential Impacts ...... 191 10.3 Guidance ...... 191 10.4 Methodology ...... 192 10.5 Baseline ...... 193 10.6 Predicted Impacts ...... 196 10.7 Mitigation ...... 200 10.8 Assessment of Residual Impact ...... 203 10.9 Conclusion ...... 204 11 Existing Infrastructure, Telecommunications, Television, Aviation and Electromagnetic Interference ...... 205 11.1 Introduction ...... 205 11.2 Guidance ...... 205 11.3 Methodology ...... 205 11.4 Assessment of Impact ...... 206 11.5 Impacts, Issues and Mitigating Actions ...... 208 12 Shadow Flicker ...... 209 12.1 Background ...... 209 12.2 Baseline and Methodology ...... 210 12.3 Assessment ...... 211 12.4 Summary and Conclusion ...... 213 13 Climate Change ...... 215 13.1 Introduction ...... 215 13.2 Potential Impacts ...... 215 13.3 Guidance ...... 216 13.4 Carbon Balance ...... 217 13.5 Mitigation ...... 220 13.6 Summary ...... 220 13.7 References ...... 221 14 Traffic and Transportation ...... 223 14.1 Introduction ...... 223 14.2 Scoping Consultation ...... 223 14.3 Site Access Junction ...... 223 14.4 Traffic Generation and Phasing ...... 224 14.5 Abnormal Loads ...... 225

14.6 Access Routes...... 227 14.7 Swept Path Analysis ...... 228 14.8 Other potential effects ...... 236 14.9 Mitigation ...... 238 14.10 Residual effects ...... 239 14.11 Summary of effects ...... 239 14.12 Statement of Significance ...... 240

Appendices

Appendix 1 – Ecology 1.1 – Phase 1 Habitat Map 1.2 - NVC Classification Tables Appendix 2 – Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 2.1 – Viewpoint Assessment 2.2 – Residential Assessment Appendix 3 - Noise Appendix 4 – Cultural Heritage 4.1 – AOC Archaeology - Delf Hill Archaeological Desk Based Assessment 4.2 – Catalogue of Sites, Features and Monuments 4.3 – Archaeological Glossary 4.4 - Guide for Contextualised Aesthetic Appreciation of monuments 4.5 –Designated Heritage Assets within 5 km of the proposed wind cluster at Delf Hill 4.6 – Onsite recorded Heritage Assets 4.7 – Summary of Impact on Designated Heritage Assets 4.8 – Wirelines from on-site Scheduled Monuments Appendix 5 – Hydrology Appendix 6 - Transportation

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

1 Project Summary

1.1 Introduction The proposed development would comprise the installation and operation of three wind turbines, no greater than 126m to blade tip height. The turbines would be located in and around Delf Hill Quarry, 530m to the south-east of Sweet Well House Farm in the Briercliffe parish of Burnley.

1.2 Background The development is being proposed by Rural Wind Farms Ltd, a company that specialises in working with local farmers and landowners to develop wind projects. As well as generating a substantial amount of clean electricity, the project will help to support Sweet Well Farm, which has been farmed by the Atkinson family for three generations. Farming sheep and cattle in the surrounding moorland has become less and less financially sustainable over recent years. This diversification will ensure that hill farming remains a way of life at Sweet Well for future generations of the family.

1.3 Benefits of the Project The project will:

Generate a substantial amount of clean electricity. It is estimated that the turbines will generate ~20,650MWh of electricity per year, enough to power ~4,900 homes. Generate an additional income stream for Sweet Well Farm;

Contribute to the UK Government’s targets for renewable energy and CO2 reduction; and

Save an estimated 8,800 tonnes of CO2 per year, and 220,000 tonnes of CO2 over its 25 year lifecycle.

A community benefit package is proposed as part of the scheme. It is intended to offer an annual sum of £5,000 per installed MW to local communities; in total, assuming a total installed capacity of 9MW, this would amount to £45,000 per year, or £1.25m over the lifetime of the project.

It is intended that this sum would be split between Pendleside Hospice and other community groups. Early positive discussions have taken place with Pendleside Hospice regarding this, but as yet the community groups to benefit have not been identified. It is suggested that these would come from the Worsthorne and Briercliffe areas.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

1.4 Scope of the Environmental Statement In line with the EIA Directive and the local planning policies, this Environmental Statement (ES) covers the key issues associated with the project, to a level of detail appropriate to the scale of the proposed development. The structure of the ES is as follows:

The Proposed Development; Planning and Environmental Policy Context; Local Economic Benefits; Project Design Considerations; Ecology and Ornithology; Landscape and Visual Impact; Noise; Cultural Heritage and Archaeology; Surface and Groundwater Hydrology; Existing Infrastructure, Telecommunications, Television, Aviation and Electromagnetic Safety; Shadow Flicker; Climate change; and Traffic and Transportation.

Other issues, more commonly relevant to larger scale wind projects, and not raised as potential issues by Burnley Council during the scoping process, have been scoped out of the assessment:

Geology; Socio-economic Impact and Tourism.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

2 The Proposed Development The proposed development consists of three wind turbines of 85m to hub and 126m to blade tip, with a combined installed generating capacity of 9MW.

2.1 Location The development site is located approximately 6km to the east of Burnley, and 2.2km northeast of the village of Worsthorne. The location of the site is shown in Figure 2.1.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

2.2 Site Layout The proposed turbines would be located as shown in Figure 2.2. A larger site plan is provided in the separate drawing APP-001, and the detailed Block Plans APP-002, APP-003 and APP-004.

The turbines would be broadly aligned from west to east through the south of the site at elevations of 314m, 344m and 374m. Turbine 1 would be located in the west of the landholding, to the south of an existing track which passes through the site. Turbine 2 would be located within an old area of the quarry that has been previously worked. Turbine 3 would be located on higher ground to the east of the quarry, around 90m to the south-west of the trig point on Delf Hill.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Access to the site would be taken via a new track which would leave the public road to the south of the Swinden Bridge, cross the Swinden Water via a new bridging structure to the west of Ing Hey, and continue up the broad ridge of Twist Hill to enter the site at its western boundary. This is the old historical access route to the quarry, as evidenced by the remains of bridging points over the Swinden Water and the still-visible base of the track as it heads eastwards up Twist Hill.

2.3 Community Consultation A public exhibition was held on Friday 22nd November at Briercliffe Community Hall. The drop-in event ran from 3pm to 8pm and provided details about the proposed scheme, and presented the findings of the environmental studies that had been carried out to date. Both the landowner and members of the Green Cat Renewables project team were on hand to answer any questions members of the public had about the scheme.

The event was advertised in the Burnley Express on Tuesday 19th November and the Burnley Citizen on Wednesday 20th November. In addition to this, an invitation was posted to each property within 2km of the site prior to the event. Letters were also sent to each of the Community Councillors serving both Worsthorne and Briercliffe, and public notices were posted in both villages.

Both Rural Renewables Ltd and the landowner at Sweet Well House Farm were keen to provide as much information as possible to members of the public prior to the application being lodged. The event itself was well attended. 46 people signed the official attendance sheets, but around 100 people attended in total. 22 people completed questionnaires about the event:

13 ‘Strongly Support’ the Scheme; 2 ‘Support’ the scheme; 3 expressed ‘No opinion’; and 4 ‘Strongly Object’.

2.4 About the Site The site is set in open countryside in the Briercliffe Parish of Burnley, and is allocated as a ‘rural area’ in the Burnley Local Plan. Delf Hill itself is the highest point on the landholding, rising to an altitude of 380m. The site consists of rough grazing land located around a sandstone quarry.

The nearest property to the site is Sweet Well House Farm, which is occupied by the landowner at Delf Hill. This is a traditional working farm with an associated kennels business.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Figure 2.3 – Photograph taken looking north-west from close to the trig point on Delf Hill. Sweet Well House Farm is visible in the middle distance.

The site is currently accessed by a single track road which links Shay Lane to Monk Hall Farm, and then continues eastwards towards Sweet Well House Farm. Beyond Sweet Well the track is rough and un-surfaced, and heads southwards towards the quarry.

Delf Hill Quarry covers approximately 10 hectares, and is located on lower ground to the south-west of the broad summit of Delf Hill. The quarry area is a disturbed landscape, and is characterised by dressings and overburden piles. There are some delving holes and various locations where large blocks of stones have been stored. Large-scale quarrying operations on the site ceased in 2010, but a smaller scale operation is currently ongoing in the southern portion of the historical quarry area, as shown on APP-001. This quarrying can continue alongside the proposed development.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Figure 2.4 – Typical views in and around Delf Hill quarry

To the south of the quarry the land falls away steeply to the Swinden Water, which feeds the Swinden Reservoir in the valley bottom.

Figure 2.5 – The west of the site looking towards the location of T1 and Swinden Reservoir

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

The area to the west of the site is semi-rural in character, and contains detached properties (such as Monk Hall Farm and Ing Hey), converted farmsteads (such as Elders’ th’ Row and High Halstead) and small clusters of properties such as those located at Roggerham Gate.

Immediately to the north and north-east of the site is open agricultural land predominantly used for grazing livestock. This area is typical of the Pennine Uplands and is characterised by dry stone wall field boundaries.

Further to the north of the site lies the Thursden Valley, which is an area popular with walkers, cyclists and horse riders. On the northern side of this valley there are numerous farmhouses and converted barns which are located on Halifax Road and Ridealgh Lane. The southern side of the valley is covered in woodland, but otherwise the area is largely devoid of trees.

The character of the landscape changes to the east of the site, which is characterised by higher moorland areas. The site is directly adjacent to the South Pennine Moors Special Protection Area (SPA), which is a large ecological designation running from Ilkley in the north to Leek and Matlock in the south. It covers extensive tracts of semi-natural moorland habitats including upland heath and blanket mire.

Current activities on site

Quarrying An application for the current quarrying operation (REF 12/13/0173) was approved by Burnley Council in 2013. The active site covers 1.3 hectares and borders the existing quarry on its southern edge. The area is currently despoiled and has been used to store piles of minerals and overburden. The quarry area to the north was worked until 2010, following which restoration was undertaken.

The approved proposals will see the extraction of approximately 25,000 cubic metres of sandstone over a 15 year period. Activities are due to finish in September 2028, at which point the site will be restored. The operation itself is relatively low key, requiring only two excavators and a dumper on site. The excavated sandstone is placed on 7.5 tonne trucks which transport the stone offsite for finishing. Traffic movements are limited to two movements each way per day, with the hours or working 07:30 to 18:30 Monday to Friday, and between 07:30 and 13:30 on Saturday.

The proposed turbine locations are not within the consented quarrying area, and the operation of the wind cluster would not conflict with current activities on site.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Other The area around the quarry is also currently used by off-road vehicles as part of a business venture by the landowner. Should the development be consented then these activities would be discontinued in the area of the wind cluster.

Public access A public footpath runs east to west through the south of the site, passing the south of the quarry and linking Extwistle Moor to Swinden Bridge. Another footpath runs from Swinden Bridge up to Sweet Well House Farm, then proceeds eastwards through the Inclosures Pasture to link up with the Penning Bridleway near Rieve Edge. A third footpath runs along the north-eastern wall in a south-westerly direction, before Crossing Coal Pit Pasture to meet up with the Pennine Bridleway on Extwistle Moor.

2.5 Description of the Proposed Wind Turbines A diagram of the principal dimensions of the Enercon E82, which is the most likely turbine for the development, is shown in Figure 2.6. A scaled drawing is provided as APP-005.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Figure 2.6 - Enercon E82 wind turbine showing principal dimensions

The key dimensions of the Enercon E82 are summarised in Table 2.2.

Table 2.2 – Key dimensions of the Enercon E82

Element Dimension (m) Hub height 85 Rotor diameter 82 Total height 126

The nacelle housing contains the generator and other operating equipment. The transformer of the candidate machine is contained inside the tower base. It is proposed that the finish of the wind turbines, towers and blades will be semi-matt and will be pale grey in colour.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Unlike some other makes of wind turbines that are programmed to stop when the wind speed exceeds 25m/s (‘cut-out’ wind speed), Enercon wind turbines are fitted with a storm control feature which enables the turbine to continue to operate in very high wind speeds; this avoids the need for sudden shutdowns and the resulting energy yield losses.

2.6 Associated Infrastructure

Site Tracks and Crane Hardstanding As shown in Figure 2.3, approximately 1,800m of new and 480m of upgraded track would be required between the new site access junction on Extwistle Road and the turbine locations. The tracks would be typically 4.0 m wide with 0.5 m shoulders on each side and would consist of crushed stone to an average depth of up to 500 mm. On corners, it will be necessary to construct wider areas of track to reflect the minimum bend-radii for the longest construction loads (the blades).

Construction of the site tracks would involve the removal of the vegetation and top soil to a depth of approximately 200 mm. This would be stored adjacent to the tracks for later, partial reinstatement. Where necessary, a geotextile layer would be placed directly onto the exposed subsoil, upon which the crushed rock would be placed.

Appropriate drainage requirements would be incorporated where the site specific conditions make this necessary. If any areas of softer ground are encountered, the depth of crushed rock may need to increase to approximately 700 mm and a layer of geotextile material embedded within the structure would be used.

Crane platforms would be of similar construction to the access tracks, designed to withstand the maximum load bearing applied by the crane during the construction process.

Figure 2.7 shows the specification of the required crane hardstanding. Any excess earth excavated during the construction phase would be stored behind the foundations. Reinstatement of the track verges and the areas of hardstanding will be undertaken where appropriate. As there would be a continuing need to use the site tracks, these will be left in place for the lifetime of the development.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Key Turbine foundations Access track

Crane Hard-standing

Figure 2.7 – Crane and hardstanding diagram (dimensions in m)

Construction Compound The local ground works contractor would set up a small compound for site offices, welfare facilities and storage of tools, located near the site entrance.

Turbine Foundations Depending on how high the groundwater table is, each turbine’s foundations will be designed as either buoyant or non-buoyant. Buoyant foundations are larger and have been used as a conservative assumption in this assessment, though the hydrology assessment indicates that the need for a buoyant foundation is unlikely. Figure 2.8 shows the typical dimensions of a buoyant turbine foundation. The foundation would have a diameter of up to 20.5m, and a depth of approximately 2.7m. When the foundations are excavated, a further metre around the foundation will be dug to allow access during construction. A thin layer, called a ‘blinding layer’, will be poured to provide a surface on which the foundation can be constructed. Conservatively, each foundation would comprise:

89 tonnes of steel reinforcement bars; 478 cubic metres of concrete; and 34 cubic metres blinding layer slab.

As can be seen in Figure 2.8, the turbine foundations will be covered by topsoil when construction is complete, leaving a plinth of about 5.5m in diameter just above the surface level, upon which the turbine would be bolted. Much of the excavated material will be used

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

for this back-filling, and the topsoil would be reseeded. A scaled version of Figure 2.8 is provided as Drawing APP-006.

Figure 2.8 – Typical buoyant foundation dimensions for E82 turbine (dimensions in mm)

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

2.7 Grid Connection The wind turbines envisaged for use on this site produce electricity at 400 volts. This would be transformed to 33 kV using a transformer within the turbines. Grid connection has been applied for, and an offer is expected from Electricity North West (ENW) in March 2014.

2.8 Site electrical works A substation building will be required to house the necessary metering and protection equipment. The building would be a single storey high and approximately 10m x 4m in size. It would be located close to the base of the western-most turbine as shown in the Site Plan drawing APP-001. An indicative drawing of the type of building proposed is shown in Drawing APP-007.

The onsite substation and control building compound will accommodate metering equipment, switchgear, transformers, the central computer system and electrical control panels. A spare parts store room and domestic facilities will also be located in the control building. Figure 2.9 shows a typical compound and layout. Although not permanently staffed, the buildings would be visited periodically by maintenance personnel. There is no requirement for any other permanent buildings on the site.

Rainwater would either be collected from the roof of the control building via a modified drain pipe system or from a borehole. It would then be diverted into a storage tank located within the toilet area of the control building. An overflow from the tank would drain to the outside of the building and into a rainwater soak-away.

The storage tank would supply:

Raw/untreated rainwater to the toilet; and Rainwater via a UV filter to the hand basin.

Should an extended period of no rainfall occur, water would be transported to the proposed site in small tanks as required.

Following an assessment of foul treatment options by reviewing Pollution Prevention Guidelines 41, the preferred option would be for the toilet, wash hand basin and sink to drain to a septic tank and soakaway. The septic tank design and required soakaway area will be finalised following an onsite percolation test and will be agreed with Burnley Council.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Figure 2.9 - Indicative substation Diagram (Extract from APP-007)

2.9 Construction Programme The construction phase would start after the financial and due diligence process has been completed and would be on-going for approximately 5 to 7 months, from construction of the access track through to erection and commissioning of the wind turbines. Table 2.1 presents an indicative programme.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Table 2.1 – Indicative construction programme Activity Timescale (months from planning decision) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Roads, hard-standings and drainage Foundation excavation Foundation reinforcement Foundation structural concrete pour Sub-station construction On-site cabling Turbine delivery Turbine erection Turbine commissioning

2.10 Traffic and Transportation The delivery of turbine components to the site and other traffic and transportation issues are discussed in detail in Section 14. A summary is provided below.

Site Access The site would be accessed from the west via a new access junction which would leave the public road to the south of the Swinden Bridge and enter the site at its western edge via a trackway running eastwards up the broad saddle of Twist Hill.

This requires the construction of a steel multiplate arch bridging structure across the Swinden Water to the west of Ing Hey. This is the old historical access route to the quarry, as evidenced by the remains of bridging points over the Swinden Water and the still-visible base of the track as it heads eastwards up Twist Hill.

The design of the multiplate arch is provided as APP-008, and a drawing of the proposed site access junction is provided as APP-009.

Construction Traffic There are four main components of construction traffic. These comprise of: Delivery of the turbine components (blades, tower sections and turbine nacelles); Deliveries of crushed stone for the site access tracks and crane hardstandings. In this instance crushed stone is available on site, so no import traffic will be required; Concrete deliveries for the foundation pour; and Personnel trips to and from the site.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Table 2.5 gives an estimate of the volume of traffic likely to be involved during the construction phase. Table 2.2 – Construction Traffic

Load Number of deliveries Type of vehicle Aggregate for site tracks Standard Heavy Goods ~2,800 m3 0 and crane hardstandings Vehicles Concrete turbine Standard Heavy Goods ~1,540 m3 192 foundations Vehicles Reinforcement steel 270 tonnes 14 Standard flatbed lorry Cabling 3 Standard flatbed lorry Personnel 6-10 arrivals a day at peak Cars / Light good - time Vehicles Turbine components Specialised non- - 18-24 articulated lorries standard articulated vehicles

Aggregate deliveries All crushed stone for the internal access tracks and crane hardstandings will be sourced from Delf Hill quarry itself. There is a plentiful supply of material that has already been excavated, so no new borrow pits will be required. This will be crushed and graded and reused on site, requiring a dumper and two HGVs on site. This will remove the need for ~470 deliveries of stone on the public road network which would otherwise have been sourced from the most convenient nearby quarry.

Concrete deliveries Deliveries of concrete during the foundation pour represent the most intensive period of traffic associated with the development. In total 192 deliveries will be required on site over a period of 6 days – 2 days per turbine. On average this would result in 30 deliveries per day, arriving at the rate of 5 per hour over a 6 hour period.

Turbine components There are three different types of components to be delivered to site, which will arrive on specialist Turbine Delivery Vehicles (TDV):

Turbine blades – 42m in length, which are the longest components transported to site;

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Turbine tower sections– four sections per turbine. The longest of these is 28.5m long; and Turbine nacelles – these are the widest components transported to site, 5m in width.

Access roads typically need a minimum clearance width of 5.5m and a minimum clearance height of 4.6m, with the transport vehicles requiring a minimum ground clearance of 0.15m. Roadways, bridges and access tracks along the access route will have to be able to withstand loads up to a maximum axle load of 12 tonnes and a maximum overall weight of up to 120 tonnes.

Access Routes Different access routes are proposed for the Turbine Delivery Vehicles (TDV) and cranes and the other HGVs that will access the site. These Access Routes are presented in the drawing in Appendix 6.

TDVs and cranes It is not known whether turbine components will arrive in the UK via an east or west coast port. However, they will be transported via the motorway network and arrive in Burnley via the M65. TDVs will leave the M65 at Junction 12, and head south on the A682 towards Burnley.

At the junction between A682 Colne Road and A6114 Casterton Avenue the vehicles will turn left, passing Burnley General Hospital. The TDVs will continue southwards on the A6614 and bear left onto to Queen’s Park Road, which runs along the northern edge of the park. The route then continues along Queen’s Park Road, Ridge Avenue and Brunshaw Road to the Brownside Road junction. The route up to this point is that proposed for turbines for the consented Coal Clough repowering, which has been subject to a trial run by test vehicles.

At this point the route diverges from that proposed for the Coal Clough turbines. The Delf Hill TDVs would travel into Worsthorne via Brownside Road. In the centre of Worsthorne the vehicles would turn left onto Extwistle Road. Swept Path Analysis indicates that the bollards and signpost on the corner of Extwistle Road, close to the public telephone box would need to be temporarily removed to allow the blade delivery vehicles to make this manoeuvre.

Following this the route continues past the Crooked Billet Public House and out of Worsthorne towards the site. The section by The Crooked Billet is narrow, but analysis shows that it can be successfully negotiated by the turbine nacelle delivery vehicles.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Beyond Worsthorne, the TDVs will follow Extwistle Road past Lower Bottin and High Halstead to the site entrance. Third party land agreements have been reached to allow passage of the TDVs, specifically those carrying the blades. The locations where minor works will be required are shown in Section 14 and described briefly below:

At the right hand bend on the approach to Lower Bottin Farm a section of stone wall will need to be removed, and a 5m strip of land on the outer curve of the bend may need to be reinforced. On the section of road approaching High Halstead Farm a section of land to the east of the road will need to be reinforced, and the existing stone wall temporarily removed. The existing stone wall to the east of the road will need to be temporarily removed / lowered at two other locations to allow the sweep of the blades to overhang.

Cranes Two cranes will be required on site to erect the turbines. The largest crane proposed to be used on site, Liebherr Crane LTM 1500-8.1, is 21.385m long and 3.23m wide. The crane has 8 axles, all of which have axle loads of 12 tonnes, with the total vehicle weight of 96 tonnes. Therefore, the carriageway width required is 3.5m, the access roads need a minimum clearance width of 4m and a minimum clearance height of 4.6m, with the transport vehicles requiring a minimum ground clearance of 0.2m. Roadways, bridges and access tracks along the access route will have to be able to withstand loads up to a maximum axle load of 12 tonnes and a maximum overall weight of up to 120 tonnes.

Other HGV deliveries It is proposed to route all other HGV deliveries via Briercliffe, with deliveries arriving from the north. HGVs would travel from the A6114 onto Briercliffe Road, passing through Briercliffe itself and onwards towards Haggate. At the crossroads between Burnley Road and Nelson Road they would turn right onto Todmorden Road, which travels southwards to join Shay Lane. Vehicles would then turn right at the Shay Lane junction and pass the Roggerham Gate Inn before reaching the site entrance. As shown in Table 2.2, approximately 192 deliveries of concrete would be required over a six day period.

Route Management Plan A Route Management Plan (RMP) finalising traffic management measures will be produced during the post-planning stage and agreed with Lancashire Constabulary, Burnley Council and the Highways Agency. The RMP will finalise:

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

The route to be followed by the Turbine Delivery Vehicles (TDVs) and HGVs; The schedule of deliveries. Deliveries will be scheduled outside of peak hours to minimize impact on the road network; Suitable escort arrangements for each turbine convoy, from the port of entry to the site access itself; Traffic management measures during delivery; Confirmation of construction traffic numbers and construction phasing; Appropriate road signs warning other road users of increased HGV activity and abnormal loads in the vicinity of the site. This will be particularly pertinent on Todmorden Road and Extwistle Road; Information to be supplied to the general public regarding the movement of abnormal loads, and any road closures or diversions; and Considerate construction methods to be employed such as wheel cleaning and road sweeping.

Operational traffic Once erected the wind turbines would operate automatically. Typically, Enercon maintenance teams are scheduled to conduct quarterly checks on the operation of turbines. These are undertaken in light commercial vehicles such as vans, cars or similar vehicles

Decommissioning traffic The amount of site traffic during decommissioning would be less than that during the construction stage.

2.11 Decommissioning At the end of the development’s operational life, the wind turbines would be decommissioned, the principal elements removed, and the site restored leaving little, if any, visible trace.

The wind turbines would be removed from the site and the foundations, tracks and hardstandings would be covered over with topsoil and reseeded. The cables would be de-energised and left in place, with any cable marker signs removed. The electrical substation building would be removed and the building demolished to ground level with the foundation covered with topsoil and reseeded.

The decommissioning process would take approximately two months to complete. A decommissioning programme would be agreed with the relevant authority prior to the commencement of decommissioning works.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

3 Planning and Environmental Policy Context As part of a commitment to reduce carbon emissions and limit the adverse consequences of global warming related climate change, there exists legislation and planning policy at international, European, national and regional levels to encourage the development of renewable energy production.

3.1 International and EU Context Under the Kyoto Protocol of 1997, the European Union and its Member States agreed to meet a joint target of an 8% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions below 1990 levels by 2012. The arrangement allowed for varying targets between Member States in order to achieve this overall target relative to national circumstances. The UK agreed to a 12.5% reduction by 2012. The operational targets of the Kyoto Protocol were extended by a further eight years to 2020 at the 18th Conference of Parties (COP-18) international climate change meeting at Doha, Qatar in 2012.

European Union leaders committed Europe to more ambitious targets in March 2007, known as the ‘20-20-20’ targets. Specifically, these targets demand:

A 20% reduction in EU greenhouse gas emissions from 1990 levels; Raising the share of EU energy consumption produced from renewable resources to 20%; A 20% improvement in the EU's energy efficiency.

The targets were enacted through the climate and energy package in 2009, committing the EU to transform into a highly energy-efficient, low carbon economy. At the 15th Conference of Parties (COP-15), the EU offered to further increase its greenhouse gas emissions reduction to 30% by 2020 provided other major economies also undertake to commit to further reductions.

These headline targets are also expected to contribute significantly to the creation of employment, growth and improving the EU's medium to long term competitiveness. For example, it is estimated that meeting the 20% renewable target could create around 417,000 additional jobs.

3.2 UK National Context The UK Climate Change Act 2008 sets out a clear, legally binding framework to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by at least 80% below 1990 levels by 2050. To provide certainty to investors and decision-makers, the Act includes a system of binding five-year ‘carbon budgets’, set at least 15 years in advance. The Government

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

has committed to interim targets of 34% by 2020 and 50% by 2025. The Act also brought into being the Committee on Climate Change, a powerful independent body, to advise on future carbon targets and to assess the Government's progress against them. Furthermore, and of particular significance in a planning context, the Act set up a framework to require relevant public bodies to introduce plans to adapt to the impacts of climate change.

The UK Coalition Government has expressed its commitment to increase the proportion of UK energy to be produced by renewable sources, including onshore wind, to meet the present and upcoming targets. Planning policy in support of renewable energy is maintained, subject to advice from the Climate Change Committee. The Government intends to review the fourth carbon budget in 2014.

Article 4 of the European Renewable Energy Directive (2009/28/EC) required each Member State to submit a National Renewable Energy Action Plan. The UK Renewable Energy Strategy published in 2009 set forth proposals which later were incorporated in the UK National Renewable Energy Action Plan of 2010, in which the Government recognised that renewable energy can make a significant contribution to the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and committed to sourcing 15% of its energy from renewable sources by 2020. This is a considerable increase from present renewable energy production levels.

Of particular significance to the planning context in England, applications for energy installations of 50MW and below for onshore renewable production are dealt with at local authority level under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. Those above 50MW are dealt with under the Planning Act 2008 regime, with decisions made by the Secretary of State. Therefore, in order to meet the ambitious target adopted in the 2010 Plan, all local authorities in England must engage in identifying and approving appropriate renewable energy development.

The Planning Act 2008 adopted a new planning regime for infrastructure projects of national significance, including energy installations of greater than 50MW capacity. The Government has published National Policy Statements to guide decision-makers on these infrastructure projects. The 2008 Act also introduced a duty to include policies making a contribution to both climate mitigation and adaption within local development plans.

Following the Energy Act 2008, powers were put in place to introduce Feed-in Tariffs and a Renewable Heat Incentive scheme, both aimed at encouraging a rapid increase in the UK's renewable energy generating capacity. A Government consultation led to legislation in August 2010 allowing local authorities in England and Wales to sell

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

electricity produced from renewables to local electricity networks. Furthermore, the Energy Act 2011 provided for a step change in the provision of energy measures to homes and businesses. For example, the 'Green Deal' launched a new financial framework for the provision of energy efficiency improvements funded by a charge against energy bills rather than an upfront cost.

The Committee on Climate Change's Annual Progress Report of 2013 assesses the emissions trends over the course of that year and publishes findings on the progress of carbon-reduction implementation and policies in the UK. The report found that Economy-wide emissions increased by 3.5% to 570 MtCO2e in 2012, in the context of low economic growth and high oil and gas prices, but also cold winter temperatures and a gas-to-coal switch in the power sector driven by low coal prices. Without these cold winter temperatures the increase in greenhouse gas emissions would have been around 2%, and without the gas-to-coal switch greenhouse gas emissions would have decreased by 1-1.5%.

Despite 2012 emissions remaining below the level of the first carbon budget (which was set before the full impact of the recession had occurred), such a rate of underlying progress would be insufficient to meet the third and fourth carbon budgets, which will require annual emissions reductions of around 3%.

In terms of wind technology, the Report found that the rate of wind new build, if sustained through the rest of the decade, would meet the required level of capacity by 2020 for both onshore and offshore. It concludes that the future pipeline for wind projects remains strong, with sufficient projects awaiting construction or in planning to meet the indicators to 2020.

The Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) published the UK Renewable Energy Roadmap Update in December 2013. The Update states: “We are continuing to make excellent progress in the deployment of renewable electricity across the UK. In Quarter 2 of 2013, renewables accounted for a record 15.5% of all electricity generated. This represents a significant increase in generation since the publication of the last Update. Overall capacity has grown by 38% over the period July 2012 to June 2013 and now stands at 19.5 GW.”

The Government continues to be committed to further onshore wind development, stating in paragraph 114 that, “Onshore wind, as one of the most cost effective and proven renewable energy technologies, has an important part to play in a responsible and balanced UK energy policy”.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

The Energy White Paper 2011 sets out the Government strategy for power sector emissions to be largely decarbonised by the 2030s, warning that without reform the electricity sector would have emissions intensity in 2030 of over three times the level advised by the Climate Change Committee.

3.3 National Planning Policy Framework (2012) The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), published in March 2012, sets out the key planning priorities for England and is a material consideration for Local Planning Authorities. The NPPF identifies the National Policy Statement on renewable energy as material to town and country planning decisions. Furthermore, the NPPF refers to the Climate Change Act 2008 as a relevant consideration in decision making (paragraph 94 and accompanying footnote 16). The effect is that the 80% target reduction in emissions by 2050 is of direct relevance to the discharge of the duty on planning authorities to develop policy which aims to reduce emissions significantly.

In light of these objectives, the NPPF includes as the sixth of twelve Core Planning Principles the requirement to “support the transition to a low carbon future in a changing climate, taking full account of flood risk and coastal change, and encourage the reuse of existing resources, including conversion of existing buildings, and encourage the use of renewable resources (for example by the development of renewable energy).”

Local plans and other development proposals of Local Planning Authorities which are introduced where plans are out of date, absent or silent must therefore adopt policies to reflect this principle, ensuring that planning policy meets obligations to adapt to climate change and reduce greenhouse gas emissions in line with the over- riding legal obligations of the Climate Change Act 2008 and the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

The positive vision set out in the NPPF for local plans to “secure radical reductions in greenhouse gas emissions” and to support “the delivery of renewable and low carbon energy and associated infrastructure” (paragraph 93) presents both the opportunity and obligation for local planning authorities to contribute to the 80% target by 2050. To support the move to a low carbon economy and maximise decentralised renewable energy production, local planning authorities are encouraged to “recognise the responsibility on all communities to contribute to energy generation from renewable or low carbon sources” (paragraph 97) and when determining planning applications should “not require applicants for energy development to demonstrate the overall need for renewable or low carbon energy and also recognise

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

that even small-scale projects provide a valuable contribution to cutting greenhouse gas emissions” (paragraph 98).

3.4 National Energy Policy Statements A series of National Energy Policy Statements were published by the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) in July 2011, including the Overarching National Policy Statement for Energy (EN-1) and the National Policy Statement for Renewable Energy Infrastructure (EN-3). Paragraph 1.2.1 EN-1 states:

“In England and Wales this NPS is likely to be a material consideration in decision making on applications that fall under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended). Whether, and to what extent, this NPS is a material consideration will be judged on a case by case basis.”

There are various sections of particular significance to onshore wind turbine electricity production in both EN-1 and EN-2, including design (EN-1 at 4.5) and impact assessment (EN-3 at 2.7).

3.5 Local Context Local Policy is set out within the Burnley Local Plan (Second Review), which was adopted in April 2006. The Plan sets out the Council’s detailed policies and proposals for the future development and use of land in the Borough up to 2016.

The most relevant policies contained within the plan are set out in Table 3.1, which also demonstrates the compliance of the project against each of these policies.

Table 3.1 – Local Policy Compliance Local Plan Policy Policy and Compliance E1 – Nature conservation Development likely to have an adverse effect on the South Pennines – Internationally and European Special Protection Area/Special Area of Conservation/Site of nationally important sites Special Scientific Interest, shown on the Proposals Map, will not be permitted.

Development likely to have an adverse effect on any subsequently designated internationally, or nationally, important sites will also not be permitted.

Compliance: The development site is adjacent to the South Pennine Moors Special Protection Area (SPA), Special Area of Conservation (SAC), and SSSI. The South Pennine Moors is designated for an assemblage of moorland breeding birds and associated bog, flush and myre habitats. A detailed Ecological Impact Assessment (EcIA) has been undertaken, which involved 12 months of ecology surveys and detailed habitat surveys. This concluded that the development would not significantly

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Local Plan Policy Policy and Compliance impact upon the SPA / SSSI.

E5 - Species protection The presence of a protected species will be a material consideration in determining any planning application.

Development that would affect sites supporting species protected by law will not be permitted unless

(a) adequate provision is made within the proposed development to avoid disturbance to the species and habitat in question; or (b) adequate provision is made, by way of planning conditions or agreements, to: i. facilitate the survival of the individual species affected; ii. reduce the disturbance to a minimum; and iii. provide adequate alternative habitats to sustain the viability of the local population of that species.

Compliance: Protected Species surveys (specifically otters, water vole, badger and bat surveys) were undertaken as part of the EcIA. These concluded that there would be no significant impact upon any Protected Species as a result of the development. E7 – Water bodies and Proposals adjacent to the Leeds-Liverpool Canal, the Rivers Brun and water courses Calder, reservoirs, ponds, streams and other water features will not be permitted where the existing water quality, amenity, recreation, nature conservation and wildlife value is adversely affected, unless suitable mitigating measures are taken to avoid or minimise damage.

Compliance: A detailed Hydrological Assessment has been undertaken as part of the Environmental Statement (ES) (see Section 10). This assessed the potential for run-off and increased sedimentation in the Swinden Water, which feeds the Swinden Reservoir. No significant impacts are predicted.

E8 – Development and Development will not be permitted if: flood risk (a) it would increase the risk of flooding: (i) by reducing the capacity of, or increasing flows within a flood plain; or (ii) through discharge of additional surface water; or (iii) by harming flood defences.

(b) it would be at risk itself from flooding; (c) adequate provision is not made for access to watercourses for maintenance; and (d) the proposal does not include adequate flood protection measures.

A Flood Risk Assessment will be required where it is considered that there would be an increased risk of flooding as a result of development,

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Local Plan Policy Policy and Compliance or the development would be at risk of flooding.

Compliance: The site is not located in an area known to be at risk of flooding. The Hydrological Assessment (see Section 10) assessed the potential for increased run-off and flooding as a result of the development. No significant impacts are predicted.

E9 – Groundwater Development will not be permitted where it would have an adverse Resources effect on the quantity or quality of groundwater resources.

Compliance: The Hydrological Assessment (see Section 10) concluded that there would be no significant impacts on groundwater resources as a result of the development.

E10 – Alterations, The Council will not permit proposals which adversely affect the extensions, change of use character, architectural or historic interest of a Listed Building, or its and development setting. Proposals will only be permitted where they: affecting Listed Buildings. (c) have no adverse effect on the setting of the building, including trees, walls, gardens, and any other structure or object within the curtilage of the building;

Compliance: There will be no direct impact upon any Listed Building. However, the development has the potential to impact upon the setting of Listed Buildings. The Cultural Heritage assessment undertaken as part of the ES assessed the impact on 168 Listed buildings within a 5km radius of the site. Only one (Towneley Hall) was assessed to experience a ‘Moderate’ impact upon its settings, which is significant in terms of EIA regulations, but deemed to be less than substantial in terms of National Planning Policy Framework.

E17 – Historic Parks and The Council will seek to preserve and enhance the Parks and Gardens Gardens included in English Heritage’s Register of Parks and Gardens of Special Historic Interest. Within the Borough they are as follows: E17/1 – Towneley Park; E17/2 – Gawthorpe Hall; E17/3 – Thompson Park; E17/4 – Scott Park; and E17/5 – Queens Park.

Development within and adjoining historic parks and gardens, will be permitted provided that all of the following criteria are satisfied:

(a) it would not lead to the loss of, or harm to, the historic character, setting and appearance of the park or garden and any important landscape or ecological features within it; (b) the proposals are compatible with the character and appearance of

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Local Plan Policy Policy and Compliance the surrounding area; and (c) the site has adequate access and the traffic generated can be safely accommodated on the local highway network.

Compliance: There will be no direct impact upon any Historic Parks and Gardens (HPG). However, the development has the potential to impact indirectly upon these. The Cultural Heritage assessment undertaken as part of the ES assessed the impact on three HPG – Towneley Hall, Thompson Park and Queens Park. The impact on Thompson Park and Queens Park was assessed as negligible. The impact on Towneley Hall was assessed to be ‘Moderate’. While this impact of Moderate significance is considered to be significant in terms of EIA regulations, and therefore requires consideration in the planning balance, it is not considered that the proposed turbines would form a major impediment to the ability to understand or appreciate the significance of the heritage assets.

E18 - Scheduled Ancient Scheduled Ancient Monuments should be preserved where they are Monuments found. Development which fails to preserve the archaeological value and interest of Ancient Monuments or their settings will not be permitted.

Compliance – The impact upon 17 Scheduled Ancient Monuments (SAM) within a 5km radius of the site has been undertaken within the Cultural Heritage Assessment. The proposed development would not have a direct impact upon any of the three Scheduled Monuments within the site. Six SAMs are expected to experience ‘Moderate’ impacts. Again, this requires to be considered in the planning balance and is deemed to be significant in terms of EIA regulations, but is considered less than substantial in terms of the NPPF.

E19 - Development and Before the Council determines an application for development that may archaeological remains affect known or potential sites of archaeological interest, applicants will be required to make provision for an archaeological assessment. This assessment should define:

(a) the character and condition of any archaeological monuments or remains within the application site; (b) the likely impact of the proposed development on such features; and (c) the means of mitigating the effect of the proposed development to achieve preservation of the remains in situ, or, where this is not feasible or justifiable, provision for excavation and archaeological recording prior to the commencement of development.

Compliance – a detailed archaeological assessment has been undertaken by AOC Archaeology, which is IFA affiliated, following dialogue with English Heritage and Lancashire County Council’s archaeologist. This conforms with each requirement set out in E19.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Local Plan Policy Policy and Compliance

E20 - Views New development will be permitted where:

a) it respects skylines, roofscapes and views; and b) it does not detract from the public view of prominent or important buildings, or affect views into and out of Major Open Areas, by intruding into or on their margins

Compliance – The Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (see Section 7) considers in detail how the development will appear from properties, settlements, transport routes and recreational locations. The development will be viewed against the skyline but in general it will not dominate views. The LVIA found that significant effects were limited to 3km around the site.

E27 - Landscape, All proposals for new development in Rural Areas and the Green Belt will character and local be expected to contribute to the protection, enhancement and distinctiveness in Rural restoration of the Borough’s distinctive landscape character by: Areas and Green Belt a) protecting critical environmental capital and key features in the landscape, b) protecting the setting of rural and urban settlements; c) protecting, enhancing and restoring archaeological and historical features; d) protecting farmsteads, barns, mills and other prominent buildings, and man-made features such as ponds, lodges, and bridges; e) protecting and enhancing historic field patterns, including walls and hedgerows; f) seeking the use of local materials, or the nearest match, and vernacular styles in all new buildings, walls, and fences, and by resisting urban style lighting, materials and standardised detailing; g) maintaining views and avoiding skyline development; h) encouraging tree planting, woodland and afforestation of native species when appropriate in the landscape setting; i) protecting and restoring native species; j) protecting, restoring, enhancing, and creating habitats; k) reclaiming derelict land where appropriate; and l) by conserving and enhancing river corridors.

Compliance – by its nature a wind development will introduce new vertical man-made features into the landscape. The development would be located within the Moorland Fringe LCT, which is outlined as having some capacity for a development of this type, particularly in the slopes to the north west where Delf Hill is situated. As an area of moorland which borders a heavily developed valley, this area has a medium landscape sensitivity and the LVIA has found that there would be no

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Local Plan Policy Policy and Compliance significant or unacceptable effects on the wider landscape character area.

The turbine sizes, layout, number and location have been specifically chosen so as to minimise the overall impact of the development on the landscape and when visible allow the development to be read as a simple balanced scheme, which is in scale with the surrounding landscape and does not offer any visual confusion when seen alongside other schemes in the area such as Coal Clough or Hameldon Hill.

Only one of the residential properties assessed was found to have significant visual effects on either their environs or windows. These effects were generally not considered to be unacceptable as due to the distance between the property and the development the turbines are seen alongside the quarry.

Significant effects were found from the two closest settlements, although it should be noted that there was almost no impact on any of the larger settlements as the moorland limits visibility greatly to the east.

E28 - Protecting The Council will support the diversification of the Borough’s Agricultural agricultural land and economy. Where significant development of agricultural land is businesses unavoidable, areas of poorer quality land (grades 3b, 4 and 5)should be used in preference to that of a higher quality, except where this would be inconsistent with other sustainability considerations.

Development will be permitted where:

(a) farm diversification does not detrimentally affect the local environment or local landscape character in line with Local Plan Policy EW11 – “Rural Diversification and Conversion of Rural Buildings for Employment Uses”; (b) development will not have a detrimental effect on farm operations, including that on adjoining farmland; and (c) development would not lead to the severance or fragmentation of farmholdings.

The other sustainability considerations that might justify using land of a higher quality in preference to that of poorer quality will include its importance for biodiversity, the quality and character of the landscape, its amenity value or heritage interest, accessibility to infrastructure, workforce and markets and the protection of natural resources, including soil quality.

Compliance – land rental payments from the turbines will help to support a local farming business at a time when rural farms are under severe financial pressures. Current land uses – grazing and quarrying,

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Local Plan Policy Policy and Compliance can continue around the proposed development.

The Environmental Statement has found that whilst there will be localised environmental impacts, overall the development can be accommodated within the landscape.

E31 - Wind Farms The development of wind farms and related development will be approved, provided that: (a) there is no unacceptable impact on the character of the landscape or on the visual amenity of the area by reason of the siting, number, design, colour or layout of the wind turbines; (b) there is no unacceptable effect on the setting of buildings and sites of architectural and historic interest and sites of archaeological importance; (c) there is no unacceptable effect on sites of nature conservation value or biodiversity action plan priority habitats or species; (d) there is no unacceptable effect on the amenity of local residents (e) the proposal is close to the electricity distribution network and the length of any overhead electricity connection cables is minimised; (f) it does not adversely affect any recreational facilities and routes; (g) any electromagnetic disturbance on existing transmitting or receiving systems is minimised; and (h) applications are accompanied by a scheme for removal of any associated structures, and reinstatement of the site to its former use in the event of the site becoming non-operational.

Development that would have a negative cumulative impact in relation to existing wind turbines or extant approvals for these, will not be permitted.

Compliance – each of the policy areas listed above has been considered in detail within the Environmental Statement.

The Local Plan recognises that “the open exposed upland areas of Burnley with high annual, mean wind speeds have potential for further wind farm development”. The question in relation to landscape and visual impacts is therefore not whether the impacts are significant, but is any harm so significant as to outweigh the wider benefits

The proposed turbines are located in an area of moorland to the east of Burnley near Swinden Reservoir and Extwistle Moor. This landscape has been identified as being an area with capacity for development according to the Landscape Capacity Study for Wind Energy Developments in the South Pennines.

The impact on cultural heritage assets, including Listed Buildings, SAM’s, Historic Parks and Gardens and other archaeological features has been

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Local Plan Policy Policy and Compliance fully considered within the ES, which reaches the overall conclusion that overall the development is acceptable.

The EcIA has considered the impact of the development upon the ecology of the site, and concludes that there will be no significant impact upon any nationally or locally designated species.

In terms of the amenity of local residents, assessments have shown that the development will comply with agreed noise limits at all of the nearest properties, and that shadow flicker is not expected to be problematic at any 3rd party properties. Only one of the residential properties assessed was found to have significant visual effects on either their environs or windows. These effects were generally not considered to be unacceptable as due to the distance between the property and the development the turbines are seen alongside the quarry.

A grid connection offer is expected from Electricity North West in March 2014, which will confirm the grid connection point. It is anticipated that electricity cables will be buried underground to minimise visual clutter.

There are three footpaths that cross the site. It is not anticipated that any of these routes will be affected by the development. Once the project is operational, there will be no long-term impacts upon routes in the area.

There is no predicted impact upon communication links in the area. The turbines will be visible to civil and military radar, and suitable mitigation measures will need to be agreed at the post-planning stage.

Overall the development is deemed to be in compliance with Policy E31.

TM6 - Walking and horse The network of public footpaths and bridleways in rural areas will be riding in the countryside enhanced. Particular attention will be paid to maintaining and improving surfaces, signage, footbridges, gates and stiles, the creation of “Greenways” and the designation of “Quiet Lanes”

Compliance – As per Policy E31. No Greenways or Quiet Lanes are affected by the proposals, but three footpaths cross the site. These will be unaffected by the development.

3.6 Conclusion

Renewable energy projects such as that proposed at Delf Hill make a modest but important contribution towards national renewable energy and carbon reduction targets. The development of any commercial scale windfarm will have some

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

environmental impacts, and it is therefore a question of balancing these impacts against the overall benefits of the scheme, as recognised within PPG22: “Renewable Energy”, which seeks to increase energy production from renewable energy sources whilst minimising impact on the environment.

It is contended that the development is fully in line with the overarching aims of National Policy and complies with the specific requirements of the Burnley Local Plan. The remainder of the Environmental Assessment sets out in detail the assessments that support this conclusion.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

4 Local Economic Benefits

4.1 Construction / Decommissioning Phase Benefits The construction, operational and decommissioning phases of the proposed wind cluster has the potential to benefit the local and/or regional economies through:

Financial investment in the local area with up to 50% of construction costs (excluding turbine components) typically being spent in the locality. Contracts would be placed with a variety of companies, including electrical and civil engineers, fencers and hoteliers; Direct employment opportunities created from the construction and decommissioning phases; and Indirect employment created for companies located further down the supply chain which provide goods and services to contractors during the construction, operation and decommissioning phases of the development;

Rural Windfarms Ltd has a policy of using local contractors and will actively seek out opportunities to work with contractors and businesses in the local area prior to the construction phase. Preference will be given during any tendering procedures to local firms in order to maximise the extent to which the investment can be channelled into the local economy.

At the end of the turbines’ 25 year life span, the decommissioning phase of the turbines will take between two and four months to complete which may create opportunities for economic benefit in the local area.

4.2 Operational Phase Benefits The operational benefits of the turbines are:

The turbines will generate ~20,650MWh1 of clean electricity every year, enough to power the equivalent of 4,900 homes2. The project will support Sweet Well Farm at a time when rural businesses are under pressure to diversify. The additional revenue from the sale of excess electricity will allow money to be re-invested into the business, providing more job security for existing employees and opening up the possibility of further employment through the expansion of the business.

1 Based upon the average capacity factor for onshore wind farms throughout the UK in 2012, DECC ‘Energy Trends September 2013’ 2 Based upon an average electricity consumption of 4,226 kWh per household, DECC ‘Energy Consumption in the UK 2013’ Table 3.07 – Temperature adjusted figure

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

The project will co-exist alongside existing farming and quarrying operations on the site.

It is estimated that the project will save ~220,000 tonnes of CO2 over its 25 year lifecycle, helping to contribute to the UK Government’s environmental targets. More detail is provided in Section 13. A total community payment over the life of the project of £1.25M (details below).

A portion of the income generated by the turbines can be expected to be recycled locally through the purchase of new agricultural equipment, new infrastructure and other expenditure linked to business development.

4.3 Community Benefit The provision of a Community Benefit package is not a planning requirement, and will not be a material consideration in the determination of the application.

Most community benefit agreements will consist of one, or a combination, of the following options:

An annual lump sum payment or community investment, up to an agreed maximum sum; An equity stake in the renewable energy project for the community; and A benefit in‐kind, consisting of, for example, funding local apprenticeships in renewable energy technologies.

The applicant is keen to offer a community benefit package as part of the scheme. It is intended to offer an annual sum of £5,000 per installed MW to local communities; in total, assuming a total installed capacity of 9MW, this would amount to £45,000 per year, or £1.25m over the lifetime of the project.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

5 Project Design Considerations

5.1 Site Selection The proposed site was identified as being suitable for a wind project following an initial screening process carried out by Rural Windfarms. This process was designed to identify sites for wind turbine developments that are environmentally acceptable, technically and economically viable and that will make meaningful contributions to the UK’s targets for renewable energy generation.

Some of the key considerations for this stage are:

The potential impact upon environmental and landscape designations; The viability of the wind resource; Proximity to grid connection; A viable access route to the site; and The potential to achieve suitable separation from residential properties to protect residential amenity.

Regardless of a location’s designation status, a consideration of the nature conservation and landscape character interests of all potential sites is an overarching factor in the site selection process.

Once selected as a potentially suitable site, local constraints are then examined more closely, taking into account further considerations such as:

Whether there is sufficient space to accommodate turbines and infrastructure; The land use and topography of the site; and Ground conditions and hydrology.

If the above criteria can be satisfied then the site is progressed to a more detailed stage of assessment that involves engagement with key stakeholders and statutory and non-statutory bodies.

5.2 Site Design Process The overall aim of the design process is to develop a layout that is environmentally acceptable, technically feasible and economically viable.

At Delf Hill the design process has considered:

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Ecology and Ornithology; Landscape and Visual impact; Noise impacts Cultural heritage and Archaeology; Hydrology/hydrogeology; Communications infrastructure; Access; and Ongoing quarrying activities on site.

The layout of the wind cluster has evolved throughout the EIA process, and has been informed by:

The scoping exercise – in particular feedback from Lancashire County Council’s Archaeologist and English Heritage, and a Scoping Meeting held with the Council’s Planner on 4th March 2013; Findings of baseline surveys – in particular Landscape and Visual, and archaeological surveys; and The opinions of the specialist consultants in each of the areas of assessment.

The key considerations that have informed the final site design are set out in the following section.

5.3 Key Considerations

Ecology The site was deemed to be low risk from an ecological perspective, and contained no areas that were deemed to be particularly sensitive. The main ecological issues related to the site centred on the potential impact upon the species associated with the adjacent Pennine Moors SPA rather than on-site concerns. The southern portion of the site around the quarry was deemed to be slightly less sensitive than the northern Inclosures Pasture due to the prevalence of bare ground and compromised habitats, limiting the number of breeding species on site. The surveys identified that no Schedule 1 species or qualifying species for the South Pennines SPA (merlin, short-eared owl, and golden plover) nest on or near the site.

Ecology aspects are considered further in Chapter 6: Ecology and Ornithology.

Visual Impact (including cumulative impact) Achieving a balanced and coherent appearance from nearby properties, viewpoints and transport routes was a primary focus of the design.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

The most sensitive views were assessed as being those from the north across the Thursden Valley, and from within the Thursden Valley itself, which is a well-used recreational resource. This assumption was reinforced by officers from Burnley Council during the Scoping stage.

The Initial Scoping Layout proposed five turbines of 126m in height, with two of the turbines located in the northern part of the site, within the Inclosures pasture. This meant that the full height of the two closest turbines would be seen when viewed from across the Thursden Valley. The decision was taken to remove these two turbines from the scheme, and to ‘draw back’ the remaining turbines to the south of the crest of Delf Hill. This approach greatly reduces the perceived height of the turbines when viewed from the Thursden Valley.

The LVIA shows that the turbines will appear to be evenly spaced from most of the key viewpoints assessed, presenting a coherent and logical development. This element is considered further in Chapter 7: Landscape and Visual Impact.

Cultural Heritage and Archaeology The Delf Hill site was identified as being archaeologically sensitive from an early stage in the assessment. Consultation was undertaken with Lancashire County Council’s Archaeology Service and Natural England at the Scoping stage, who both requested that a desk-based assessment and field survey be undertaken by a suitably qualified archaeologist to identify all of the on-site and off-site features (within a 2km radius) that could be potentially affected by the development. The potential for unrecorded remains on site was also to be assessed.

AOC Archaeology was commissioned to complete the requested assessment. They identified over 200 on-site archaeological features, the vast majority of which related to historical quarrying activities. Three Scheduled Ancient Monuments were identified on site comprising a Bronze Age cairn, saucer barrow and a ‘stone circle’, which is also likely to represent the remains of a cairn. The saucer barrow is situated at the centre of an enclosure which is similar in form to Iron Age and Roman period enclosures recorded in the wider study area.

The Saucer Barrow, Cairn and associated enclosure are located in the north of the site, adjacent to the track that leads through the Inclosures Pasture. The study identified that this was the most sensitive area of the site in archaeological terms. In terms of site design, the aim was to avoid any direct impact upon all three identified SAMs, and to preferably focus on the less sensitive southern portion of the site, around the quarry.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

This element is considered further in Chapter 9: Cultural Heritage and Archaeology.

Noise Habitable dwellings within 2km of the site were considered to be potentially sensitive noise receptors and were considered within the EIA noise assessment. The wind cluster has been designed to operate within guidance for noise levels. This work has been informed by the recording of background noise levels at two locations, to provide a comprehensive analysis. A detailed Noise Impact Assessment is presented in Chapter 8 - Noise.

Hydrology and hydrogeology The turbine sites, access tracks and borrow pits have been situated to minimise both the potential disturbance of the natural drainage flow and risk to local potable water sources. This element is considered further in Chapter 10 – Surface and Ground Water Hydrology and Hydrogeology.

A geotechnical study identified that there were shallow historical mine working in the northern Inclosures Pasture, which could prove problematic in terms of foundation design and buildability. This was not considered to preclude development in this area, but was a factor to consider in the overall design process.

Communications Infrastructure Ofcom was consulted at an early stage, and confirmed that no communication links cross the site. An independent aviation study identified that any commercial sized turbines on the site were likely to be visible to the St Anne’s Radar and the Warton Radar, and would trigger civil and military aviation objections respectively. Mitigation measures to address these concerns are available, and therefore again this was not considered as a design constraint.

The turbines also have the potential to impact upon the Met Office weather radar at Hameldon Hill, and therefore it was important that the turbine locations corresponded as closely as possible with a ‘radial’ from this weather station. The Met Office has confirmed that the final layout would not conflict with its operations.

Access Access to the site was identified as a possible key constraint at an early stage. A Route Access Study was undertaken which identified that third-party land agreements would need to be reached in order for 126m turbines to access the site. These agreements have been put in place, allowing a full range of turbine sizes to be considered.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

This element is considered further in Chapter 14 – Traffic and Transportation.

Topography and Wind Resource In order to ensure that the turbines operate as efficiently as possible, it is essential that sites making the most of the available wind resource are selected. However this fundamental criterion needed to be balanced out with the other key constraints discussed above.

A suitable separation distance has been allowed between each turbine to minimise wake loss effects, taking into account the prevailing westerly wind direction.

5.4 Design Evolution As a consequence of the EIA process, there have been a number of modifications to the design, to avoid or minimise environmental effects without compromising the overall design strategy. These modifications have been made as a result of the findings of the baseline survey work consultation undertaken.

A summary of the modifications to the design of the proposed wind cluster is provided in Figures 5.1 to 5.4. These modifications have included relocating turbines, reducing the number of turbines, and relocating access tracks and associated infrastructure to:

Minimise the visual effects of the proposed turbines in views from the wider landscape; Minimise effects on landscape character; Minimise effects on local properties; Minimise the impact on the weather radar at Hameldon Hill; Avoid areas of archaeological interest; Take account of noise constraints; and Take account of wind yield.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Layout A – Initial Scoping Layout

5 x 126m tip height turbines 15MW installed capacity

Discussion

Initial assessments showed that the site had the potential for 5 x 126m turbines, with three located around the quarry area and two in the Inclosures Pasture to the north. These turbines of 3MW capacity each would make best use of the on-site wind resource to maximise output on the site. The site contains quite complex topography, and these larger turbines help to minimise turbulence effects on site. A suitable separation distance between the turbines and the nearest properties to protect amenity was achievable. This layout envisaged access coming from the north-west past Sweet Well House Farm.

Figure 5.1 – Initial Scoping Layout

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Layout B – Revised Scoping Layout

3 x 126m tip height turbines 9MW installed capacity

Discussion

The Scoping Process and further investigations identified that the Inclosures area of the site was:

More sensitive in terms of views from properties and recreational users in the Thursden Valley;

Contained the most sensitive cultural heritage features – two SAMs and an enclosure; and

Was underlain by shallow historical mine workings.

The decision was taken to concentrate the development around the quarry area to the south. This subsequent reduction in the space available meant a reduction to a three turbine development. The turbines were placed in a linear arrangement, with the topography rising from west to east. T3 was located to the south of the summit of Delf Hill, reducing its perceived height when viewed from the Thursden Valley.

Access for this new arrangement envisaged a new access route past Swinden Reservoir, which bypasses notable pinch points at the reservoir itself and the Roggerham Gate Inn.

Figure 5.2 – Revised Scoping Layout

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Layout C – Investigation of lower tip height

8 x 87m tip height turbines 6.4MW installed capacity

Discussion

As part of the decision to cluster the development around the quarry, an alternative layout was created which considered smaller turbines of 87m to tip. In order to maintain the installed capacity of the site, ten of these machines would be required. Whilst suitable space was available in theory on the site, the turbines would need to be located throughout the quarry on areas heavily disturbed by quarrying. Many of these would be unsuitable in engineering terms. Analysis of the wind resource on site also showed that 87m turbines would not operate as efficiently as taller turbines due to a lower wind speed at hub height, turbulence and wake loss effects.

Figure 5.3 – Investigation of Lower Tip Height

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Layout D – Final (Planning Application) Layout

3 x 126m tip height turbines 9MW installed capacity

Discussion

The final application is similar to Layout B. Following further wind analysis more space has been allowed between the turbines, with the central turbine in the quarry moved 140m to the east, and the easternmost turbine above the quarry moved ~90m to the north-west. This layout is also more closely aligned to a radial from the Hameldon Hill weather radar, and unlike the previous layouts will not conflict with its operation, removing the need for any mitigation in this respect.

Figure 5.4 – Final Layout

5.5 Summary The final proposed layout for the Delf Hill site is the result of a design strategy which aimed to produce the best layout for the site taking into account environmental, technical and economic factors. The final turbine locations are clustered around the quarry area in the south of the site. The most important decision taken during the design stage was to remove two

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

proposed turbines from the northern portion of the site, which was assessed as being the most sensitive in terms of visual impacts and on-site cultural heritage features, and which would potentially present technical problems as a result of shallow underground mine workings.

The three aligned turbines will appear as a coherent and logical layout from most of the locations that were assessed, and will satisfy noise and shadow flicker requirements at the nearest properties. The adoption of three 126m turbines with a hub height of 85m will ensure that the good wind resource on site is optimised.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

6 Ecology and Ornithology

6.1 Introduction This section considers the potential effects of the proposed three wind turbines on the nature conservation interests on and around the site. It sets out the findings of the ecological surveys that have been carried out and provides an assessment of the impact on key sensitive species and habitats.

The analysis concludes by assessing the residual impacts remaining after mitigation has been implemented.

These assessments were carried out by GLM Ecology, an established ecology consultancy with extensive experience at wind farm sites.

6.2 Regulations and Guidance This ecological impact assessment (EcIA) pays explicit regard to the requirements of:

Council Directive 79/409/EEC on the Conservation of Wild Birds (the “Birds Directive”); Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora (the “Habitats Directive”); The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, as amended; The Hedgerow Regulations 1997; National Planning Policy Framework – ODPM Circular 06/2005 - ‘Biodiversity and Geological Conservation’ The UK Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP).

The EcIA was carried out using the following documents:

Assessing the impact of small-scale wind energy proposals on the natural heritage, SNH 2011; Recommended bird survey methods to inform impact assessment of onshore wind farms, Scottish Natural Heritage, November 2013; Assessing connectivity with Special Protection Areas (SPAs), SNH 2012; Assessing the cumulative impact of onshore wind energy developments SNH 2012; Technical Information Note 59 Bats and single large wind turbines: joint agencies interim guidance Natural England 18 September 2009; and Technical Information Note 51 Bats and onshore wind turbines Interim guidance Natural England 11 February 2009.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

BCT (2011) Bat Surveys – Good Practice Guidelines; surveying for onshore wind farms. Bat Conservation Trust, London, UK. The Lancashire Biodiversity Action Plan.

Impact Assessment Methodology The EcIA has been carried out according to current guidance published by the Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (2006), which is recognized as best practice. These guidelines set out a process of identifying the value of each ecological receptor and then characterizing the effects that are predicted, before discussing the effects on the integrity or conservation status of the receptor, proposed mitigation and residual effects.

Ecological Features Evaluation Criteria A value or sensitivity has been assigned to each ecological receptor based on the following factors:

Importance at a geographical scale, from local to international level; Designation status, e.g., SPA, SSSI, non-statutory designated sites, etc.; Biodiversity value, e.g., national BAP habitat/species, local BAP species, etc.; and Social, community and economic value.

The rationale for the valuation of sensitivity has been included for each receptor for which a significant effect is predicted. Table 6.1 provides examples which are designed to give guidance as to how levels of sensitivity are typically derived. The value of sensitivity of an ecological receptor refers to land within the development area and a recognised 500m zone of effect.

Table 6.1 – Guideline definitions for the sensitivity of ecological receptors

Sensitivity of Examples (Guidance to evaluation) Receptor International An internationally designated site or candidate site (SPA, pSPA, SAC, pSAC , Ramsar site, Biogenetic Reserve) or an area which the country agency has determined meets the published selection criteria for such designation, irrespective of whether or not it has yet been notified. A viable area of a habitat type listed in Annex I of the Habitats Directive, EU 1992 or smaller areas of such habitat which are essential to maintain the viability of a larger whole. Any regularly occurring population of an internationally important species, which is threatened or rare in the UK, i.e. it is a UK Red Data Book species or listed as occurring in 15 or fewer 10km squares in the UK (categories 1 and 2 in the UK Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP)) or of uncertain conservation status or of global conservation concern in the UK BAP. A regularly occurring, nationally significant population/number of any internationally important species.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Sensitivity of Examples (Guidance to evaluation) Receptor National A nationally designated site (SSSI, ASSI, NNR, Marine Nature Reserve) or a discrete area, which the country conservation agency has determined meets the published selection criteria for national designation (e.g. SSSI selection guidelines) irrespective of whether or not it has yet been notified. A viable area of a priority habitat identified in the UK BAP, or of smaller areas of such habitat, which are essential to maintain the viability of a larger whole. Any regularly occurring population of a nationally important species, which is threatened or rare in the region or county (see local BAP). A regularly occurring, regionally or county significant population/number of any nationally important species. A feature identified as of critical importance in the UK BAP. Regional Viable areas of key habitat identified in the Regional BAP or smaller areas of such habitat which are essential to maintain the viability of a larger whole. Viable areas of key habitat identified as being of Regional value in the appropriate Natural Area profile. Any regularly occurring, locally significant population of a species listed as being nationally scarce which occurs in 16-100 10km squares in the UK or in a Regional BAP or relevant Natural Area on account of its regional rarity or localisation. A regularly occurring, locally significant number of a regionally important species. Sites, which exceed the County-level designations but fall short of SSSI selection guidelines, where these occur. County Semi-natural ancient woodland greater than 0.25 ha. County/Metropolitan sites and other sites which the designating authority has determined meet the published ecological selection criteria for designation, including Local Nature Reserves selected on County/metropolitan ecological criteria (County/Metropolitan sites will often have been identified in local plans). A viable area of habitat identified in County BAP. Any regularly occurring, locally significant population of a species which is listed in a County/Metropolitan “red data book” or BAP on account of its regional rarity or localisation. A regularly occurring, locally significant number of a County important species. District Semi-natural ancient woodland smaller than 0.25 ha. Areas of habitat identified in a sub-County (District/Borough) BAP or in the relevant Natural Area profile. District sites that the designating authority has determined meet the published ecological selection criteria for designation, including Local Nature Reserves selected on District/ Borough ecological criteria (District sites, where they exist, will often have been identified in local plans). Sites/features that are scarce within the District/Borough or which appreciably enrich the District/Borough habitat resource. A diverse and/ or ecologically valuable hedgerow network. A population of a species that is listed in a District/Borough BAP because of its rarity in the locality or in the relevant Natural Area profile because of its regional rarity or localisation. A regularly occurring, locally significant number of a District / Borough important species during a critical phase of its life cycle.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Sensitivity of Examples (Guidance to evaluation) Receptor Parish (Local) Areas of habitat considered to appreciably enrich the habitat resource within the context of the Parish or neighbourhood, e.g. species-rich hedgerows. A regularly occurring but low number of locally common protected species within or adjacent to the Development area. Local Nature Reserves selected on Parish ecological criteria. Very Local Areas of habitat that have a limited ecological value. Plant assemblages tend to be species poor, but may be utilised by a small number of faunal species. Those habitats that have an effect of enriching and complimenting the local natural environment to a small degree. Low Areas of habitats considered to be of very limited ecological value. They are not representative of natural habitats and are very species poor. Those habitats that do not enrich the local natural environment. NB: Where species of habitats occur in more than one category, the highest value is applicable.

6.3 Characterisation of Effects/Magnitude of Effect The effects on individual receptors are described in relation to a range of factors. These include the magnitude, extent (either in area or population terms), duration, timing and frequency of the effect on the structure and function of the ecosystem. Effects in combination may have a cumulative effect that is greater than when the same effects occur in isolation. Combination effects include the separate effects of the scheme upon a feature (e.g., effects as a result of the construction and operation stage), or the combined effects of a number of schemes that affect the same receptor. Consideration is given to the longevity of effects, based on the life span of the Development and reversibility of the effect.

The criteria used to determine the character (magnitude, scale, duration, reversibility) of the ecological effects are given in Table 6.2.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Table 6.2 – Definition of terms relating to the Character of ecological effects

Character/ Definition Magnitude Very high Total loss or very major alteration to key elements or features of the baseline conditions such that post development character, composition or attributes will be fundamentally changed and may be lost from the site altogether. For example the loss of a great crested newt breeding pond or loss/destruction of a maternity roost of a rare species of bat, loss/destruction of hibernation roost for bats, destruction of a Annex1 priority habitat or a statutory designated site. Generally irreversible and permanent. Guide: >80% of population or habitat lost High Major alteration to key elements or features of the baseline (pre-development) conditions such that post development character, composition or attributes will be fundamentally changed. For example the loss of a bat maternity roost, damage to a great crested newt breeding pond, pollution of a stream containing white clawed crayfish, damage to annex 1 priority habitat. Generally reversible after long period of time. Guide: 20-80% of population or habitat lost Medium Loss or alteration to one or more key elements or features of the baseline conditions such that post development character, composition or attributes of baseline will be partially changed. For example loss of optimal foraging habitat for great crested newts, death or injury to a low number of a locally rare species, loss of species rich ancient hedgerow, severance of a bat flight path, temporary abandonment of a bat roost. Generally reversible with mitigation on a short timescale Guide: 5-20% of population or habitat lost Low Minor shift away from baseline conditions. Change arising from the loss or alteration will be discernible but underlying character, composition or attributes of baseline condition will be similar to pre-development circumstances or patterns. For example loss of sub optimal foraging habitat for Great crested newt, loss of species poor hedgerow, death or injury of a very small number of common species of bat. Generally reversible without mitigation in short timescale. Guide: 1-5% of population or habitat lost. Negligible Very slight change from baseline condition. Change barely distinguishable, approximating to the “no change” situation. Guide: <1% of population or habitat lost.

Significance Criteria An ecologically significant effect is defined as an effect (adverse or positive) on the integrity of the site or ecosystem(s) and/or the conservation status of habitats or species within the identified zone of effect for the Development. The definitions of integrity and conservation used for this assessment are those detailed in the Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (IEEM) Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment, namely:

Integrity is the coherence of ecological structure and function, across a site’s whole area, that enables it to sustain a habitat, complex of habitats and/or the levels of populations of species; and Conservation status for habitats is determined by the sum of the influences acting on the habitat and its typical species that may affect its long-term distribution, structure

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

and functions as well as the long-term survival of its typical species within a given geographical area. The combined assessment of the effect characterisation and the sensitivity of ecological receptors have been used to determine whether or not an effect is significant with respect to the EIA Regulations. These two criteria have been cross-tabulated to assess the overall significance of the effect in Table 6.3. Effects with significance of moderate or major are considered to be significant in terms of the EIA Regulations.

Table 6.3 – Matrix used to assess the significance of potential effects upon ecological receptors.

Magnitude of Sensitivity of High Medium Low Negligible effect receptor (International and (Regional and (Parish/ (Very National) District) (Local)) Local/Low) High Major Major Moderate Negligible Medium Major Moderate Moderate Negligible Low Moderate Moderate Minor Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible

Site Background and Context Three turbines, of a maximum of 126m to tip, are proposed for the Delf Hill site. The habitat near the turbine locations is bare ground and poor heavily grazed grassland.

The land use for the majority of the site is rough grazing land for sheep and rare breed cattle; there is however a small working quarry in the centre of site. The site is directly adjacent to the ‘South Pennines’ Special Protection Area (SPA), Special Area of Conservation (SAC) and Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI).

Habitats on site include grazed pasture, rush dominated grassland in wetter areas, bare rock and soil and acid grassland dominates in drier areas. The lower slopes are generally heavily grazed. On the higher ground away from turbine locations there are various areas of peat and bryophyte communities present. To the north of the site there is an area of predominantly silver birch woodland and to the south an area of larch and fir species.

In the centre of the site there is a large area of bare ground from old quarry works where trail bikes and off-road vehicles are driven. There is also occasional clay pigeon shooting in this area.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

The quarrying area where excavated stone is stored Improved grazing habitat prior to removal from the site

Typical area of improved grazing with rushes present

Peat and bryophyte communities on higher ground. Disturbed ground adjacent to the quarry

Figure 6.1 – Site features and habitats

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

The nearest buildings on site are Sweet Well House Farm that is approximately 530m from the nearest turbine location.

To the north of the site there is a stream present and odd small flushes occur. There are small ponds present in depressions, which would appear to be seasonal.

The proposed access track is from the minor road to the west near Swinden Bridge. The upgraded track would follow the route of an existing un-surfaced track that travels eastwards along Twist Hill.

Designated Sites Designated sites and associated protected species and habitats at a local and regional level have been identified through a desk based assessment and site walkover process. A description of the local area in relation to designated sites with ecological interests and the findings of an initial desk based review of the area are presented in the context of the following sections. The following resources were used:

NBN Gateway1 RSPB sensitivity maps2; Natural England; The Lancashire Environmental Record Network4; and Multi Agency Geographic Information for the Countryside5.

Guidelines are present to ensure that the proposal does not have a significant impact on the qualifying interests of both International and National Designated Sites within accepted distances from the Survey Area. These distances vary according to what protected species are present in the relevant Designated Sites and differ according to the level of protection accorded to a particular species i.e. whether the species is protected at an International, National or Local level. The following sites were identified within 20km from the site:

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Table 6.4 – Ecological designations within 20km of the site

Ecological feature Zone of impact Sites from site boundary Internationally Within 20km South Pennine Moors SPA- designated for moorland bird designated sites (SPA, aggregation (golden plover merlin, and short eared owl). SAC, Ramsar) South Pennine Moors SAC- designated for European Dry Heath, Blanket Bog, Old Sessile Oak woods with bryophyte communities. Nationally designated Within 5km South Pennine Moors SSSI sites Locally designated Within 1km None sites

Scope of Ecological Assessments The scope of the present EcIA was derived from the initial site background and context study above, the local knowledge and experience of the ecologist and guidance from Natural England (NE). The EcIA considers the following issues:

Phase 1 Habitat Survey; National Vegetation Classification Survey. Birds; Bats; Otter; Badger; and Water Vole;

The scope of ecological assessments was in accordance with Natural England. Feedback from NE highlighted that short-eared owl, merlin and golden plover have been recorded in the recent past as breeding locally on the South Pennine Moors SPA.

It was also considered that Delf Hill might be a staging post for migrant golden plover.

All bird and plant survey work was carried out in conjunction with David Pollard of Corvus Ecology Consulting. David is an extremely experienced all round ecologist who has worked for over 15 years on wind farm projects for major companies before forming his own consultancy.

6.4 Phase 1 Habitat Surveys Legislation Legislation exists to protect habitats and floral species from destruction, degradation and loss as a result of development activities and include:

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

The Conservation (Natural Habitats, & C.) Regulations 1994; and Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (as amended);

Aims & Objectives The Phase 1 Habitat Survey aimed to:

Identify and record broad habitats within the vicinity of the development area; Provide a description of habitat distributions and highlight any areas of ecological constraints in relation to the proposed development; and Contribute towards informing planning processes.

Whilst not a full botanical survey, the Phase I method enables a suitably experienced ecologist to obtain sufficient understanding of the ecology of a site so that it is possible either: To confirm the conservation significance of the site and assess the potential for impacts on habitats /species likely to represent a material consideration in planning terms; or To ascertain that further surveys of some aspect(s) of the site’s ecology will be required before such confirmation can be made.

Survey Methodology Phase I habitat survey is a standardised method of recording habitat types and characteristic vegetation, as set out in the Handbook for Phase I Habitat Survey – a technique for Environmental Audit19. The Phase I habitat survey undertaken in June 2012 covered the whole of the site and proposed turbine area and encompassed a buffer envelope around this area where possible.

Field Survey The habitats present within the proposed turbine and track survey area are presented in Appendix 1.1.

Quarry The middle of the site is a small active quarry (I 2.1) producing bespoke stone products. There is a lot of bare ground and track ways with little or no vegetation or any plant species that indicate previous land usage i.e. very little remains of the previous habitats not encroached by machinery and four wheel drive vehicles.

Acid Grassland The NVC classification recorded in acid grassland (B1) areas was U4 Festuca ovina - Agrostis capillaries – Galium saxatile grassland. This is a species poor habitat found on thin acidic

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

soils, with good drainage. This classification is found on large areas on Delf Hill. The green appearance of these areas on this sites is due to the coverage of grasses Festuca ovina and Agrostis capillaries and moss species Rhytididadephus squarrosus, Polytrichum commune and Dicranum scoparium, typically closely grazed by sheep on this site. The rush species Juncus effusus is found in patches on these areas. Herb and dwarf shrub coverage is kept low mainly due to grazing, with no ericoids present and herbs limited to Rumex acetosella, Potentilla erecta and Galium saxatile.

Semi Improved Grassland Some grazing fields are classed as being semi improved (B6) and are between improved and semi improved acid grassland status. This grassland formed a mosaic with the rushy marshy grassland (B5) and contained creeping thistle (Cirsium arvense), nettle (Urtica dioica), broad leaved dock (Rumex obtusifolium), meadow buttercup (Ranunculus acris), cock’s foot (Dactylis glomerata), hard rush (Juncus inflexus), soft rush (Juncus effusus), mat grass (Nardus stricta) and rosebay willowherb (Chamerion angustifolium).

Broadleaved woodland and scattered trees Within the boundaries of the site and in proximity of the track there is a stonewall boundary field with broadleaved trees growing within it (A1.1.1). This wooded area contained trees such as birch (Betula pendula), oak (Quercus sp.), ash (Fraxinus excelsior), rowan (Sorbus aucuparia) and sycamore (Acer pseudoplatanus). Occasional hawthorn (Crataegus monygna) (A3.1) are found on site within fields, close to the track and stream.

Acid/Neutral Flush The acid/neutral flush (E2.1) NVC classifications recorded on this site was M6 Carex echinata – Sphagnum fallax/denticulatum mire. This is found in wet areas with moderate to deep peat, typically leading off slopes in the transition from wet/dry heath to blanket bog, modified bog and surrounding watercourses. The M6c Juncus effuses sub-community and M6d Juncus acutiflorus sub-community were both found on this site. Both of these flushes are relatively species rich, although large variation does occur. Juncus effusus or Juncus acutifolium are typically present, although Eriophorum species, Carex echinata or Myrica gale can also be dominant. Sphagnum papillosum, S. compacticum and S. denticulatum are also present. Due to high water saturation levels, water plants such as Potamogeton polygonfolius, Viola palustre and Rannunculus acris are also present.

Marshy grassland Juncus species (forming B5) are found in patches within the semi improved grassland and the semi improved acid grassland. Both hard rush (Juncus inflexus) and soft rush (Juncus effusus) were found.

Wet Modified Bog

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Wet modified bog (E 1.7) is derived from blanket bog which has been affected by drainage, grazing, burning and/or Molinia caerulea invasion. On this site there are small areas of this habitat and wet modified bog NVC classifications on this site mainly include M25 Molinia caerulea - Potentilla erecta mire and with lesser coverage of M18 Erica tetralix – Sphagnum papillosum mire also a mosaic of both M25 and M18.

M25 Molinia caerulea - Potentilla erecta mire is found on the flat or gently sloping areas on this site, on peat of greater that 1m depth. This bog resembles M17 mire but with high coverage of Molinia caerulea. The majority of wet modified bog on this site is M25, although some variation between classifications occurs, e.g. the wet modified bog section to the north of Delf Hill is a mixture between M25 and M17 Trichophorum cespitosum – Eriophorum vaginatum mire, and due to the size of area concerned it is difficult to distinguish between these classifications. The M25a Erica tetralix sub-community is found on this site, shown by the coverage of Calluna vulgaris and Erica tetralix. As the classification suggest, Potentilla erecta is also present and common. Sphagnum papillosum is also found across these areas, although in variable amounts, along with other species indicating wet areas, including Juncus acutifolius and Narthecium ossifragum.

M18 Erica tetralix – Sphagnum papillosum mire is a classification of heavily modified blanket bog, an area of which was located towards the wall that traverses the site west to east towards the SPA. This is a species poor area of wet modified heath, dominated by Trichophorum cespitosum, Erica tetralix and Sphagnum papillosum. This mire would typically have lichen coverage, but grazing and trampling and possibly muirburn have removed these from the assemblage.

6.5 NVC Survey A NVC survey was carried out and frequency and DOMIN range tables for each NVC classification are shown in Appendix 1.2.

The NVC classifications surveyed were U4 Festuca ovina - Agrostis capillaries – Galium saxatile grassland, and wet modified bog category’s M17, M20, MI8 and M6.

6.6 Ornithology Generally, ornithological surveys on and around the site are required to assess potential impacts of birds throughout the year, which could arise due to:

Potential loss, fragmentation and degradation of bird habitats arising from the construction of turbine bases, crane pads, access tracks, a sub-station and temporary construction compounds and power lines;

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Potential displacement of hunting or migrating birds through avoidance of turbines, work staff and machinery; Disturbance to birds due to noise from operating turbines; Potential disturbance to nesting birds (for example, displacement of birds from breeding habitats) resulting from the construction activities; and Potential for birds to collide with turbine blades and power lines.

It should be noted that the issues identified above are more likely to be significant for larger wind turbine developments; however, these were considered for this application.

Survey Scope & Methodology To assess the year-round movements and presence of birds on site and in the surrounding area, a variety of survey methods were carried out, including breeding bird surveys and VPs.

Breeding Bird Survey The area 500m round the proposed site was surveyed. The survey work was based on the adapted Brown & Shepard technique (Calladine 2009)6 with four visits undertaken. Birds of Conservation Concern (Eaton et al. 2009)7 were identified. The designations used were: Breeds (B), and Possible Breeder (PB).

Vantage Point Surveys Data from VP surveys are utilised as part of the assessment of potential impacts including: species presence, density, distribution and behaviour.

Two VPs were used allowing all flights to be recorded to 500m outside the site boundary. When the site was originally proposed it was with five possible turbine locations. VP survey work covered all five-turbine locations. At a later date turbine numbers were reduced from five to three, although all survey work discussed in this report covers the original proposal

VP watches were 12 hours per month per VP from March 2012 - August 2012, then 6hrs per VP from September-March 2013. Primary target species were identified as all Special Protection Areas (SPA) qualifying species including wildfowl, waders and Schedule 1 raptors. The location, direction of flight and estimated height above the ground of each target species were recorded. VP times typically covered a period of three hours and covered a range of times between the dawn and dusk periods. During the VPs flight data for both primary and secondary target species were recorded. Details of species, number of birds, flight height (in bands), duration and direction were recorded. The following height bands were used in the surveys: A- <20m, B- 20-125m, C- >125m. Any flights recorded at band B and within 200m of the proposed turbine location were classified as being within the collision risk window.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Survey Results

Breeding Birds Twelve species of birds were recorded as breeding within the survey area (Table 6.5). This does not include common passerines breeding in plantations or around habitation e.g. robin, coal tit, pied wagtail, willow warbler etc. Most of the recorded birds are recorded locally as common residents or summer visitors whose populations are not threatened and are in favourable conservation status in England. No raptors were recorded as breeding on site. Nationally six species are on the amber list of Birds of Conservation Concern (Eaton et al. 2009), and one on the red list.

Table 6.5 - Breeding bird species list for Delf Hill: April – June 2012.

Species Latin Totals Status

Curlew Numenius. arquata 2-3 pairs B Lapwing Vanellus vanellus 4-6 pairs B Snipe Gallinago gallinago 1-2 pairs B Oystercatcher Haem. ostralegus 3-4 pairs B Little Owl Athena noctua 2 pair B Blackbird Turdus merulas Small numbers B Wood Pigeon Columba palumbus Present B Meadow Pipit Anthus pratenis Small numbers B Skylark Alauda arvensis Small numbers B Wren Troglodytes Small numbers B troglodytes Chaffinch Fringella Small numbers B coelebs Wheatear Oenanthe oenanthe 3 pair B

Schedule 1 Species No Schedule 1 species or qualifying species for the South Pennines SPA (merlin, short-eared owl, golden plover etc.) nest on or near Delf Hill.

VP Surveys Table 6.6 displays the VP dates, times and weather conditions. The only target species recorded were golden plover. The only raptor recorded was kestrel. Small numbers of golden plover (a maximum of 8) flew over site in April-early May. These birds were staging in fields to the north west of the site where a maximum of 45 birds were recorded. By early May these birds had disappeared. In late May – early June 1 or 2 golden plovers were

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

recorded flying high over site in fields to the northwest. These were not recorded after late August. All Golden Plover flights are listed in Table 6.7.

Table 6.6 - VP times and dates Delf Hill.

Date VP GP Flights Start Finish Weather 28/03/12 1 10:00 16:30 Sunny showers 8° 6/8 N1-2 29/03/12 2 2 1 08:30 15:00 Hazy 11° 2/8 Wind NW2-3 12/04/12 2 5+2 2 08:30 15:00 Showery 3° 6/8 Wind N1-2 23/04/12 1 11:00 17:30 Showers 6° 3/8 Wind N3 24/04/12 1 3 1 09:00 15:30 Dry 8° 2/8 Wind NE 2-3 30/04/12 2 4+3 2 10:00 16:30 Sunny 8° Cloud 4/8 Wind E3-4 03/05/12 1 6+2 2 09:00 15:30 Overcast 8° Cloud 8/8 Wind E3 09/05/12 2 09:00 15:30 Overcast 6° Cloud 6/8 Wind E3 21/05/12 2 09:00 15:30 Dry 15° Cloud 4/8 Wind W1-2 28/05/12 1 1 1 10:00 16:30 Hot 23° Cloud 6/8 Wind nil SE 06/06/12 2 1 1 11:00 17:30 Cloudy 18° 8/8 Wind SE1 15/06/12 1 1 1 09:00 15:30 Warm 21° 2/8 Wind SW1 20/06/12 1 1 1 08:00 14:30 Sunny 15° Cloud 3/8 Wind S1 26/06/12 2 1 1 11:00 17:30 Showery 20° 7/8 Wind W3 03/07/12 2 09:00 15:30 Showers 15° 4/8 Wind W2 12/07/12 1 1+1 2 10:00 16:30 Blustery 14° 4/8 Wind NW3 18/07/12 2 08:30 15:00 Sunny 22° Cloud 0/8 Wind 1SE 25/07/12 1 1+1 2 08:00 14:30 Sunny 15° 4/8 Wind SW3 21/08/12 2 08:00 14:30 Drizzly 14° Cloud 8/8 Wind S1 28/08/12 1 1+1+1 3 13:00 19:30 Dry 14° Cloud 2/8 Wind E1 11/09/12 2 09:00 15:30 Overcast 10° Cloud 8/8 Wind nil 27/09/12 1 14:00 20:00 Cold 9° Cloud 0/8 Wind still 10/10/12 1 09:00 15:30 Showers 10° 6/8 Wind E2 24/10/12 2 09:00 15:30 Dry 10° Cloud 8/8 Wind W3 16/11/12 1 09:00 15:30 Sunny 8° Cloud 2/8 Wind S1 29/11/12 2 09:00 15:30 Cold 2° Cloud 0/8 Wind E1 07/12/12 2 10:00 16:30 Cold 0° Cloud 4/8 Wind E2 18/12/12 1 10:00 16:30 Snow/Ice -2° 2/8 Wind E2 09/01/13 1 10:00 16:30 Cold 0° Cloud 4/8 Wind E2 22/01/13 2 10:00 16:30 Snow/Ice -2° 2/8 Wind E2 06/02/13 2 10:00 16:30 Snow/Ice -2° 6/8 Wind E2 19/02/12 1 09:00 15:30 Cold 2° Cloud 0/8 Wind E 1 05/03/13 1 09:00 15:30 Cold 2° Cloud 0/8 Wind E1 11/03/13 2 09:00 15:30 Cold 9° Cloud 0/8 Wind nil/still

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Table 6.7 - Golden Plover flight details.

Flight Date Number Height Comments of birds band 1 29/3/12 2 B Linked with transient flock adjacent to site 2 12/4/12 2 A Linked with transient flock adjacent to site 3 12/4/12 5 A Linked with transient flock adjacent to site 4 24/4/12 3 B Linked with transient flock adjacent to site 5 30/4/12 4 C Linked with transient flock adjacent to site 6 30/4/12 3 B Linked with transient flock adjacent to site 7 3/5/12 2 A Linked with transient flock adjacent to site 8 3/5/12 6 A Linked with transient flock adjacent to site 9 28/5/12 1 C Single bird high overhead from SPA 10 6/6/12 1 C Single bird high overhead from SPA 11 15/6/12 1 C Single bird high overhead towards SPA 12 20/6/12 1 C Single bird high overhead from SPA 13 26/6/12 1 C Single bird high overhead towards SPA 14 2/7/12 2 C Single bird high overhead from SPA 15 25/7/12 2 C Single bird high overhead towards SPA 16 28/8/12 1 C Single bird high overhead towards SPA 17 28/8/12 1 C Single bird high overhead from SPA 18 28/8/12 1 C Single bird high overhead towards SPA

6.7 European Protected Species (EPS) Survey and Mammal Surveys

Methodology Survey Limitations All mammal or EPS surveys provide only a snapshot of animal activity and are intended to inform a planning application only. Mammal activity is likely to vary over time and in differing conditions and, as such, a negative result does not prove a lack of all mammal activity, but does provide a strong indication of activity levels.

Desk Study A desktop study was carried out via NBN Gateway to identify the presence of any protected mammals or EPS present within the 10km grid square encompassing the survey site.

Field Survey The surveys consisted of walkovers of the site and along a 50m corridor along the access track following standardised guidance to visually inspect and assess the site for its potential to support protected mammals and EPS. Due to the habitat and data search this survey concentrated on badger, otter and water vole however signs for any protected mammals or EPS were searched for. The searches for otter and water vole were along the Swinden Water at the beginning of the access track. Aims & Objectives

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

The aims of this assessment were: To assess whether any protected mammals or EPS were present on site; If any protected species are present to assess local population status and usage of the site; and To recommend further survey work if required.

Badgers

Badger Legislation Both badgers and their setts are protected by law. As a result it is an offence to:

Willfully kill, injure, take, possess or cruelly ill-treat a badger, or to attempt to do so; To intentionally or recklessly interfere with a sett; To disturb a badger when it is occupying a sett; Damage or destroy a sett; and To obstruct access to, or any entrance of a badger sett.

A badger sett is defined in the legislation as ‘any structure or place, which displays signs indicating current use by a badger’. 'Current use' does not simply mean 'current occupation' and for licensing purposes it is defined as 'any sett within an occupied badger territory regardless of when it may have last been used'. A sett therefore, in an occupied territory, is classified as in current use even if it is only used seasonally or occasionally by badgers, and is afforded the same protection in law

Survey Methodology The surveys consisted of a walkover of the site and ground within 250m of its boundary to visually inspect and assess the site for its potential to support badgers. Badgers surveys were carried out according to recommended guidelines8, 9, 10 and 11. Evidence of badger activity searched for included:

Setts: badger setts typically have characteristic shapes and dimensions; Paw prints and badger hair caught on hedges and fences; Foraging signs: foraging badgers leave distinctive marks when foraging; Characteristic worn pathways; and Latrines: badgers defecate in pits, often clustering several pits into a latrine.

NBN Gateway recorded badger within the 10km grid square of the site. No signs of badger were recorded in the survey area.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Otters

Legislative Context Otters Otters and their resting places receive protection under The Conservation (Natural Habitats &c.) Amendment (Scotland) Regulations 2004 (the Habitats Regulations) which make it an offence to: Intentionally kill, injure or take an otter; Possess or control any live or dead specimen or anything derived from an otter; Intentionally or recklessly damage, destroy or obstruct access to any structure or place used for shelter or protection by an otter; or Intentionally or recklessly disturb an otter while it is occupying a structure or place, which it uses for that purpose.

Survey Methodology The surveys consisted of a walkover of the site and ground within 250m of its boundary to visually inspect and assess the site for its potential to support otters. Otter surveys were carried out according to recommended guidelines12, 13, 14 and 15. Evidence of otter activity searched for included:

Holts: otter holts are often found in various situations. These include cavities in a riverbank, hollow trees, between roots, rocky clefts, rabbit burrows or tunnels in peat. The entrance may be underwater with an air vent into the chamber, which is lined with dry vegetation. Couches: otters often have resting spots or couches whey they lay up. An otter may have many holts or resting sites within its home range Paw prints in muddy or silted areas along the burn edges. Spraints or otter faeces. Often found on boulders, under bridges, elevated positions, fallen trees or on piles of grass Characteristic worn pathways/slides or haul out areas.

NBN Gateway recorded otter within the 10km grid square of the site. No signs of otter were recorded.

Water Voles For water voles the approach was to thoroughly search a strip approximately 5m wide on each side of the watercourse banks for signs of water vole activity, in accordance with the standard survey methodology16. Banks with steep sides are most commonly used by water vole, though all areas were searched in this instance. Wider strips were searched where suitable habitat occurred. The survey was conducted at low flow so that the exposed bankside could be carefully searched from the river.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Forms of evidence searched for included:

Sightings of the species itself; Tracks/footprints found in soft substrate such as mud along the water-line; Droppings and latrines also found along the water-line; Burrows, which may be below water or on the bank top; Grazed lawns, often associated with the burrows and feeding signs such as piles of cut vegetation.

NBN Gateway recorded no water vole within the 10km grid square of the site. No signs of water vole were recorded.

Bats Bat Legislation Bats of all species in Britain and their roosts are protected under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010. It is illegal intentionally or recklessly to kill or injure a bat, to disturb a roosting bat or to damage, destroy or obstruct access to any bat roost. This applies to both summer and winter roosts, which may be in different structures. Any action, which is likely to disturb or damage a bat roost, requires a license from Natural England.

Aims & Objectives To determine what bat species are present on the site and whether the habitat is utilized for roosting, foraging or commuting by bats.

Data Review A data search was carried out using NBN Gateway to determine if any bat species had been recorded in the 10km square of which Delf Hill is enclosed.

Survey Methodology A habitat and bat assessment survey was carried out at the site in May 2012 followed by bat detector surveys in May – September in accordance with guidance from the Bat 17 18 Conservation Trust and Natural England . The objectives of the bat surveys were to identify whether the site would be considered suitable for roosting bats and whether bats were present on site. The aim was to provide sufficient evidence so that the potential impacts of the proposed development on any local bat populations could be assessed and if appropriate, mitigation suggested.

Habitat Survey The site was surveyed for potential flight lines/commuting routes, roosts and foraging areas and the habitat assessed for its overall suitability for bats. Any potential foraging areas were

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

examined and linear features were assessed for their suitability as flight lines or commuting pathways. This survey was to evaluate the site, not a specific survey to find roosts etc.

Bat Detector Surveys Three visits were made with details of times and weather conditions below. The dusk surveys were carried out from approximately 30mins before sunset to 2.0hrs after sunset. The dawn survey was from approximately two hours before sunrise to 30mins after sunrise (Table 6.8) The site was divided into transect lines (blue line Figure 6.9) which were surveyed constantly by two individual surveyors starting at opposite ends of the transect on each visit.

In June and August two SM2 static recorders were positioned near approximate turbine locations for 5 nights at stopping points 3 & 5.

Table 6.8 - Survey times and weather conditions. Survey Date Sun Set Sun Rise Time Weather Dusk 18/05/12 21.10 20.35-23.30 E2.6/8.10C Dusk 19/06/12 21.40 21.00-24.00 NE2.8/8.8C Dawn 29/07/12 05.20 03.15-05.50 S1.4/8. 11C Dusk 15/09/12 19.15 18.40-21.30 SW2. 4/8 14.C

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

8 7

1 6 5

2 3

Figure 6.2 – Bat survey area

Transect

Stopping point

Data Search NBN Gateway recorded common pipistrelle within 10km of the site.

Buildings No buildings are on site within 500m of the proposed turbines.

Trees No trees on site have the potential for bat roosts.

Foraging Areas The site near the turbines is basically bare ground with small areas of acid grassland with rush present and this would be classed as low quality foraging. It would be expected that any bats would forage to the south near woodland and the reservoirs. No roost potential is present on site so bats would not travel past good quality foraging to reach poor quality habitat.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Walked Bat Detector Survey Results The results reveal a very poor usage of the site by bats. Two species (common pipistrelle and Myotis species) were recorded in low numbers. Figure 6.3 illustrates where bats were recorded. Small numbers of common pipistrelle (<5) were recorded between stopping points 1 & 8 commuting to the Swinden Reservoir. Also recorded were small numbers (< 4) of a Myotis bat believed to be Natterers bat. These bats were commuting along a stone wall near a track. No roosts were found although suitable buildings are present to the north off site. A single common pipistrelle was recorded twice near stopping point 3 over bare ground.

Commuting area

Stopping point

Figure 6.3 – Bat activity

Static Recorder The SM2 at stopping point 3 recorded 21 bat passes of common pipistrelle over 10 nights recording. The SM2 at stopping point 5 recorded 4 bat passes of common pipistrelle over the same period. All of the records were brief indicating bats were not foraging in the area but were commuting.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

6.8 Assessment of Impacts

Impacts on Habitats The vegetation of the survey area is a mixture of improved/semi improved acid grassland and bare ground/quarry areas. To the north-east areas of wet modified bog are present. The vegetation types found in this survey are typical of those found more widely at low altitudes in upland and upland fringe areas in northern England.

When the application was originally proposed it was proposed that turbines would be present in the areas of wet modified bog and around the centre of the site near the quarry and bare ground areas. The proposal has been modified and all turbines are proposed in the centre of the site away from bog areas.

No significant impacts on the aquatic environment are anticipated from the location of the proposed development infrastructure. There is the potential of a slight increase in run-off in to ditch systems through the ground disturbance of the construction phase but this is expected to be short lived, minor and further reduced through mitigation, as discussed in Section 10. Standard best practice mitigation measures are recommended to ensure likelihood of impact events upon freshwater ecology receptors at the site result in non- significant negative residual effects.

Standard Mitigation for Terrestrial and Aquatic Habitats The following standard mitigation measures are proposed: Good construction site management will be implemented to minimise generation of litter, dust, noise and vibration.. Through adhering to best practices during construction and operation phases, fragmentation, disturbance and pollution to habitats present can be minimised; and During construction, management of excavated soil will focus on preventing silt runoff into the water environment during rainfall periods through careful design and maintenance of drainage/silt traps.

Impacts on Breeding Birds The species of breeding birds recorded would be considered as typical for the habitat and of low sensitivity. In the area near the bare ground/ quarry areas where the turbines are proposed very few breeding birds were recorded apart from meadow pipit, skylark and 1-2 pairs of lapwing. A maximum of three pairs of curlew are present over the entire site. No raptors are present apart from two pairs of little owl nesting in stonewalls. No golden plover or Schedule 1 raptors breed on site. The magnitude of impact is considered to be negligible and overall the significance of impact to be no more than negligible.

Mitigation

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

No mitigation is deemed to be required.

Impacts on Schedule 1 raptors No Schedule 1 raptors were recorded on site in 12 months VP work. None were recorded during breeding bird surveys.

It can be said with considerable confidence that no Schedule 1 raptors or short-eared owls use the site for foraging

Mitigation No mitigation is deemed to be required.

Impacts on Staging Golden Plover The VP survey work concentrated on whether golden plovers in springtime used the fields in the general area as a staging post before migrating north to breed. Up to 45 golden plover were recorded feeding in grass fields to the north west of the site predominantly during April. It was considered that these were not local breeding birds as these were already established on territory on the SPA. Flight lines were only recorded over site on 8 occasions when small numbers of birds (max 6) were recorded. No Collision Risk Model (CRM) can be calculated due to extremely low numbers of birds at collision risk height. The magnitude of impact is considered to be negligible and overall the significance of impact to be no more than negligible.

Mitigation No mitigation is deemed to be required.

Impacts on breeding Golden Plover. The surveys were to establish whether the application would have an adverse effect on the integrity of the qualifying species (i.e. golden plover) for the South Pennines Moor SPA. In three months VP survey effort (78hrs) between May and August, 12 flights of single golden plover were recorded over site. These were all above CRM height and involved birds going to feeding grounds well off site from the SPA or vice versa. The magnitude of impact is considered to be negligible and overall the significance of impact to be no more than negligible.

Mitigation No mitigation is deemed to be required.

Impacts on Water Vole No signs of water vole were recorded.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Mitigation No mitigation is deemed to be required. Impacts on Badger No signs of badger were recorded.

Mitigation No mitigation is deemed to be required.

Impacts on Otters No signs of otter were recorded.

Mitigation No mitigation is deemed to be required.

Impacts on Bats Small numbers of common pipistrelle and probable Natterers bat were recorded. The bats were recorded commuting towards Swinden Reservoirs following a stone wall in the west of the site well away from turbine locations. The SM2s recorded very small numbers of common pipistrelles bats commuting across open areas of the site. No roosts are present on site. No trees or buildings are to be removed for construction and therefore no significant impact on bats is expected from the turbines. The proposed location of the wind turbines has been assessed against Natural England guidance regarding wind turbines and bats (Natural England, 2012).

Mitigation That the turbines are placed more than 50m from tip to hedgerows or tree lines in accordance with Natural England design guidance.

6.9 Summary of Impacts This assessment sought to identify all species and habitats on or near the Site that are protected under European and national legislation or which appear on national or local biodiversity action plans.

Survey work was completed across the Site and the immediately surrounding area, following best practice and industry guidance to identify the species and habitats present.

A comprehensive desktop study was carried out.

Following the criteria set out in Tables 6.1, 6.2 & 6.3 the following table is an assessment of the impacts on flora and fauna at Delf Hill due to the proposed construction of three turbines.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Table 6.9 – Summary of Impacts

Residual Effects Value of Magnitude Duration Nature Significance receptor of change Loss of foraging or Parish (Local) Low Short term Negative Not significant breeding habitat to badgers. Loss of foraging or Parish (Local) Low Short term Negative Not significant breeding habitat to golden plover. Loss of foraging or Parish (Local) Low Short term Negative Not significant breeding habitat to otter. Loss of foraging or Parish (Local) Low Short term Negative Not significant breeding habitat to water vole. Loss of foraging or Parish (Local) Low Short term Negative Not significant roosting habitat to bats Bat mortality due to Parish (Local) Low Short term Negative Not significant turbine collisions Bird mortality due to Parish (Local) Low Short term Negative Not significant turbine collisions Loss of habitat to Parish (Local) Low Short term Negative Not significant breeding birds Loss of habitat to Parish (Local) Low Short term Negative Not significant wintering birds Loss of Parish (Local) Low Short term Negative Not significant habitat/vegetation South Pennines SPA International Negligible Short term Negative Not significant

No golden plover, merlin, short-eared owl or any Schedule 1 raptors breed on site. Golden plover stage in small numbers in early spring to the northwest of the site. Intensive VP work showed that neither migrant nor breeding golden plover were at collision risk from the proposed turbines. The vegetation types found in this survey are typical of those found more widely in upland and upland fringe areas in northern England. No trees or hedgerows are to be removed. The habitat in the centre of the site near proposed turbine locations is highly degraded through quarrying activities, off road trial biking and 4 x4 driving and clay pigeon shooting. It is considered highly unlikely that the Development will have any long-term impact on the integrity of the area’s ornithological features or the conservation status of the species found here. There are no notable uncertainties or limitations with the data collection. The survey timings were all optimal.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

It is considered that the integrity of qualifying species and habitats for designated sites (SPA, SAC) within the specified distances as recommended by SNH would not be impacted upon.

6.10 Conclusion It is proposed to construct three wind turbines and associated infrastructure on an area of degraded quarry land situated at Delf Hill, Briercliffe, Burnley. A range of ecological assessments have been undertaken to investigate the ornithological and other ecological interest of the site and it is concluded that potential for this to be adversely affected by the current proposal is extremely unlikely.

6.11 References

1. National Biodiversity Gateway Database: http://data.nbn.org.uk/ 2. J. A. Bright et.al. 2006. Bird Sensitivity Map to provide locational guidance for onshore wind farms in Scotland. RSPB Research Report No 20. http://www.rspb.org.uk/Images/sensitivitymapreport_tcm9-157990.pdf 3. http://www.naturalengland.org.ukhttp:// 4. www.lancspartners.org/lern/index.asp 5. Multi Agency Geographic Information for The Countryside: http://www.magic.gov.uk/website/magic/ 6. Calladine, J., Garner, G., Wernham, C. & Thiel, A. (2009) The influence of survey frequency on population estimates of moorland breeding birds. Bird Study, 56: 3, 381-388. 7. Eaton, M.A. et al. 2009. Birds of Conservation Concern 3: the population status of birds in the United Kingdom, Channel Islands and Isle of Man. British Birds 102:296- 341. 8. Harris, S., Cresswell, P. & Jefferies, D. 1989. Surveying for badgers. Occasional Publication of the Mammal Society No. 9. Mammal Society, Bristol. 9. http://www.badger.org.uk/Content/Home.asp 10. Cresswell, P., Harris, S. and Jefferies, D.J. (1990). The History, Distribution, Status and Habitat Requirements of the Badger in Britain. Nature Conservancy Council, Peterborough. 11. Macdonald. D.W., Mace, G. & Rushton, S. 1998. Proposals for future monitoring of British mammals. Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions, and Joint Nature Conservation Committee, London. 12. National Rivers Authority 1993. Otters and river habitat management. Conservation Technical Handbook 3 (subsequently reissued by the Environment Agency) 13. JNCC 2004. Common Standards Monitoring Guidance for Mammals. ISSN 1743-8160. 14. Chanin P. (2003) Ecology of the European Otter. Conserving Natura 2000 Rivers Ecology Series No.10 English Nature, Peterborough

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

15. Liles G. (2003) Otter Breeding Sites. Conservation and Management. Conserving Natura 2000 Rivers Conservation Technical Series No.5 English Nature, Peterborough. 16. Strachan, R. 2011.Water Vole Conservation Handbook EA/EN/WildCRU, Oxford. (3rd edition) 17. Bat Conservation Trust (2007). Bat Surveys – Good Practice Guidelines. Bat Conservation Trust, London. 18. Natural England Technical Information Note TIN051. (2009) Bats and onshore wind turbines: Interim Guidance. 19. Joint Nature Conservation Council (1988) Handbook for Phase 1 Habitat Survey

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

7 Landscape and Visual Impact

7.1 Introduction A Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA), which incorporates a Cumulative LVIA, has been undertaken for this project in accordance with the relevant EIA Regulations. This section reports on the potential landscape and visual effects of the proposed Delf Hill Wind Cluster. The proposed development comprises three wind turbines of up to 126m to blade tip, located in moorland to the west of Burnley at Extwistle Moor. The development will be situated in a landscape that is already modified by the quarrying activities on the western slopes of Delf Hill.

The aim of the design and assessment process is to promote the best “environmental fit” for the development through consideration of the existing landscape resource, the potential landscape and visual effects and design alternatives. The assessment process refers to landscape value, and in particular landscape designations and related planning policy, as well as landscape character and the capacity for a wind development at this site.

This chapter is supported by the separate A3 Landscape Figures document.

7.2 Guidance The methodology for the landscape and visual impact assessment (LVIA) and the cumulative landscape and visual assessment (CLVIA) has been undertaken in accordance with the methodology set out below and conforms with The Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment, Third Edition (Landscape Institute and IEMA, 2013).

Additional guidance has been taken from the following publications:

Making Space for Renewable Energy: Assessing On-shore Wind Energy Development, Natural England, 2010;

A Landscape Strategy for Lancashire: Landscape Character Assessment, Lancashire County Council & The Countryside Agency, 2000;

Landscape Capacity Study for Wind Energy Developments in the South Pennines, Julie Martin Associates, 2010;

Landscape Character Assessment: Guidance for England and Scotland (Countryside Agency and Scottish Natural Heritage publication, produced by the University of Sheffield and Landuse Consultants), 2002; Photography and Photomontage in Landscape and Visual Assessment, Landscape Institute Advice Note 01/2011, 2011;

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Visual Representation of Windfarms Good Practice Guidance, prepared by Horner + Maclennan and Envision for Scottish Natural Heritage, The Scottish Renewables Forum and the Scottish Society of Directors of Planning, February 2007;

Siting and Designing Windfarms in the Landscape, Scottish Natural Heritage, Version 1, December 2009;

7.3 Assessment Methodology Defining the Study Area An overall Study Area of 35km radius from the site centre has been established following consultation with Burnley Borough Council. The study area was further defined for each part of the assessment process as follows:

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) – the study area was restricted to the application site, access routes, and the potential Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) from where there may be a view of the development at up to 35km distance from the site centre. The main focus of the assessment is on the area within 15km, as this is the area most likely to experience significant effects as a result of the proposed development. This emphasis has been informed with reference to the findings of field survey and viewpoint analysis, as well as professional experience from previous assessments;

Cumulative Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (CLVIA) - considered existing wind energy development proposals that have permissions, and those that are currently the subject of undetermined applications within a Search Area of 60km radius of the site centre. An initial assessment of the cumulative visibility of these windfarms within the Cumulative Search Area was then undertaken in order to determine which windfarms have the potential to contribute to a significant cumulative effect following addition of the Delf Hill Wind Cluster proposal. Many of these developments were scoped out of the assessment at this stage due to the lack of combined visibility or long distance from the proposed site such that they would not contribute to significant cumulative effects. The detailed assessment, therefore, focuses on those sites with potential for significant cumulative effects in combination with Delf Hill Wind Cluster. These windfarms are considered to be those within a 30km radius Study Area as mapped at Figure 7.6a; and

A Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) was calculated using the ReSoft © Wind Farm computer software to produce areas of potential visibility of any part of the proposed wind turbines calculated to blade tip and hub-height. The ZTV however, does not take account of built development and vegetation, which can significantly reduce the area and extent of actual visibility in the field and as such provides the limits of the visual assessment study area.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Figure 7.5 illustrates the ZTV for hub height of 85m at 1:200,000 scale, Figure 7.6 illustrates the ZTV to a tip height of 126m at this scale, while Figure 7.7 illustrates the ZTV quadrants to blade tip at a more detailed scale.

Baseline Landscape and Visual Resource This part of the LVIA refers to the existing landscape character, quality or condition and value of the landscape and landscape elements on the site and within the surrounding area, as well as general trends in landscape change across the study area. A brief description of the existing landscape character and land use of the area which includes reference to settlements, transport routes, vegetation cover, as well as landscape planning designations, local landmarks, and tourist destinations.

Assessing Landscape Effects Landscape Effects are defined by the Landscape Institute as “changes to landscape elements, characteristics, character, and qualities of the landscape as a result of development”. The potential landscape effects, occurring during the construction and operation period, may therefore include, but are not restricted to, the following:

Changes to landscape elements: the addition of new elements or the removal of trees, vegetation, and buildings and other characteristic elements of the landscape character type; Changes to landscape quality: degradation or erosion of landscape elements and patterns, particularly those that form characteristic elements of landscape character types; Changes to landscape character: landscape character may be affected through the incremental effect on characteristic elements, landscape patterns and qualities and the cumulative addition of new features, the magnitude of which is sufficient to alter the overall landscape character type of a particular area; and Cumulative landscape effects: where more than one wind farm may lead to a potential landscape effect.

The development may have a direct (physical) effect on the landscape as well as an indirect effect or effect perceived from out with the landscape character area. Landscape effects are assessed by considering the sensitivity of the landscape against the degree of change posed by the development. The sensitivity of the landscape to a particular development is based on factors such as its quality and value and is defined as high, medium or low. Examples of landscape sensitivity and criteria are described below:

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

High Sensitivity – This would primarily be rare landscapes, or landscapes which have been afforded either a national or local designation such as National Parks, or Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty. These landscapes can be fairly dramatic in terms of scale and may feature a number of attractive landscape features, including mature woodland, intricate gorges and river valleys, prominent summits of features of cultural heritage. Man-made features or modifications to the landscape will be minimal and the landscape may have a wild or remote feeling to it; Medium Sensitivity – This would include landscapes which are still relatively attractive and generally rural but do contain some man-made elements. It may be landscapes which have been modified to accommodate farming practices and landscapes which include more prominent settlement pattern and road networks. These landscapes may also contain woodland including plantation forestry and shelterbelts; and Low Sensitivity – This would only be reserved for landscapes which may be deemed unattractive due to heavy modification and prominent man-made features, such as industrial units.

The magnitude, or degree of change, considers the scale and extent of the proposed development, which may include the loss or addition of particular features, and changes to landscape quality, and character. Magnitude can be defined as high, medium, low or negligible, examples of magnitude are shown below:

High Magnitude – This would be a major change to baseline conditions, where the character of the landscape may be altered from its existing state into a landscape with windfarms; Medium Magnitude – This would be a noticeable change in the baseline condition but not necessarily one which would be enough to alter the character of the landscape and will generally diminish with distance; Low Magnitude – This would be a minor change to the baseline conditions where the development would be readily missed by a casual viewer and any character of the landscape would remain intact; and Negligible Magnitude – This would be a change which would be difficult to notice and the baseline conditions are likely to remain almost as they were.

The level of effect is determined by the combination of sensitivity and magnitude of change as shown in Table 7.2.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Table 7.2 - Magnitude and Sensitivity Matrix for assessing Overall Level of Effect

Sensitivity Magnitude of Change

High Medium Low Negligible

High Major Major/Moderate Moderate Moderate/Minor

Medium Major/Moderate Moderate Moderate/Minor Minor

Low Moderate Moderate/Minor Minor Minor/Negligible

Key: Significant in terms of the EIA Regulations

Not Significant

Assessing Visual Effects Visual effects are recognised by the Landscape Institute as a subset of landscape effects and are concerned wholly with the effect of the development on views, and the general visual amenity. The visual effects are identified for different receptors (people) who will experience the view at their places of residence, during recreational activities, at work, or when travelling through the area. These may include:

Visual effect: a change to an existing view, views or wider visual amenity as a result of development or the loss of particular landscape elements or features already present in the view; and Cumulative visual effects: the cumulative or incremental visibility of similar types of development may combine to have a cumulative visual effect. Either: - Simultaneously - where a number of developments may be viewed from a single fixed viewpoint simultaneously within the viewer’s field of view without moving; - Successively - where a number of developments may be viewed from a single viewpoint successively by turning around at a viewpoint, to view in other directions; and - Sequentially - where a number of developments may be viewed sequentially or repeatedly from a range of locations when travelling along a route.

The general principles adopted for the assessment of visual effects were taken from The Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment Third Edition, produced by the Landscape Institute, 2013. This guidance outlines the approach to define a ‘sensitivity’ for a given view and a ‘magnitude of change’ that would be caused by the development in question over its lifetime. A matrix in the Guidance is then used to assess the overall ‘level of effect’. This matrix is the same format as used to understand landscape effects and can be seen in Table 7.2. Examples of visual sensitivity are highlighted below:

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

High Sensitivity – These include residential receptors, such as views from individual properties or views from within settlements. Views from both recreational locations, such as hill summits, long distance footpaths, cycle paths and tourist locations such as castles and visitor centres are also considered to be of high sensitivity; Medium Sensitivity – This would include most other visual receptors such as views from roads, other areas of landscape which would not be classed as recreational areas and views from areas within settlements which would not be considered residential; and Low Sensitivity – This would cover views experienced by people at work and views where the existing view is already dominated by significant man-made features.

In the context of this project, the effects during operation are always direct and long term (reversible after 25 years). Effects may also be non-cumulative or cumulative. None of the visual effects relating to this project have been considered positive in order to present a worst case view of any effects, although it should be noted that surveys have consistently shown that the majority of people are positively disposed to wind development once it is built.

Viewpoint Analysis Method Viewpoint analysis is used to assist the LVIA from selected viewpoints within the study area. The purpose of this is to assess both the level of visual impact for particular receptors and to help guide the assessment of the overall effect on visual amenity and landscape character. The assessment involves visiting the viewpoint location in good weather and viewing wireframes and photomontages prepared for each viewpoint location. Illustrated turbines always face the viewer to give a worst case impression of the development under consideration. The viewpoints, where available have been selected to meet the following criteria:

A balance of viewpoints to the north, south, east and west; A range of near middle and distance views of the development; A proportion representing areas known locally where people use the landscape, such as prominent hill tops or footpaths; and A proportion representing designated areas.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

A wide range of viewpoints have been studied as part of this assessment and 14 viewpoints have been illustrated with photomontages to assist the assessment for the proposed development.

Methodology for Production of Visualisations With the view selected, the locations were confirmed and then photographed with a digital Single Lens Reflex (SLR) camera set to produce photographs equivalent to that of a manual 35 mm SLR camera with a fixed 50 mm focal length lens. In accordance with the SNH guidance Visual Representation of Windfarms Good Practice Guidance, panoramic images were produced from these photographs to record a 76 angle of view illustrating the typical extent of view that would be experienced by the viewer at the viewpoint when facing in one direction and also provides an indication of the visual context of the proposed development. The wider 360 of each view were also taken into account, particularly for the hill summit viewpoints.

Each view was illustrated using a panoramic photograph, a wireline and, in some cases, a photomontage. Wirelines and photomontages were produced using Resoft© WindFarm software and utilising 50m² Ordnance Survey Digital Terrain Mapping (DTM) height data covering the study area.

Visual Assessment of Settlements and Residential Properties All settlements within the study area have been assessed with regards to the level of visual impact the development will have on them. The sensitivity for each of the settlements is considered to be high in accordance with Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment, 2013.

An assessment of the visual amenity of residential properties closest to the wind cluster (within 10 times of the turbine height) was undertaken. Individual residential properties have been assessed from public roads and footpaths within the area and the assessment represents a ‘best estimate’ of the likely visual effects. In line with the guidance from the Landscape Institute3, the views from upper floor windows are considered as of lesser importance, but the garden and public areas are included as well as the visual context in which views are experienced. In addition to this all settlements within the study area have been assessed and level of effect noted.

3 Paragraph 7.30 page 90 in ‘Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment. Second Edition.’ Landscape Institute and Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment. March 2002.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Visual Assessment of Main Transport Routes A route assessment has been undertaken which explores the visual impact of the development on views experienced by road users along major transport routes in the area and assumes that the viewer would be travelling at speed. It also includes assessment of any National Cycle Routes, Long Distance Footpaths and locally valued footpaths which fall within the study area. This part of the assessment has been considered cumulatively along with all other wind energy development within the study area.

Cumulative Landscape and Visual Assessment In addition to the Landscape Institute methodology for LVIA, the cumulative landscape and visual assessment (CLVIA) has considered the emerging guidance from Scottish Natural Heritage’s Assessing the Cumulative Impact of Onshore Wind Energy Developments, Scottish Natural Heritage, March 2012. Although produced for Scotland, the findings and techniques are relevant in all areas. The CLVIA is however, not a substitute for individual wind farm landscape and visual impact assessment.

Predicting Cumulative Landscape Effects The assessment considers the extent to which the proposed development, in combination with others, may change landscape character through either incremental effect on characteristic elements, landscape patterns and quality, or by the overall cumulative addition of new features. Identified cumulative landscape effects are described in relation to each individual Landscape Character Area and for any designated landscape areas that exist within the study area.

Predicting Cumulative Visual Effects The assessment of cumulative visual effects involves reference to the cumulative visibility ZTV maps and the cumulative viewpoint analysis. Cumulative visibility maps are analysed to identify the residential and recreational locations and travel routes where cumulative visual effects on receptors (people) may occur as a result of the proposed development.

With potential receptor locations identified, cumulative effects on individual receptor groups are then explored through viewpoint analysis, which involves site visits informed by wireline illustrations that include other wind cluster developments. Travel routes are driven to assess the visibility of different wind cluster developments and inform the assessment of sequential cumulative effects that may occur along a route or journey.

Cumulative Viewpoint Analysis Each viewpoint has been assessed cumulatively in order to understand whether or not the proposed development introduces a cumulative impact on the view from that location. All visible operational, consented and undetermined planning application wind energy projects are considered along with the Delf Hill development and a level of cumulative magnitude is

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

assigned. The level and significance of cumulative visual effects is determined in the same manner as the main LVIA, using the previous matrix shown in Table 7.2.

7.4 Consultation and Scope Comments from Natural England (NE), Burnley Borough Council, English Heritage (EH) and other consultees were taken into account when undertaking the LVIA.

Summary of Scope Consultation has been undertaken with statutory consultees through a ‘scoping opinion’. Further consultation was conducted with representatives from Burnley Borough Council and Natural England to discuss and agree the scope of the LVIA, choice of assessment viewpoints, design options, and mitigation.

The scope of the assessment has been established on the basis of professional judgment and through the consultation process and is set out in Table 7.2.

Table 7.2 - Scope of the Landscape and Visual Assessment

Landscape Issues Description

Landscape Character The effects of the proposed development on the landscape character and quality of the site area, as defined by the Lancashire Landscape Character Assessment and site survey.

Landscape Elements Direct or physical effects on landscape elements.

Landscape Designations Views from the National Parks, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, Registered Parks and Gardens as well as views from other areas of landscape character as perceived by people

Visual Issues Description

Local Community Views from the local community, particularly from residential properties near the site and from local settlements which lie within the ZTV. Views from roads and popular tourist / walker destinations and hilltops will also be taken into consideration.

Tourist Destinations Views from popular outdoor tourist destinations which entail an appreciation of the landscape tourist destinations, and the setting of features and the visitor experience.

Major Transport Routes Transport routes including the M65 as well as any popular walking routes in the area.

Cumulative Issues Description

Cumulative Assessment The cumulative assessment includes viewpoint assessment within the Study Area where simultaneous and/or successive views of more than one wind energy development may be achieved, and sequential cumulative assessment, where more than one wind energy development may be viewed along transport routes (simultaneous or successive).

Viewpoint Selection

Viewpoints were identified as part of the scoping exercise and were selected to represent a number of different visual receptors and different locations in the landscape. The selected

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

viewpoints offer views from near, middle and distant locations as well as views from the north, south, east and west. Table7.3 below provides a summary of the viewpoint locations and rationale for their selection.

Table 7.3 - Summary of locations selected for Viewpoint Assessment

Viewpoint Reason for Selection Distance

1. Pennine Bridleway Located on the footpath to the south east of the site and representative of the closest views to the south as well as any 1.2km walkers on the Pennine Bridleway.

2. Worsthorne Located on the northern edge of the settlement and 1.7km representative of views from Worsthorne to the south west.

3. Ridehalgh Lane Located on Ridehalgh Lane which runs through the Thursden Valley, to the north of the proposed development. The view is 1.3km representative of views experienced by residents of Thursden.

4. Thursden Picnic Area Located at a picnic area and car park above the Thursden Valley. The view is representative of both residents of the area and 1.5km recreational users such as walkers and horse riders.

5. Haggate Located on a minor road on the eastern edge of the settlement of Haggate, adjacent to the graveyard. The view is 2.7km representative of views experienced by both road users and residents.

6. Boulsworth Hill Located near the summit of Boulsworth Hill to the north east of the proposed development. The view is representative of views 2.4km experienced by walkers in the area.

7. Red Lees Road Located on Red Lees Road, as it enters Burnley on the south east side of the settlement. The view is representative of views 3.1km experienced by residents of Burnley and road users.

8. Straight Mile Canal Located on the footpath that runs along the side of the Straight Mile Canal as it passes through Burnley. The view is 5.3km representative of views experienced by residents and walkers.

9. Towneley Hall Located in the car park in front of the hall, the view is 4.6km representative of visitors to the popular local attraction.

10. Limestone Trail Located on the footpath that forms part of the Limestone rail and is representative of views to the south, located at a scenic 4.3km viewpoint and on part of a National Cycle Route.

11. A671 layby at Easden Located at a scenic viewpoint on the A671 just to the east of the Singing Ringing Tree. The view is representative of that 5.7km experienced by both visitors to the sculpture and road users.

12. Nick of Pendle Located on a minor road which passes over the south western 13.1km side of Pendle Hill. Viewpoint is representative of road users.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Viewpoint Reason for Selection Distance

13. Mellor Located on a minor road which passes through the settlement of Mellor to the north of Blackburn, this road is also a National 22.3km Cycle Route. The view is representative of views experienced by residents, road users and cyclists.

14. Longridge Fell Located at the scenic viewpoint on the minor road which passes along the fell and represents views from within the Forest of 22.7km Bowland AONB, road users and visitors to the scenic viewpoint.

15. Malham Cove Located at the top of the cove by the limestone pavement. The 30.0km viewpoint represents visitors to the popular attraction.

16. Pendle Hill Located at the summit of Pendle Hill and representative of views from within the Forest of Bowland AONB and walkers on Pendle 12.0km Hill, located to the north west.

LVIA Study Area An overall Study Area of 35km radius from the proposed turbine has been established following consultation with Burnley Borough Council. This study area is illustrated in Figure 7.1. In addition to this a 60km study area was agreed for the cumulative assessment where initially all other wind energy development within this area were considered. The majority of other developments are situated to the south of the site. The detailed assessment focuses on these sites which have the potential for significant cumulative effects in combination with the Delf Hill development. These projects are listed below in Table 7.4.

Cumulative Assessment The list of other wind energy development sites to be included in the assessment has been confirmed with Burnley Borough Council and compiled from known wind energy development planning applications and formal requests for scoping opinions held by the various planning authorities.

All wind energy developments included or referred to in this assessment out to 60km are illustrated on a plan in Figure 7.8, and listed below in Table 7.4, are the key projects which are likely to have some level of cumulative impact with Delf Hill, potential appearing simultaneously of successively in views.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Table 7.4 - Summary of key projects within 60km Cumulative Study Area

Scale of Project (Single turbine, Distance to Project Development Name Cluster or Windfarm) (approx. in km)

Operational Projects Coal Clough Windfarm ~5km Hameldon Hill Wind Cluster ~8km Scout Moor Windfarm ~16km Hyndburn Windfarm ~17km Consented Projects Higher Micklehurst Single Turbine ~7km Hameldon Hill Extension Wind Cluster ~8km Todmorden Moor Windfarm ~8km Reaps Moss Windfarm ~11km Gorpley Windfarm ~12km Crook Hill Windfarm ~13km Rooley Moor Windfarm ~14km Ovenden Moor Windfarm ~14km Projects in Planning Shuttleworth Hall Single Turbine ~16km Swales Moor Single Turbine ~20km Englands Head Single Turbine ~21km Graincliffe Single Turbine ~23km

7.5 Landscape Design Considerations

Project Description The Delf Hill Wind Cluster would include the construction of three turbines in the Moorland Fringe landscape on the eastern side of Burnley. The turbines would be 85m in height to hub and 126m to blade tip.

Landscape Capacity The Landscape Capacity Study for Wind Energy Developments in the South Pennines identifies different sections of the landscape and gives guidance on the opportunities within each. The site location lies within Area 5, which is described as follows:

“Locally on the north-western edges of this area, the moorland fringes may also have some limited capacity for wind energy development. Landscape sensitivity here is lower in this area than in other parts of the moorland fringe as the landscape has already been affected by influences such as quarrying, transmission lines and urban fringe land uses. The relatively gentle, rounded slopes east of Burnley may offer the best opportunity for a small group of turbines or a small windfarm on a mid-slope location similar to that of Hameldon

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Hill wind farm; areas south of this have less capacity as they are too close to other existing or consented wind energy development”.

The Delf Hill site lies within the north western corner of this Area 5 and on the edge of the Moorland Fringe Landscape Character Type. This would be one of the areas of lower sensitivity due to the quarrying activity which has taken place and the presence of electricity pylons. The turbines would be located on these rounded slopes east of Burnley and the development would include three turbines in a similar fashion to the development at Hameldon Hill and using turbines in the same large (90m-130m) typology.

The site would offer a suitable gap between this scheme and the other operational and consented schemes in the area which should limit any significant cumulative impacts that may be caused by Delf Hill.

Design Objectives Although produced for Scotland SNH’s guidance ‘Siting and Designing Windfarms in the Landscape’ was the most relevant guidance for windfarm design and has been used to inform the layout and design of the scheme and the final development will be in accordance with its key principles, layout out below.

Scale - turbine size and number of turbines has been chosen to ‘fit’ with the scale of the landscape and not diminish the scale and setting of the adjacent dale. The three turbine layout will have a similar appearance within the landscape as the three turbine scheme at Hameldon Hill and this was a key factor in the design. Using three turbines of the ‘large’ typology would create a balance and familiar effect; Skylines – smaller turbines were considered, however in order to create a viable project between 6 and 8 turbines were required which had a much greater impact on the horizon. Using fewer larger turbines would keep the horizontal impact on the horizon to a minimum and still be in scale with the surrounding topography; and Aesthetics - the layout appears balanced and simple with regular spacing and limited overlapping. The development mimics the layout of the Hameldon Hill scheme creating a linear layout which runs along the side of the Moorland Fringe. When viewed from most angles the scheme is visible as an even linear scheme in a similar pattern to Hameldon Hill.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Layout Design The proposed, broad location has been chosen as it is considered to represent the best compromise between technical and environmental considerations. The design in terms of layout composition and turbine height was developed to minimise the visual impact of the development and create a scheme which was appropriate and logical to the surrounding topography.

A number of different layouts and turbine numbers were considered as part of the design process, ranging from three to eight turbines. The design evolution of the scheme is set out in Section 5. The presence of a number of archaeological features to the north of the site limited development in this area and using smaller turbines required a greater number, which would in turn affect a greater proportion of the horizon.

The impact on the Thursden Valley to the north was also a consideration and it was decided that the turbines should be kept to the south of the summit as not only would this keep them away from the archaeological features near the summit but would also minimise the visual impact on the Thursden Valley. Turbines located just over the summit to the south would benefit from topographical screening and minimise the vertical scale of the turbines. The turbines would have the appearance of rising from behind the horizon as opposed to sitting on the horizon above the valley. This creates visual separation, allowing the viewer to have the perception that the turbines are not part of Thursden Valley but in an adjacent landscape.

Turbine Selection The LVIA has been assessed on the basis of turbines up to a maximum height of 126m. This was chosen to fit with the surrounding topography in terms of vertical scale. Other likely design considerations include the following:

A modern turbine will be used that has a simple and balanced appearance with three blades and tapered, non-lattice towers; The turbines will be semi-matt and pale grey in colour to reduce its contrast with the background sky under most weather conditions; and The transformers will be located within the turbine tower.

For a full description and details of the scheme and all its components see Section 2.4.

7.6 Construction Activities Temporary landscape and visual effects would occur during the construction period, and would result from the visibility of construction activity, use of lay down areas, and site compounds. The landscape and visual effects would be of a low to negligible magnitude of change and not significant. The lay down area and compound would be located in the

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

moorland adjacent to the proposed turbine location. During the construction period the landscape and visual effects would be significant due to the movement and contrast of workers and machinery in this area. These effects would be temporary and fully restored on completion, however when evident they would not constitute a great deal of difference to the quarrying activities which have taken place on the hill side in the recent past.

All disturbed areas resulting from the construction (around turbine bases, access tracks and on site compounds and lay-down areas) will be restored upon completion of the construction period. Specific mitigation measures necessary during construction would include:

Colour and finish of substation/control building to be agree with Burnley Borough Council prior to construction; Land clearance and occupation will be limited to the minimum necessary for the works; Vegetation removal will be minimised as far as possible; and Valued features, such as dry stone walls, woodland, historic features and field boundaries will be protected and fencing will be used to keep contractors out of areas where damage could result.

Decommissioning All of the visible, above ground structures (turbines, transformers, substation and grid connection) will be removed upon decommissioning, thus rendering the landscape and visual effects of the development as reversible. There would therefore, be no landscape and visual effects remaining after decommissioning.

7.7 Landscape and Visual Baseline

Information on the existing landscape and visual resource has been collected by reference to Local Plans, OS maps and relevant literature, including the Character Assessment for Lancashire County Council as well as information gathered from field surveys.

Broad Landscape Context The study area for the proposed development (Figure 7.1) is located within the Lancashire Landscape Character Assessment. The Lancashire area covers the entire county of Lancashire from the dales in the south east to the coastal areas in the west. This is a highly varied landscape which includes remote areas of moorland as well as highly modified sections of landscape, particularly along the M65 corridor where a number of settlements are located. This can lead to quite a contrast in landscapes with heavily urbanised areas found adjacent to remote moors.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Figure 7.3 illustrates the various landscape characters types, which have been classified by various bodies including Lancashire County Council and Natural England and their consultant landscape architects. It can be seen from Figure 7.3 that the site study area is covered by seven different reports and studies on landscape character; however the primary one is considered to be the Lancashire Landscape Character Assessment as this is where the site is located and were the majority of the impact would be experienced.

The proposed development site is located on the border between two different character areas with the two of the turbines being situated in Moorland Fringe LCT and potentially one turbine within the Moorland Plateaux LCT. These moorland landscapes cover a large portion of the landscape Burnley in the west, Bradford in the east and Manchester in the south.

In addition to these landscapes there are also a number of other landscape character areas that are included within the study area. Table 7.5 summarises all landscape character areas covered by the ZTV that are situated within the study area and are potentially affected by the development.

Table 7.5 - Key Characteristics of Landscape Character Types

Name Key characteristics

Lancashire Landscape Character Assessment

Moorland Hills The rolling Moorland Hills are generally found at lower elevations than the higher Moorland Plateaux. Although grit crags and glacial erratic provide some texture to the smooth profiles, the steep escarpments create distinctive and dramatic landforms which are steeply incised and drained by fast flowing streams. Hillsides allow long views across wide valleys or the surrounding lowlands and landcover is typically blanket bog, heather moorland and acid grasslands.

Enclosed Uplands The distinctive character of these exposed uplands is derived from a long history of settlement and exploitation of the mineral wealth of the moors. A network of gritstone walls encloses virtually the whole of the upland area and the landscape is dotted with a network of small, remote farms. Overall the impression is of a somewhat derelict landscape with rush infested pastures.

Undulating Lowland Generally below 150m AOD, the Undulating Lowland Farmland lies between the major valleys and the Farmland moorland fringes. The underlying geology is largely masked by heavy boulder clays and hedgerows predominate over stone walls. This lowland landscape is traversed by deeply incised, wooded cloughs and gorges. There are also many mixed farm woodlands, copses and hedgerow trees, creating an impression of a well wooded landscape.

Drumlin Field This distinctive landscape type is characterised by a ‘field’ of rolling drumlins. The consistent orientation of the hills gives the landscape a uniform grain, which is sometimes difficult to appreciate from within the field. The regular green hillocks are between about 100m and 200m AOD with steep sides and broad rounded tops.

Farmed Ridges These gritstone outcrops are relatively low in comparison to the Bowland Fells and outliers, their distinctive ridge profiles set them apart from the adjacent lowland agricultural landscapes. Wooded sides, which rise sometimes dramatically from the farmed plains, are visible for miles around and provide a sense of orientation when in the lowlands. The ridges themselves support a mosaic of mixed

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Name Key characteristics

farmland and woodland which provides textural backdrop to the surrounding lowlands.

Rolling Upland The combination of carboniferous mountain limestone and Millstone Grit has created a soft, rolling Farmland pastoral landscape which appears verdant in views to the muted hues of the Moorland Hills. Prominent knolls and limestone outcrops on the exposed hill slopes provide a sharp contrast to the gentler rolling form of grazed hills. Moorland grasses cover the higher summits and there are stunted hawthorns and gorse on roadsides and the steeper hillsides.

Industrial Foothills and The Industrial Foothills and Valleys are a complex transitional landscape of relatively small scale with Valleys intensive settlement. The area has a more gentle landform and varied vegetation over than that of the nearby higher ground. Trees thrive around farmsteads, along stone wall boundaries and in small and mediums sized woodlands.

North Yorkshire Landscape Character Assessment

Limestone Moors This landscape has a distinctive pattern of limestone scar and pavements with panoramic views across the southern Farmed Dales. Views are often dominated by the three peaks of Ingleborough, Whernside and Pen-y-ghent, which contribute to strongly recognisable sense of place. It generally has an undeveloped character with an absence of artificial structures, where there are areas of exposed limestone features including cliffs, screes, gorges, pavements and scattered boulders.

Moor Fringe These are gently sloping landscape which forms a transition between higher moors and fells to the west and the lower magnesian limestone ridge to the east. It is predominantly a rural landscape which has an associated relatively strong sense of tranquillity. Reservoirs are key landscape features which sit within a patchwork of arable and pastoral fields which are delineated by stone walls and hedgerows.

Gritstone High Moors & These are a series of pronounced upland hills which support characteristic moorland vegetation Fells including dwarf shrub heather, neutral and acid grassland and blanket bog. It is a strongly rural landscape with an undeveloped character with associated strong sense of tranquillity, where the large scale expansive landscape facilitates extensive open, panoramic views across surrounding lowland landscapes. The landscape displays a range of muted colours and there are generally few signs of human influence.

Gritstone Low Moors & These form a series of rounded low hills which are generally located between 200m and 400m AOD Fells which are characterised by moorland vegetation comprising of dwarf shrub heather on the higher hills, with a mosaic of improved, neutral and calcareous grassland on the lower slopes. There is sparse settlement pattern and a predominantly rural character, with associated sense of tranquillity and dark night skies. Occasional minor roads cross the landscape.

South Pennines Landscape Character Assessment

High Moorland Plateaux This landscape lies mainly between 300 and 500m AOD and is of a large vertical scale, forming a sweeping landform with high ridges and deeply incised valleys. Landcover tends to be blanket bog, heather moorland and areas of grassland. Woodland is fairly limited, particularly on the upper slopes. It is an undeveloped landscape which is characteristically open and in contrast to the adjacent valleys.

Moorland Fringe The enclosed landscapes of the moorland fringes are relatively small in scale and are transitional landscapes contained uphill by the high moorland plateaux and downhill by the settled valleys and rural fringes. The land is almost entirely grazed pasture, with the lower gentler slopes comprising of older enclosures distinguished by their small size and irregular patterns, while the higher slopes tend to have larger and more regular fields.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Land use and Landscape Change This area of Lancashire is dominated by the rounded moorland hills which surround the narrow dales where the most development occurs. The dales are home to a number of sizeable settlements, transport corridors and industry and of a real contrast to the more exposed and rural moorlands which surround them.

Moorland Fringe Landscape Character Type The site is located within the Moorland Fringe Landscape Character, which forms a transitional landscape between the lower valleys and the higher moorland within the Lancashire Landscape Character Assessment and is described below:

”The fringes of moorland areas are transitional enclosed landscapes between the inhospitable moorland fells and the more intensively farmed land of the lowlands. They occur, generally above the 200m contour, throughout the study area and are characterised by a rolling landscape of marginal pastures divided by stone walls which reflect the underlying geology. Sheep grazing forms the predominant land use of these fringe areas which have often been improved either from semi- natural acidic, neutral or wet grassland. There is a great diversity of landform, colour and texture. Tree cover is sparse in these landscapes although trees are usually associated with farmsteads and gorse is common along the roadsides. Isolated stone farmsteads are often prominent on the steep slopes and are reached by dead-end lanes. There are also terraces of weavers’ and other workers cottages and sparse linear settlements, particularly along the winding roads towards the foot of the slopes. There is good preservation of archaeological sites in these marginal locations as a result of the non intensive agricultural practices adopted.

The narrow moorland fringe of the western escarpment of the South Pennine ridge is a relatively narrow band of small-medium sized fields enclosed by gritstone walls and supplemented by post and wire fences. The grassland is generally improved, but some acid grassland remains in places. Shallow valley cloughs, containing remnants of semi-natural woodland, feed into the Calder. Many of these valley heads have been dammed to create small reservoirs at the junction with the moorland. There are also a number of small quarries which now support rich wildlife habitats. The settlement pattern is of scattered isolated local stone farmsteads. There are a number of parking and picnic places which have encouraged visitors; rubbish and fly-tipping indicate proximity to large centres of urban population. The wind farm at Coal Clough is a dramatic landscape feature on the edge of the moorland plateaux.”

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Moorland Plateaux Landscape Character Type Immediately to the east of the site is the Moorland Plateaux Landscape Character which forms a much larger scale landscape with less man-made influence than the Moorland Fringe. It forms part of the Lancashire Landscape Character Assessment and is described below:

“The high, Moorland Plateaux are the most remote and exposed landscape type in Lancashire. They are generally characterised by a level or gently rolling landform although they may include steep high level escarpments, and are found at elevations between 300m and 600m. Landcover is predominantly blanket bog, and trees are generally absent. Rock outcrops occur in some areas and some moorland summits are strewn with gritstone boulders. Soils are poor and a vegetation cover of dwarf shrub heath, purple moor grass and/or cottongrass is typical of these acid moorlands. Localised erosion of the soils has exposed the underlying rocks and gravels giving rise to crags and peat hags. The plateaux have a sense of elevation and openness, with uninterrupted views across vast areas of surrounding countryside. The open landscape also creates a sense of wildness, remoteness and space, which is further strengthened by the enormity and dominance of sky in these large scale landscapes. Colours tend to be muted, although in autumn heather moorland provides vivid expanses of colour.

The South Pennine Moors forms a long high plateaux. The Moorland Plateaux landscape type occurs as the fragmented moors at Scout Moor and Heald Moor as well as the vast expanse of high uninhabited moorland around Worsthorne Moor and Boulsworth Hill in the north. This large scale sweeping exposed landscape contrasts dramatically with the surrounding urban areas and intersecting industrial valleys which lie close below. Boulsworth Hill is characterised by a steep high level scarp slope. The proximity of the urban areas has affected the landscape of this character area and resource exploitation is visible in the form of electricity pylons, wind turbines, reservoirs and mineral extraction sites which appear as quarry scars on the edges of the plateaux. Disused quarries are a feature of this area and are important for specialised plant communities and species such as bats and peregrines. The strong skyline ridges and expansive views instil a sense of remoteness and isolation which has been a source of inspiration for writers such as the Bronte sisters. The concentration of later prehistoric and Romano British remains are important evidence of exploitation and settlement of these areas.”

Local Landscape Character The local landscape is formed by the summit at Delf Hill which is an indistinct peak on the edge of Extwistle Moor. The summit is not well defined and is generally plateau-like in

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

nature with an expansive area of moorland around the summit. It sits on the shoulder of Extwistle Moor formed by the narrow valleys at Swinden Water to the south, culminating in Swinden Reservoir and Thursden Valley to the north. This creates a rounded and often close horizon which provides a backdrop to these valleys and the Burnley area in general. Landcover tends to be grassland moorland which appears uniform in texture and colour with little or no woodland. The quarry on the southern side of Delf Hill and the reservoir are distinctly man-made alterations to the landscape which lower the quality and sensitivity of the area. Farmsteads and a network of roads are dotted across the lower slopes of the moorland, with the Bronte Way and Pennine Bridleway footpaths also cutting across the moorland. The landscape tends to be of a medium scale and provides a natural transition area between the urbanised area around Burnley and the large scale moorland to the east. Dry stone walls are common features proving field enclosure.

Landscape Elements and Features Landscape elements are the component parts of the landscape, such as trees, woodland and lakes that combine to form areas of landscape character. Often these characteristic elements may be distinctive to a particular regional area of landscape character or a more localised area of landscape character type. The main elements of landscape character across the area include dry stone walls, the quarry, electricity pylons and a number of farms.

Broad Visual Context The visual character of the landscape is influenced primarily by the intersecting moorlands and dales. When lower in the valleys, visibility is restricted and views tend to be inwardly focused. The moorlands to the east provide a backdrop to most views and limit any long range visibility in this direction. Views from higher slopes are concentrated down into the valleys or across to the moorland opposite at Worsthorne Moor, Coal Clough, Hameldon Hill and Deerplay Moor. Looking across the lower landscape the concentration of urban features is prominent in views with the settlements of Burnley, Padiham and Brierfield prominent, behind which distant views to Pendle Hill are common.

Weather conditions Changing weather patterns and local climatic conditions will influence the visibility of the wind cluster in terms of the extent of view, the colour and contrast of the turbines and the number of turbines visible and thus the perceived visual impact. There will be periods of low visibility (fog, low cloud, and bright sunny conditions that are accompanied by haze generated by temperature inversions) as well as periods of high visibility in clear weather. In some instances and from some locations the wind cluster may be ‘back-lit’ (e.g. appearing darker in colour during sunset/sunrise and periods of pale or white blanket cloud) and in other circumstances may appear to be ‘up-lit’ (e.g. during stormy periods that combine dark clouds and bright sunshine).

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Landscape Planning Designations The study area for the proposed development as shown in Figure 7.1 is covered by a number of council areas, with the site itself being within Burnley Borough Council area. The local development plans contain a number of policies which seek to protect landscape resources. The site itself is not located within any designated landscape; however there are other landscapes within the study area which are designated. The key landscape planning designations are illustrated in Figure 7.4.

Landscape planning designations and policies are considered in the determination of the sensitivity of landscape receptors as they provide an indication of value ascribed to the landscape resource.

Those designated landscapes that overlap the ZTV (and may potentially have views of the proposed development) have been considered as part of this assessment and are listed in Table 7.6. Other planning policies and designated landscapes out with the ZTV have been excluded from this study.

Table 7.6 - Landscape Planning Designations

Designation Description

National Parks The Yorkshire Dales National Park is located to the north of the proposed development and is one of the most well-known and popular regions in the north of England. The designation covers a large section of North Yorkshire and parts of Cumbria, as well as the northern section of the study area. The area is designated as a National Park due to its scenic qualities, range of wildlife habitats and rich cultural heritage. The designation is situated ~20km distance from the nearest turbine.

The Peak District National Park is located to the south east of the proposed development and covers a large section of landscape to the east of Manchester. The area is designated as a National Park as it provides a natural rolling landscape which contrasts to the many urban areas nearby as well as containing high levels of scenic quality. The designation is situated ~27km distance from the nearest turbine.

Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty Forest of Bowland AONB is located to the north west of the proposed development; the designation covers the landscape around the Forest of Bowland and Longridge Fell, occupying much of the Ribble Valley. At its closest point the development is situated ~17km distance from the nearest turbine.

Pendle Hill AONB is a small area located to the north west of the proposed development. The designation is much smaller than the other AONBs in the study area being focused around Pendle hill on the opposite side of Clitheroe and the A59 from the Forest of Bowland AONB. At its closest point the development is situated ~8km distance from the nearest turbine.

Nidderdale AONB is located to the north east of the proposed development and covers the landscape within the Harrogate area, adjacent to the Yorkshire Dales National Park. The designation is situated ~20km distance from the nearest turbine.

Registered Parks and Gardens There are 60 Registered Parks and Gardens within the 35km study area with the majority being located within the larger settlements at Bradford, Manchester and Blackburn and

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

as such will be unaffected by the development. Inside 10km of the site there are five, Queen’s Park, Thomson Park, Towneley Hall, Scott Park and Gawthorpe Hall.

Visual Baseline and Receptors Visual receptors would include anyone who may have visibility of the turbines, such as people who may work in the area, residents or tourists. The table below identifies all visual receptors that were considered as part of the assessment.

Table 7.7- Key Visual Receptors

Visual Receptor Description

Residents There are a number of residential properties situated within 1km of the turbines, most notably Sweet Well House, Monk Hall Farm and Ing Hey.

Settlements Settlements that will be assessed include Burnley, Lane Bottom, Brierfield and Blackburn. Photomontages have been produced for a number of these settlements. Settlements out with 20km are unlikely to experience significant visual effects.

Road Users Views from the M65 will be assessed both with regards to the impact of Delf Hill and any potential sequential cumulative effects with other wind energy projects. Photomontages which represent views of these routes are also included in the viewpoint selection.

Recreational Recreational receptors in the area mostly refer to hill walkers on the various footpaths such as the Bronte Way and Pennine Bridleway; however there are also a large number of cyclist and horse riders in the area. Photomontages have been produced from a selection of these important paths.

7.8 Construction Stage: Assessment of Landscape and Visual Effects

Section 2 contains details of the development components and construction details. This section looks at the impact these will have on the landscape and visual resource.

Landscape Effects on (Fabric and Character) The landscape does contain man-made elements, with the presence of the quarry and reservoir, as well as a network of electricity pylons and roads. Typically the moorland creates a plateau on the eastern edge of the site which is not particularly sensitive due to its larger scale and uniform landcover. There are no prominent landscape features and Delf Hill itself is not pronounced or obvious from outside this landscape, due to its wide summit and plateau nature. The Thursden Valley to the north would be the most sensitive part of the site with it being fairly well contained and of a smaller nature. The overall condition/quality of the landscape is generally low to medium.

During the construction of the proposed development, the main activities would take place primarily within an area of moorland. This would result in the loss of some 6 hectares of

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

upland pasture/moorland, although much of the local landscape is already altered by the quarrying which has taken place on the hillside.

The fabric of this landscape is considered to be of medium to low sensitivity to the construction activities. The effects on landscape fabric would be predominantly long term, but good site management plus reinstatement of temporary elements and removal of track no longer required at the end of the construction phase will minimise the extent of these effects. The loss in landscape fabric during the construction stage would be small, relative to the extensive areas of moorland in the vicinity, and accordingly this effect would be of medium magnitude, against medium/low sensitivity, giving rise to a moderate effect (not significant).

The effects on the character of the landscape during the construction phase would result primarily from the erection of the turbines / crane and activity and movement of large construction vehicles on the site and on the network of minor roads in the surrounding areas. Vehicles are already present on site due to the current practices and as such this lessens the impact any constriction vehicles will have. The landscape character of the site and its surroundings is considered to be low to medium sensitivity to temporary construction activity, given the large scale nature of the landscape, evidence of quarrying and current presence of activity. The effects of this activity on this character are considered to be medium in magnitude; however the effects would be temporary and of short duration. The significance of the temporary construction effects on the character of the landscape is considered to be moderate and not significant, as well as limited in duration.

Visual Effects during Construction The visual effects of the development during the construction period would mostly be limited to ‘close-range views’ from where it would be possible to view noticeable ground- based activities and the movement of construction vehicles. The main visual receptors able to view the ground based construction activities would be limited to the immediate properties north of Worsthorne and on the higher slopes of the Thursden Valley which will see construction vehicles accessing the site. Due to the undulating nature of the topography between these properties and the site it is unlikely that there will be any views of the site of any work taking place, other than any cranes, which may be visible rising from behind the horizon.

The visual effects of the construction would begin with the establishment of a Contractor’s compound and increase incrementally over the construction period with the most visible effects associated with the erection of the turbines. The construction activity would be limited to a relatively small area. The specific construction activities have been assessed earlier as part of the Landscape Design Considerations and no significant negative residual effects are anticipated.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

7.9 Assessment of Landscape Effects

Landscape Effects are defined by the Landscape Institute as “Change in the elements, characteristics, character, and qualities of the landscape as a result of development.” These effects are assessed by considering the landscape sensitivity against the magnitude of change. A matrix is used to guide the evaluation or level of effect as illustrated in Table 7.2. The type of effect may also be described as temporary or long term/permanent, direct or indirect, cumulative and positive, neutral, or negative.

Potential Operational Effects on Landscape Fabric Changes to landscape fabric can occur where there would be direct or indirect physical changes to the landscape. In this instance, direct changes to landscape fabric would only occur within the development boundary. The landscape has been assessed to be of medium sensitivity.

Magnitude of Change During operation the Delf Hill Wind Cluster would occupy and directly affect a minor to moderate extent of the local landscape character. The loss of some areas of moorland would however be the only direct impacts as there is little in the way of landscape features and a general uniformity to the surrounding area. The areas where there are features of cultural heritage, including a number of SAMs, will be avoided to limit any direct impacts on this landscape. When viewed from within the area or from the immediate surrounding area the turbines would be a prominent feature and become a defining feature of this local landscape allowing this small shoulder of the Extwistle Moor to be seen as a ‘Windfarm Landscape’. Although this is a sizeable change to a small section of local landscape the presence of the quarry on site, coupled with the general uniformity and lack of distinction to the summit limit the impact the turbines will have. The magnitude of change for direct landscape effects as a result of the development on the local landscape character resource, would be medium, resulting in a moderate level of effect which would be long term (reversible) and negative but not significant.

Potential Operation Effects on Landscape Character

Moorland Fringe LCT The Moorland Fringe is a linear strip of landscape that acts as a transition between the more developed and industrial landscape of the valleys and the open expansive moorlands of the higher slopes. It is medium to large scale and presence of features such as electricity pylons, quarries and reservoirs mean that this landscape is not particularly sensitive to this type of development. The summit at Delf Hill is not particularly obvious or pronounced and there is a lack of woodland in the area. The condition/quality of the landscape is generally medium to low.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

In terms of landscape value, within the study area, the landscape area is not designated, although is valued locally, by providing a backdrop to Burnley and Thursden which would indicate a medium landscape value.

The overall sensitivity of the Moorland Fringe is considered to be medium to low.

Magnitude of Change During operation, the Delf Hill Wind Cluster would occupy and directly affect a minor to moderate area of the Moorland Fringe, however it may be visible from across the character area indirectly affecting its character (and similarly affecting a small proportion indirectly). When viewed from within the area or from the immediate surrounding area the turbines would be prominent features and become a defining feature of this landscape allowing this small section of the moorland within the centre of the Moorland Fringe to be seen as a ‘Windfarm Landscape’. Although this is a sizeable change the small section of local landscape is not particularly different in character from the surrounding area and the transitional character helps the development to become absorbed well by the landscape, adjacent to similar man-made features. The scale of the landscape is medium to large and the turbines would have little impact on this despite their size. The hill would still act as a backdrop to the various settlements below and the turbines would be seen within the context of the reservoir and quarry and not within the more sensitive moorlands to the east.

The ZTV indicates that the area immediately around the site will have visibility of the development where it will be a prominent feature, typically seen on the horizon. The visibility tends to be focused within ~5km of the development and does not affect the sections of landscape to the north and south. When seen from these areas the development appears on the horizon and tends to be above these landscapes being right on the edge of the character area at its highest point just off the summit of Delf Hill. The turbines typically occupy a moderate extent of views from within the Moorland Fringe, although this will increase when closer to the turbines. Despite being located at the edge of this character area the site is very much Moorland Fringe and the presence of other manmade features in views illustrate this, as the turbines are often seen alongside the quarry and electricity pylons. They would form a distinct edge to the immediate area around Delf Hill, after which the landscape becomes more remote and undeveloped. The development is well related to the Moorland Fringe Landscape and does not appear out of context as it is located in the same LCT as the Coal Clough development.

The magnitude of change on the Moorland Fringe resource would be medium, resulting in a moderate/minor level of effect, which would be long term (reversible), direct/indirect and negative, but not significant.

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Moorland Plateaux LCT The Moorland Plateaux landscape is fairly similar to the Moorland Fringe and tends to have similar landcover, although it is more expansive and contains less evidence of human activity. The Moorland Fringe provides a transition from the urban areas to this landscape and whilst there are still man-made elements it generally has a more remote nature. The condition/quality of the landscape is generally medium.

In terms of landscape value, within the study area, the landscape area is not designated, although is valued locally, by providing a rural and unspoilt character, which has a remote feeling, which would indicate a medium landscape value.

The overall sensitivity of the Moorland Plateaux is considered to be medium.

Magnitude of Change During operation, the Delf Hill Wind Cluster would have only minor direct effects on this landscape, but would sit directly adjacent to it and will be visible from across the character area indirectly affecting its character (and similarly affecting a small proportion indirectly). The ZTV indicates that there will be visibility of the development directly to the east of the site and on the slopes of Boulsworth Hill. Here the development will be a prominent feature; however most views from these areas in this direction look back across a relatively well development landscape, with occasional views of Burnley and other settlements. Although this is only a small area of landscape it is almost exactly the same as the High Moorland Plateaux which is covered by the South Pennines Landscape Assessment and for the purpose of the impact on this character area the two are one and the same. Visibility quickly disappears to the east within the High Moorland Plateaux and its large scale easily accommodates views of the development without affecting its scale or its remote character.

The magnitude of change on the Moorland Plateaux resource would be low, resulting in a moderate/minor level of effect, which would be long term (reversible), direct/indirect and negative, but not significant.

Indirect Effects on Neighbouring Landscape Character Areas Neighbouring areas of landscape character are formed by moorland landscapes, hills and valleys as well as significant urban areas.

None of these areas would be directly affected by the wind cluster and there would be no direct effects on the key physical characteristics that form the areas landscape character or their quality and integrity. However, the turbines may be visible from these areas and as such could indirectly affect the landscape character where particular views or scenic qualities are noted as a key characteristic of the landscape. Alternatively, the wind cluster could be frequently visible and particularly prominent in the landscape such that the

100

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

addition of this new feature affects the character of the area. In this instance due to the shape of the topography most landscapes affected will be to the west, with views to the east highly limited by the topography.

Table 7.8 - Indirect Landscape Effects on Neighbouring Landscape Character Areas

Landscape Character Assessment Area

Lancashire Landscape Character Assessment

Moorland Hills This landscape can be found at the summits of Longridge Fell, Easington Fell and Pendle Hill and as such there will be visibility from the slopes facing the development and from the summits. They form distinct peaks across the more rounded and lower lying valleys and the ZTV indicates that while visibility will occur, it will be at distances of over ~10km. Viewpoint 16 which illustrates a wireline drawing from the summit of Pendle Hill would be the most impacted of these areas, however even here the development is a distant feature which only occupies a minor extent of views. Due to this distance and with the development visible in views containing settlements and road networks it is unlikely that the turbines would have any impact on the scale or setting of this character. Visibility would affect walkers on these hills but would not alter the character or the sense of remoteness and contrast to the lower landscapes. The landscape character area is considered to be of a high sensitivity due to parts of it being designated as an AONB. Overall the magnitude of change would be negligible and the overall level of effect would be moderate/minor, indirect, negative and reversible.

Enclosed Uplands These areas occur to the south of Burnley around Hameldon Hill where there is currently wind turbines operational. Views would occur from occasional locations along the northern edge and from the summits where the turbines would appear across the opposite side of the valley in the distance. The development would occupy a minor extent of the view and appear in scale with the surrounding landscape. At ~6km distance and with the turbines seen in conjunction with other man-made features the impact on this landscape is limited. The turbines appear in a similar landscape but also a notability separate landscape and the highly developed valley in between offers separation between the two landscapes. The turbines would not dominate views even when visible and appear as a distant feature. The landscape character area is considered to be of a medium sensitivity due to its uniformity and lack of any defining features. Overall the magnitude of change would be low and the overall level of effect would be moderate/minor, indirect, negative and reversible.

Undulating Lowland This is an expansive landscape which occurs to the north west and west of the development. Due Farmland to its lowland nature visibility is extremely rare with the topography at Pendle Hill screening a significant number of views. Where visibility is predicted, would be on the lower slopes of Longridge Fell to the east of the settlement of Longridge. Here the turbines would be seen on the horizon to the east; however they would only occupy a negligible extent of views. In most cases intervening vegetation will further screen any views and there will be almost no impact on this landscape. The landscape character area is considered to be of a high sensitivity due parts of it being designated as an AONB. Overall the magnitude of change would be negligible and the overall level of effect would be moderate/minor, indirect, negative and reversible.

Drumlin Field This landscape occurs at the north eastern end of the Lowland Farmland and only brief visibility is predicted, intermittently around the West Marton area. Here the turbines will be seen occupying a minor extent of the horizon, appearing in scale with its surroundings and generally not having much impact on this landscape character. The topography would rise either side of the turbines enclosing them slightly and limiting their presence. Generally there will be very few places within this landscape that would be affected by the development, due to the presence and shape of the drumlins.

101

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Landscape Character Assessment Area

The landscape character area is considered to be of a medium sensitivity simplicity and lack of any prominent features. Overall the magnitude of change would be low and the overall level of effect would be moderate/minor, indirect, negative and reversible.

Farmed Ridges This is a small area of landscape which primarily occurs to the north of Blackburn. The ZTV indicates that visibility would only occur in a small section south of Billington, where they would be visible in the distance occupying a minor extent of the view. The landscape character area is considered to be of medium sensitivity due to its proximity to urban areas and lack of any designations. Overall the magnitude of change would be negligible and the overall level of effect would be minor, indirect, negative and reversible.

Rolling Upland This landscape occurs to the north of the proposed development and is typical of rolling agricultural Farmland landscapes in the area. The ZTV predicts that there will be visibility on the south facing slopes ~6km to the north. Here the turbines will appear on the horizon seen to the right of Boulsworth Hill. They would neither diminish the scale of Boulsworth Hill nor the Rolling Upland Farmland landscape and are generally visible within the rolling landscape. The turbines would be commonly visible from within the LCA and despite this they would not be out of place and do not alter the character of the LCA. There is a second section of this landscape to the north west of the development and whilst views are also predicted here and impact will be at almost ~25km distance and the development will be indistinct. The landscape character area is considered to be of medium sensitivity due to it being primarily an agricultural landscape. Overall the magnitude of change would be low and the overall level of effect would be moderate/minor, indirect, negative and reversible.

Industrial Foothills and This landscape surrounds the settlements of Burnley, Brierfield and Padiham. Whilst the ZTV Valleys indicates that the will be visibility throughout the LCA the impact of a development of this type would have less of an effect due to the presence of existing man-made features which characterise the area. The chimneys, church spires, existing turbines and pylons already provide vertical features in the area, which provides capacity for development. A number of viewpoint have been located within this LCA and around Burnley, where it can be seen that the turbines would always be a prominent feature, although would never dominate views nor be an overbearing presence. Due to the nature of this LCA, it is unlikely that the development will alter the character or setting of what is a heavily modified landscape. The landscape character area is considered to be of low sensitivity due to it be highly development and in close proximity to large scale urban developments. Overall the magnitude of change would be medium and the overall level of effect would be moderate/minor, indirect, negative and reversible.

North Yorkshire Landscape Character Assessment

Limestone Moors The Limestone Moors occur within the Yorkshire Dales National Park, as such is tends to be a fairly rural and undeveloped landscape. Visibility will be intermittent and occur at over ~25km distance, where the turbines will generally form an indistinct feature on the horizon. Whilst there is visibility on the southern slopes of Kirby Fell the intervening distance and the fact the development will be visible in views where large scale settlement and road networks are also seen will mean that the impact will be fairly minor. Viewpoint 17 is located just to the south of this landscape and illustrates the limited impact. The landscape character area is considered to be of a high sensitivity due to its location within a National Park. Overall the magnitude of change would be negligible and the overall level of effect would be moderate/minor, indirect, negative and reversible.

Moor Fringe This landscape is located to the south of the Limestone Moors and forms the edge of the Yorkshire Dales National Park. Due to its lower elevation visibility is even more intermittent and when visibility will have a similar impact to the Limestone Moors. Again Viewpoint 17 illustrates that the impact from this area will be limited and due to this limited visibility combined with the distance would mean that there would be almost no impact on the setting, scale or character of the LCA. The landscape character area is considered to be of a high sensitivity due to its location within a

102

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Landscape Character Assessment Area

National Park. Overall the magnitude of change would be negligible and the overall level of effect would be moderate/minor, indirect, negative and reversible.

Gritstone High Moors & This is also located within the Yorkshire Dales National Park and is located on the higher slopes to Fells the north east of the study area. Visibility is predicted around the slopes of Embsay Moor where the turbines will be visible at over ~20km distance and seen breaking the skyline. The development will generally be an indistinct feature in the distance and will not have any impact on the scale or setting of the Moors and Fells. The landscape character area is considered to be of a high sensitivity due to its location within a National Park. Overall the magnitude of change would be negligible and the overall level of effect would be moderate/minor, indirect, negative and reversible.

Gritstone Low Moors & This landscape sits adjacent to the previous landscapes within the Yorkshire Dales national Park, Fells and whilst the ZTV indicates that there will be visibility across much of the LCA the impact will in fact be fairly limited. Visibility will occur at over ~25km in the moorland around Winterburn Reservoir, here it will only be blade tip visibility which will occur and combined with the intervening vegetation would mean that actual visibility will be rare. The development will have no impact on the character of this landscape or its value as part of the National Park. The landscape character area is considered to be of a high sensitivity due to its location within a National Park. Overall the magnitude of change would be negligible and the overall level of effect would be moderate/minor, indirect, negative and reversible.

South Pennines Landscape Character Assessment

High Moorland Plateaux This is a large scale landscape to the south of the study area and due to its elevated nature will have some visibility of the development. The ZTV indicates that in the moorland between the A672, A640, A62 and A635 there will be glimpses of the development, however it would be rare and at ~15km distance. Part of this landscape also occurs directly to the east of the site, but has been assessed in greater detail as part of the Moorland Plateaux assessment, due to its relationship with that landscape. The landscape character area is considered to be of a high sensitivity due to parts of it being designated as a National Park. Overall the magnitude of change would be negligible and the overall level of effect would be moderate/minor, indirect, negative and reversible.

Moorland Fringe This landscape forms a transitional buffer around the High Moorland Plateaux and as such has less visibility due to its lower elevation. With the rare visibility of the turbines it is unlikely that the development will have any effect on these landscapes. The landscape character area is considered to be of a medium sensitivity due to its transitional nature and presence of manmade features. Overall the magnitude of change would be negligible and the overall level of effect would be moderate/minor, indirect, negative and reversible.

Effects on Landscape Planning Designations The site area is not designated and there would be no direct effects on any designated landscape areas. Any landscape effects therefore would be limited to indirect effects on the views and visual character experienced from within these areas, whilst viewing towards the wind cluster. The assessment below considers if these effects on the views would lead to an indirect effect on the landscape character and valued features and characteristics for which these areas are designated.

103

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

The assessment of the overall indirect effects experienced by people viewing the wind cluster from within these areas is provided in Table 7.9. The sensitivity of all designated landscapes considered as part of this assessment has been considered as high.

Table 7.9- Landscape Effects on Landscape Planning Designations

Designation Assessment

National Parks

Yorkshire Dales National At its closest point this designation would be located ~20km to the north of the proposed Park development. Due to the nature of the National Park being moors and dales there are views expected from the some of the higher moors and slopes which face the development. The south facing slopes on the southern edge of the National Park will have distant visibility of the development where the turbines will be visible on the horizon and seen in the same angle of view as a number of other man-made features, including settlements and roads. The development will be distinctly associated with the lower landscapes nearer the settlements and have relatively limited impact on this more remote and rural landscape. The experience and character will remain the same and the setting of the National park will remain intact with important vistas in other directions uninterrupted and the scale of the hills also unaffected. The designation is considered to be of high sensitivity. The magnitude of change for the area as a whole would be negligible, resulting in a moderate/minor level of effect which would not be significant.

Peak District National At its closest point this designation would be located ~27km to the south east of the proposed Park development covering the landscape between Manchester and Huddersfield. There is almost no impact on this designation as the moorland forms a plateaux like landscape which restricts views. The only effects would be experienced from occasional sections of higher moorland and around the summit of Black Hill where the turbines would be seen in the lower landscape in the distance and have only blade tip visibility. It is unlikely that the full extent of the turbines or all three turbines will be visible from anywhere within the National Park. The designation is considered to be of high sensitivity. The magnitude of change for the area as a whole would be negligible, resulting in a moderate/minor level of effect which would not be significant.

Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty

Forest of Bowland AONB This is a large designation which is situated ~17km to the north west of the proposed development and covers the much of the study area in this direction. The ZTV indicates that there will be only rare visibility of the development from within this landscape, with views expected at Longridge Fell, Wold Fell and Croasdale Fell. Longridge Fell would be the closest to the development at ~22km distance and Viewpoint 15 illustrates the typical example of the impact. Here it can be seen that the development would only occupy a minor extent of the view and be seen on the horizon. The AONB as a whole is a large designation and with visibility only occurring in these three areas and at significant distances it is unlikely that the development would have any impact on the setting of the AONB. The character and scenic qualities would remain intact and view of the turbines would be distant where the development will be seen in a landscape which is clearly separate from this higher sensitivity landscape. The designation is considered to be of high sensitivity. The magnitude of change for the area as a whole would be negligible, resulting in a moderate/minor level of effect which would not be significant.

Pendle Hill AONB This is a much smaller designation, located to the south east of the previous AONB and ~7km to the north west of the proposed development. Much more of this designation would experience visibility according to the ZTV, with the summit of Pendle Hill and the south eastern slopes having potential visibility. Viewpoints 12 and 16 illustrate the typical impact that the development will have on this designation, where the turbines appear across the valley on the opposite moorland,

104

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Designation Assessment

occupying a minor extent of the view. The development does not appear out of scale with the landscape and the valley creates separation between the AONB and the site which helps to mitigate any impact as the turbines will always be associated with the moorland to the east. The turbines are not overbearing nor do they diminish the scale of the landscape. The landscape designation is considered to be of high sensitivity. Overall the magnitude of change would be low and the overall level of effect would be moderate and not significant.

Nidderdale AONB There is no visibility of the development predicted from this designation and as such there will be no impact on its unique character as an AONB.

Registered Parks and Gardens

Queen’s Park The ZTV indicates that there would be visibility throughout Queens Park, however due to the woodland which surrounds the park and the buildings adjacent outward view are limited and not integral to the character of the park. It is unlikely that there would be any visibility of the development from this area. The landscape designation is considered to be of high sensitivity. Overall the magnitude of change would be negligible and the overall level of effect would be moderate/minor and not significant.

Thomson Park Thomson Park is situated on the opposite side of the canal from Queen’s Park and will have a very similar impact with limited outward views. Visibility of the turbines will be limited with vegetation and the built environment screening most views. With the setting being urban and views inwards the development will not affect the character of the park. The landscape designation is considered to be of high sensitivity. Overall the magnitude of change would be negligible and the overall level of effect would be moderate/minor and not significant.

Towneley Hall Towneley Hall is situated on the southern edges of Burnley at ~4.1km distance. The ZTV indicates that there will be visibility throughout the grounds; however the mature woodland which surrounds the grounds provides significant screening. Viewpoint 9 has been taken from one of the open areas where visibility is likely to occur and illustrates the greatest impact on this designation. From the front of the Hall views will be restricted due to the mature woodland. Even when visible the turbines only occupy a minor extent of the view and are heavily screened by a combination of topography and woodland. The development would not be an overbearing feature and the woodland provides a strong edge feature which contains the grounds and it is clear that the turbines would be a feature of the surrounding landscape and not affecting the grounds. In addition to this there would be no case where the turbines would appear in conjunction with the Hall itself and as such the setting of this feature remains intact. The landscape designation is considered to be of high sensitivity. Overall the magnitude of change would be low and the overall level of effect would be moderate and not significant.

Scott Park There is no visibility of the development predicted from this designation and as such there will be no impact on its unique character of the setting of the Hall.

Gawthorpe Hall There is no visibility of the development predicted from this designation and as such there will be no impact on its unique character of the setting of the Hall.

105

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

7.10 Assessment of Visual Effects

Visual effects are recognised by the Landscape Institute as a subset of landscape effects and are concerned wholly with the effect of the development on views, and the general visual amenity. The assessment has been conducted in periods of fine weather and assumes good visibility and limited seasonal leaf cover.

Visual Effects during Operation Post construction and during operation, the appearance of the site would recover a calmer visual character with negligible levels of maintenance activity visible on site from the nearest visual receptors, and no significant visual effects likely.

The visibility of the turbines, however, would extend over the study area affecting a range of visual receptors including residents, road users, tourists, and people undertaking recreational activity. The visual effects of the wind turbines on views and visual amenity during operation are assessed in the following sections.

ZTV and Visual Receptors A blade tip ZTV is illustrated in Figure 7.6 and indicates the maximum potential visibility of the wind turbines, assuming there are no trees, woodland or buildings within the area (i.e. a bare earth scenario). It is likely that this visibility would be reduced further by the screening effect of trees, woodland, and buildings on the ground, particularly in relation to settlements.

The pattern of visibility is defined by the undulating nature of the surroundings with moorland, fells and dales dictating this pattern. Due to the high moorland to the east, visibility directly east of the site almost drops off entirely with no real visibility occurring to the east and south east, in addition to this views from the south are also fairly rare. Most of the visibility occurs with ~5km of the turbines and along the valley to the west where the settlements of Burnley and Blackburn are located. Other than this visibility generally is reduced after 10-15km where the exposed areas of higher moorland may have some isolated and intermittent views. Figure 7.3 illustrates the ZTV in a more detailed fashion, divided into six sections, each focusing on a different part of the study area.

The key visual effects to be addressed include the following:

Visual effects on the views experienced by local communities; Visual effects on the views experienced by users of footpaths and general recreational areas/ tourist destinations; and

106

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Visual effects on the views experienced by road users along the main transport routes.

Viewpoint Analysis Viewpoint analysis has been undertaken for each of the viewpoints and is reported in Appendix 2.1. A summary of the results of the viewpoint analysis is provided in Table 7.10. This analysis reveals that significant visual effects would occur from five viewpoints; from the closest receptors all within 3km of the development.

Table 7.10 - Summary of Viewpoints Analysis

Location Assessment Distance from Development

Sensitivity Magnitude Overall Impact

1. Pennine Bridleway High High Major Viewpoint located at ~1.2km distance

2. Worsthorne High High Major Viewpoint located at ~1.7km distance

3. Ridehalgh Lane High Medium Major/Moderate Viewpoint located at ~1.3km distance

4. Thursden Picnic Area High Medium Major/Moderate Viewpoint located at ~1.5km distance

5. Haggate High Medium Major/Moderate Viewpoint located at ~2.7km distance

6. Boulsworth Hill Medium Medium Moderate Viewpoint located at ~2.4km distance

7. Red Lees Road High Low Moderate Viewpoint located at ~3.1km distance

8. Straight Mile Canal High Low Moderate Viewpoint located at ~5.3km distance

9. Towneley Hall High Low Moderate Viewpoint located at ~4.6km distance

10. Limestone Trail High Low Moderate Viewpoint located at ~4.3km distance

11. A671 layby at Easden High Low Moderate Viewpoint located at ~5.7km distance

12. Nick of Pendle High Negligible Moderate/Minor Viewpoint located at ~13.1km distance

13. Mellor Medium Negligible Minor Viewpoint located at ~22.3km distance

14. Longridge fell High Negligible Moderate/Minor Viewpoint located at ~22.7km distance

15. Malham Cove High Negligible Moderate/Minor Viewpoint located at ~30.0km distance

16. Pendle Hill High Negligible Moderate/Minor Viewpoint located at ~12.0km distance

107

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Residential Properties and Settlements

The following assessment considers the views from settlements, and the likely visual effects that could be experienced from the main living rooms and garden areas of residential properties, but excludes rooftops and upper windows. The illustrated viewpoints have been selected to represent views from where the wind cluster would be most visible within the villages or along the edges of the villages. All settlements and residential properties have been judged to be of high sensitivity.

Settlements and individual dwellings within 2km A detailed survey of residential visual amenity has been undertaken for all individual properties within a 1.2km (10 times the height of the turbines) radius of the wind cluster proposal, and is presented in Appendix 2.2. There is no published guidance available on the assessment of effects on views from dwellings and the distance from the proposed development that should be defined for detailed study but ten times the height of the turbines distance was deemed suitable and agreed with Burnley Borough Council.

For the purposes of this study, views from a property have been defined as views from a dwelling, including views from inside, and from within the domestic curtilage including garden areas and access to the property.

Visual Effects on Residential Properties A total of sixteen residential properties have been assessed within a radius of 1.2km (ten times the height of the turbines) of the development, these properties, primarily Elders I’ Th Row and Monk Hall are made up of a number of dwellings, with five at Elders and six at Monk Hall, which are located to the north and west of the turbines. The assessment has looked at the theoretical visibility in conjunction with the properties’ primary and secondary views as well as views from the garden area, taking into account any vegetation or woodland which may surround the property. A summary of the assessment of all residential properties within 1.2km of the nearest turbine is provided in Table 7.12 and the full assessment can be found in Appendix 2.2.

Table 7.12 Predicted Visual Effects on Residential Properties

Property Distance Magnitude of Change Level of effect

1. Sweet Well House Farm 530m Low Moderate

2 Ing Hey 880m Negligible Moderate/Minor

3 Monk Hall (closest dwelling) 940m Low Moderate

4 Elders I’ Th Row 890m Medium Major/Moderate

5 Holden Farm 940m Low Moderate

108

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Property Distance Magnitude of Change Level of effect

6 Holden Barn 980m Low Moderate

In summary, out of the properties detailed in Table 7.12 above only the cluster of properties at Elders I’ Th Row are predicted to experience significant effects, with most of the properties in the cluster orientated away from the development. Views from within the dwellings would be limited with only Pike Low Barn and Greenhill Barn predicted to experience visual effects, the remaining effects are predicted to occur from the garden areas of the surrounding properties, although it should be noted even when visible the turbines are never an overbearing feature and are not considered to constitute an unacceptable change to the quality of living for the residents.

Settlements Many of the settlements within the study area will gain very limited, or no views of the wind cluster due to the concentration of buildings and other urban features and the landform of the area. Of the 40 settlements that were assessed, 30 of these are not overlapped by the ZTV and will therefore receive no views of the development. Settlements that have been predicted to receive views are likely to only get views of the development from open areas, prominent hill tops within settlements and from the settlement’s edges, as it is likely that woodland and the built environment will screen outward views.

Table 7.13 - Visual effect on settlements within the ZTV

Settlement Distance Visual Assessment

Settlement <5km from Delf Hill Wind Cluster

Thursden 1.2km This is a group of properties which are located within the Thursden Valley to the north of the site. Most properties tend to look over the valley and as such will face the development. The turbines have been moved specifically to the southern end of the site to limit the impact on these properties. Viewpoints 3 and 4 illustrate the impact of the development from both the top and bottom of the valley showing the different types of impact the turbines will have. Whilst there is woodland in the area and most properties do tend to have woodland planting in the garden most will still receive views of the turbines, where the lower sections of the towers will have some degree of screening depending on where in the valley the property is situated. Typically the turbines would occupy a moderate extent of both the horizontal and vertical view and be visible against the sky and although prominent would not be an overbearing feature. From properties to the east further screening would be apparent with two of the turbines almost completely screened and only blade tip visibility. The settlement is considered to be of high sensitivity. Overall the magnitude of change would be medium and the overall level of effect would be major/moderate, direct, negative and reversible.

Worsthorne 1.8km Worsthorne is situated 1.8km to the south west of the proposed development. The ZTV indicates that there will be theoretical visibility of the development from the entire settlement. Viewpoint 2 was taken on the northern edge of the settlement to

109

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Settlement Distance Visual Assessment

provide the most open views of the development. Here the turbines are seen on the horizon occupying a moderate extent of the horizontal view and a large extent of the vertical view. Many of the properties along the northern edge face to the south and west and as such will not have views from their primary windows, but may still see the turbines from their garden areas and rear windows. When visible the turbines will be a prominent feature but at almost 2km distance they are not an overbearing presence and would have only limited impact on the amenity of these residences. The direction of the development is not a particularly important vista from the settlement, currently looking at an open quarry as such the development will not disrupt any key views. The settlement is considered to be of high sensitivity. Overall the magnitude of change would be medium and the overall level of effect would be major/moderate, direct, negative and reversible.

Harle Syke 2.9km Harle Syke is situated ~2.9mk distance to the north west of the proposed development and the ZTV indicates that there will be visibility throughout the settlement. Viewpoint 5 is located at Haggate, which forms the eastern edge of Harle Syke and from here the turbines are seen occupying a moderate extent of both the vertical and horizontal views. Most properties in the centre of the settlement will have views screened by the built environment however there will be glimpses through gaps in the buildings, along roads and from the southern edge. On the southern edge there are not many properties that face the development and there are numerous business and industrial units in the area. When visible the development will appear on the horizon on the moorland opposite and will not be an overbearing feature. The settlement is considered to be of high sensitivity. Overall the magnitude of change would be low and the overall level of effect would be moderate, direct, negative and reversible.

Burnley 3.2km Burnley is situated 3.2km to the west of the proposed development and the ZTV indicates that there will be visibility throughout the settlement. A number of viewpoints (Viewpoints 7, 8 and 9) are located within or around the settlement to understand the visual impact. Typically the turbines are a feature of the horizon, seen on the moorland to the east, where they occupy a minor to moderate extent of the view. The development is not an overbearing feature, nor is it consistently visible throughout the settlement as it disappears behind woodland and buildings, coming in and out of view, very much associated with the surrounding moorland. From open areas to the east in the Brownside and Pike Hill the development will be more prominent and more commonly visible, whilst still not having a significant impact. From much of the settlement the turbines will either be screened or visible in context with the industrial feature of Burnley. The settlement is considered to be of high sensitivity. Overall the magnitude of change would be low and the overall level of effect would be moderate, direct, negative and reversible.

Nelson 4.2km Nelson is situated 4.2km to the north west of the proposed development and the ZTV indicates that there will be intermitted visibility across the settlement. A small area to the south around Marsden Height will have some visibility of the turbines where they would occupy a minor extent of both the horizontal and vertical view. Other theoretical visibility would occur to the north of the settlement around the Barrowford area although this will have high levels of screening provided by the built environment. The settlement is considered to be of high sensitivity. Overall the magnitude of change would be low and the overall level of effect would be moderate, direct, negative and reversible.

Settlement between 5-10km from Delf Hill Wind Cluster

110

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Settlement Distance Visual Assessment

Trawden 5.0km No views are predicted from Trawden.

Colne 6.0km No views are predicted from Colne.

Foulridge 8.3km Foulridge is situated to the north of the development and only very limited visibility is predicted by the ZTV and any views are only likely to occur on the southern edge. In reality only one turbine is typically visible, which is likely to be screened by a combination of intervening vegetation and the built environment from most locations. In the rare instances it is visible it would be partially screened by the topography and only occupy a negligible extent of the view. The settlement is considered to be of high sensitivity. Overall the magnitude of change would be negligible and the overall level of effect would be moderate/minor, direct, negative and reversible.

Todmorden 8.5km No views are predicted from Colne.

Padiham 8.6km Padiham is situated to the west of Burnley and the ZTV indicates that there will be visibility from some areas in the north and south of the settlement. It is unlikely that visibility will be common due to the density of the built environment both within Padiham and the adjacent Burnley; however from some open locations on the northern side of the settlement it may be possible to see the turbines. Here they would occupy a minor extent of both the horizontal and vertical view. The settlement is considered to be of high sensitivity. Overall the magnitude of change would be negligible and the overall level of effect would be moderate/minor, direct, negative and reversible.

Settlement between 10-15km from Delf Hill Wind Cluster

Bacup 10.1km No views are predicted from Bacup.

Walsden 10.2km No views are predicted from Walsden.

Hebden Bridge 10.5km No views are predicted from Hebden Bridge.

Kelbrook 10.7km No views are predicted from Kelbrook.

Rawtenstall 11.5km No views are predicted from Rawtenstall.

Simonstone 11.9km Simonstone is situated to the north west of Padiham, 11.9km distance from the proposed development. The ZTV indicates that the development will be visible across the entire settlement, although would only occupy a minor extent of the view. Being seen low in the landscape will mean that intervening features such as vegetation and the built environment will provide even more screening and it is unlikely that the development will be visible let alone prominent. The settlement is considered to be of high sensitivity. Overall the magnitude of change would be negligible and the overall level of effect would be moderate/minor, direct, negative and reversible.

Sabden 12.1km No views are predicted from Sabden.

Barnoldswick 12.5km No views are predicted from Barnoldswick.

Earby 12.6km No views are predicted from Earby.

Oxenhope 12.9km No views are predicted from Oxenhope.

Accrington 12.9km No views are predicted from Accrington.

Clayton-Le-Moors 14.0km Although the ZTV indicates that there is some visibility across the northern edge of the settlement it would be fairly limited with the turbines appearing lower in the view and heavily screened by intervening features such as vegetation and the built

111

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Settlement Distance Visual Assessment

environment. In reality it is unlikely that there would be any visibility of the turbines and the development would be an indistinct feature even if seen. The settlement is considered to be of high sensitivity. Overall the magnitude of change would be negligible and the overall level of effect would be moderate/minor, direct, negative and reversible.

Haslingden 14.4km No views are predicted from Haslingden.

Settlement between 15-20km from Delf Hill Wind Cluster

Great Harwood 15.0km Although the ZTV predicts that there will be visibility of the development from across the entire settlement actually visibility will be restricted to the northern and eastern edges which overlook the landscape to the east. From the gold club there may be some visibility however woodland in this area is strong and views are only likely to be restricted to glimpses and only occupying a negligible section of the view.

Cross Hills / Steelton 15.1km No views are predicted from Cross Hills.

Keighley 15.5km No views are predicted from Keighley.

Whalley 16.0km No views are predicted from Whalley.

Clitheroe 16.3km No views are predicted from Clitheroe.

Chatburn 16.4km No views are predicted from Chatburn.

Denholme 16.5km No views are predicted from Denholme.

Rishton 16.5km No views are predicted from Rishton.

Cullingworth 16.6km No views are predicted from Cullingworth.

Billington 16.7km No views are predicted from Billington.

Littlebrorough 16.7km No views are predicted from Littlebrorough.

Rochdale 17.1km No views are predicted from Rochdale.

Halifax 17.4km No views are predicted from Halifax.

Skipton 18.4km No views are predicted from Skipton.

Silsden 18.8km No views are predicted from Silsden.

Ramsbottom 19.2km No views are predicted from Ramsbottom.

Queensbury 19.6km No views are predicted from Queensbury.

Settlement beyond 20km are unlikely to suffer any significant effects

Assessment of Major Tourist and Transport Routes An assessment of the potential for visual effects from all major routes within the study area has been undertaken. These routes can be seen on Figure 7.8 and include the following:

M65 between Blackburn and Colne; National Cycle Route 68/91; Bronte Way between Burnley and Wycoller; and

112

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Burnley Way / Pennine Bridleway between Coal Clough and Widdop Reservoir.

M65 Blackburn to Colne The M65 is a busy motorway which connects Preston and the M6 in the west to Burnley and a number of other settlements in the east eventually connecting with the A56 and A6068. The route passes through one of the most built up and development sections of Lancashire as it passes the major settlements of Preston, Blackburn, Accrington and Burnley as well as a number of other smaller settlements. Typically this section passes through rolling farmland, however the presence of man-made features are never far away with the motorway itself a strong element, in addition to the pylons, farm infrastructure and settlements that are scattered through the landscape, particularly contained within the dales. Glimpses of these settlements are common and road users do not feel remote or particularly rural, especially as much of the routes passes Blackburn, Burnley and Nelson. A common feature of the route is its high sided embankments which screen many outward views. The section assessed runs for 30km and at its closest point is situated ~6km distance from the nearest turbine. The route is considered to be of low sensitivity as it is a busy motorway which in itself is a strong man made element, and users tend to be travelling at high speeds.

The ZTV indicates visibility will be intermittent throughout the route with visibility first occurring for ~1km in the section to the south of Rishton, at this point the embankments are high and the route is lined by mature trees as such visibility will be difficult although maybe be glimpsed at occasionally through gaps in the trees. When seen the turbines would occupy a minor extent of the horizon and generally be an indistinct feature, only visible to east bound traffic.

There would then be a gap in the ZTV until the route reaches the eastern side of Accrington where theoretically visibility is predicted until the route reaches Burnley. For a section of ~4km after Accrington there would be direct unscreened views of the turbines where they would be visible breaking the horizon, seen to the right of Boulsworth Hill occupying only a minor extent of the view and not appearing out of context with the busy surroundings. This impact would only be experienced by east bound traffic travelling towards Burnley. Once the route reach the outer edges of Burnley woodland and built features begin to screen views and the turbines are rarely visible.

The final section of visibility predicted by the ZTV would be as the route passes through Nelson, where only intermittent visibility is predicted. Traffic travelling in a south west direction would experience this impact, but due to the presence of a number of built features directly adjacent to the motorway and vegetation visibility tends to be screened. In rare instances where visibility occurs, the turbines are seen on the horizon occupying a minor to moderate extent of the view and would be visible alongside other man-made features such as stacks, factories, housing and commercial developments.

113

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

For the route as a whole the magnitude of change is considered to be low which would result in a minor level of effect which would be not be significant.

National Cycle Route 68/91 This is a circular route which begins on the north eastern edges of Burnley at Lane Bottom and continues along the minor road which follows the Thursden Valley. After which the route heads south east passing the Widdop Reservoir and then following the route of the Hebden Water until Hebden Bridge. Here it doubles back on itself passing over Stansfield Moor and along the Long Causeway at Coal Clough Windfarm. After arriving at the south eastern edges of Burnley the route turns north becoming the Regional Route 91, where it passes Worsthorne and reconnects back at Lane Bottom. The section assessed runs for 33km and at its closest is 1.2km distance from the nearest turbine. The designation as both a Regional Cycle Route and a National Cycle Route indicate that this route is considered to be of high sensitivity, often being used by both cyclist and horse riders.

The ZTV indicates that the first ~3.5km travelling east from Lane Bottom would have visibility, where Viewpoints 4 and 5 offer typical examples from open areas. At the beginning of the route views will be slightly oblique and never direct, before becoming fully oblique as the route passes to the north of the site. This section of the route is generally free from dense vegetation and as such views are open, however fairly quickly the turbines disappear from view.

After the route turns south towards Widdop reservoir visibility is non-existent and would not return until the Long Causeway section at Coal Clough. Viewpoint 10 illustrates the typical example and this experience is likely to occur for almost ~4km where views of the turbines would be oblique. Generally views are open and free from any vegetation, although the close proximity of the Coal Clough Windfarm affects the character significantly and cyclist would have the experience of passing through a ‘windfarm landscape’, this limits the sensitivity of this part of the route.

The final section between Mereclough and Haggate, which forms the Regional Route, and is no longer the National Route is predicted to have visibility for the entire length. However the section is fairly winding and feature more vegetation than the rest of the route, as well as a number of buildings and smaller settlement such as Mereclough and Worsthorne which provide screening and as such the turbines will go in and out of views. Typically when visible the turbines will be seen obliquely and occupying a minor to moderate extent of the view, with Viewpoint 2 illustrating the greatest impact on this cycle route.

The impact on the cycle route as a whole is fairly changeable as when visible the turbines are a prominent feature, however they are only visible for ~10km of the 33km route with a

114

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

large section of no visibility. For the route as a whole the magnitude of change is considered to be low which would result in a moderate level of effect which would be not be significant, although there are sections where significant visibility will occur.

Bronte Way The Bronte Way is an important local walking route which passes through Burnley and over the surrounding moorlands. The section assessed runs from the eastern edges of Burnley and then along the route of the River Brun and Swinden Water before climbing up towards the site and passing along the north western edges of Delf Hill. After this is passes through the Thursden Valley and then along the north eastern edge of Boulsworth Hill where it follows the lower slopes before turning north and connecting to the Pendle Way at Wycoller. The section assessed runs for ~14km and at its closest point the path is ~480m distance from the nearest turbine. It is considered to be of high sensitivity as it is a popular walking route.

Due to the proximity of this path to the site the ZTV indicates that the majority of the route will have visibility of the turbines. As walkers walk along the route of the River Brun they will theoretically have visibility of the turbines, however this area is heavily wooded and it is unlikely that there will be anything other than occasional glimpses of the turbines through gaps in the woodland. Along the path of the Swinden Water woodland becomes less dense and more intermittent allowing for greater visibility of the turbines.

Typically during this section the turbines would occupy a minor extent of the view, becoming moderate as the route approaches the Swinden Reservoir. Here the route turns north and passed close by the site at which point a section of ~1.5km between the Swinden Reservoir and the Thursden Valley would have significant visibility, however views would be oblique and affect only a minor section of the route overall.

Once through the Thursden Valley where the topography adds screening to views the turbines disappear to the rear of the view (walkers heading in the opposite direction would only have visibility of the turbines for ~2km of the entire route) views of the turbines would be screened by Boulsworth Hill.

Whilst there are significant impacts due to the proximity of the development, these would be isolated and the remainder of the route would have a fairly limited impact and as such overall the magnitude of change is considered to be low and the level of effect moderate.

Burnley Way / Pennine Bridle Way The Burnley Way is another important network of footpaths which traverse the moorland and dales in the landscape surrounding Burnley. It also connects to the national route at the

115

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Pennine Way. The section assessed runs for ~9km between Coal Clough and the Limestone Trail and Widdop Reservoir. The route heads north from Coal Clough passing Cant Clough Reservoir and Hurstwood Reservoir before turning east and joining the Pennine Bridleway. It continues across Hameldon Moor until it reaches Widdup Reservoir where the Burnley Way heads north connecting to the Bronte Way in the Thursden Valley and the Pennine Bridleway continues east connecting with the Pennine Way. At its closest point the route is ~1.1km distance from the nearest turbine and is considered to be of high sensitivity due to it being an important walking route.

The ZTV indicates that almost the entire route will have visibility of the turbines until Hameldon moor where the final ~2.5km would not have any views of the turbines. The first section of the route from Coal Clough to Hurstwood Reservoir will have direct views of the turbines. Initially views will be similar to those experienced in Viewpoint 10 and will continue like this for ~1.5km where the turbines will occupy a minor to moderate extent of the horizon. After which the topography provides significant levels of screening with only blade tip visibility for the remainder of the route, until they disappear from view on Hameldon Moor/

Viewpoint 1 is taken on the route as it passes over Hameldon Moor and offers a rare glimpse through a gap in the topography where the development is seen to its full extent, either side of glimpse would only be blade tip visibility. When viewed to their full extent before Cant Clough Reservoir the turbines do not dominate views and as the route gets closer the topography provides more screening, although the presence of blade tips in close proximity will still offer a notable presence.

For the section assessed the impact is considered to be medium, which would result in a major/moderate level of effect which would be significant. This is a result of the close proximity and direct views, however both the Pennine Bridleway and the Burney Way both continue on for a great distanced and the routes overall would not be significantly affected.

7.11 Assessment of Cumulative Visual Effects Wind Energy Development Included in the CLVIA The cumulative assessment includes existing wind energy developments (those operating or under construction), proposals with planning permission, and those that are currently the subject of undetermined applications within a 60km radius of the Delf Hill site. Other known pre-application wind energy development proposals have been identified as part of the assessment process and considered in outline only, due to the more limited information available in connection with these proposals.

The list of other wind energy development sites to be included in the assessment has been confirmed with Burnley Borough Council and compiled from known wind energy

116

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

development planning applications and formal requests for scoping opinions held by the various planning authorities.

All wind energy developments included or referred to in this assessment out to 60km are illustrated on a plan in Figure 7.8, and listed in Table 7.4 are the key projects which are likely to have some level of cumulative impact with Delf Hill, potential appearing simultaneously of successively in views.

Cumulative Baseline Two or more windfarms are required for the occurrence of a cumulative visual effect. This assessment has therefore considered the development of Delf Hill in addition to the other windfarm sites in the landscape in order to test the landscape capacity of the area and provide conclusions for the CLVIA relevant to this proposal.

Figure 7.8 shows the location of all of the windfarms currently operational, consented, in planning and at the scoping stage within a 60km radius of the proposed turbine locations at Delf Hill.

From this overall picture, it can be seen wind turbine development in the area is fairly minimal with most schemes being located on similar sections of moorland to the south of Delf Hill. Schemes such as Coal Clough, Hameldon Hill and Scout Moor are already operational with a number of consented schemes also located in this area. Developments are typically contained within the moorland which sits between the large areas of conurbation such as Manchester to the south, Halifax/Bradford to the east and Burnley/Blackburn to the west. Delf Hill would fit into this pattern and affect similar receptors rather than further north which is generally free from wind energy development and also where more sensitive landscapes are located.

A series of potential cumulative ZTVs for these projects are illustrated in Figures 7.10 - 7.12 showing the potential cumulative ZTV for each of the known windfarms. The findings from the analysis of the cumulative visibility maps and cumulative viewpoint assessment have been used to form a conclusion as to the level of overall cumulative visual effects during operation as experienced by various receptors.

Scoped Wind Farm Sites Due to the uncertainty of projects at the scoping stage where turbine numbers, locations and heights are either unknown or subject to change, cumulative ZTVs have not been produced. Any cumulative impact would not be a true representation of what may happen in reality.

117

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Cumulative Viewpoint Assessment Each viewpoint assessed as part of the viewpoint assessment has also been considered cumulatively with all other wind energy projects identified within the 60km cumulative study area. A summary of potential cumulative visibility assessment from each of the viewpoints is provided in Table 7.14. Further detail can be found in the viewpoint assessment located in Appendix 2.1. No significant cumulative impacts were found from any of the 16 locations.

Table 7.14 - Summary of Cumulative Viewpoint Analysis

Viewpoint No. Sensitivity Magnitude Level of Effect

VP1. Pennine Bridleway

Delf Hill and Operational Wind farms Negligible Moderate/Minor Delf Hill and Operational, Consented Wind farms High Negligible Moderate/Minor Delf Hill and Operational, Consented, Planned Wind farms Negligible Moderate/Minor

VP2. Worsthorne

Delf Hill and Operational Wind farms Negligible Moderate/Minor Delf Hill and Operational, Consented Wind farms High Low Moderate Delf Hill and Operational, Consented, Planned Wind farms Low Moderate

VP3. Ridehalgh Lane

VP4. Thursden Picnic Area

VP5. Haggate

Delf Hill and Operational Wind farms - - Delf Hill and Operational, Consented Wind farms High Negligible Moderate/Minor Delf Hill and Operational, Consented, Planned Wind farms Negligible Moderate/Minor

VP6. Boulsworth Hill

Delf Hill and Operational Wind farms Low Moderate Delf Hill and Operational, Consented Wind farms Medium Low Moderate Delf Hill and Operational, Consented, Planned Wind farms Low Moderate

VP7. Red Less Road

Delf Hill and Operational Wind farms - - Delf Hill and Operational, Consented Wind farms High - - Delf Hill and Operational, Consented, Planned Wind farms - -

VP8. Straight Mile Canal

Delf Hill and Operational Wind farms - - High Delf Hill and Operational, Consented Wind farms Negligible Moderate/Minor

118

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Viewpoint No. Sensitivity Magnitude Level of Effect

Delf Hill and Operational, Consented, Planned Wind farms Negligible Moderate/Minor

VP9. Towneley Hall

Delf Hill and Operational Wind farms - - Delf Hill and Operational, Consented Wind farms High - - Delf Hill and Operational, Consented, Planned Wind farms - -

VP10. Limestone Trail

VP11. A671 layby at Easden

VP12. Nick of Pendle

Delf Hill and Operational Wind farms Low Moderate Delf Hill and Operational, Consented Wind farms High Medium Major/Moderate Delf Hill and Operational, Consented, Planned Wind farms Medium Major/Moderate

VP13. Mellor

Delf Hill and Operational Wind farms Negligible Moderate/Minor Delf Hill and Operational, Consented Wind farms Medium Low Moderate Delf Hill and Operational, Consented, Planned Wind farms Low Moderate

VP14. Longridge Fell

Delf Hill and Operational Wind farms Negligible Moderate/Minor Delf Hill and Operational, Consented Wind farms High Low Moderate Delf Hill and Operational, Consented, Planned Wind farms Low Moderate

VP15. Malham Cove

VP16. Pendle Hill

Delf Hill and Operational Wind farms Negligible Moderate/Minor Delf Hill and Operational, Consented Wind farms High Low Moderate Delf Hill and Operational, Consented, Planned Wind farms Low Moderate

Cumulative Assessment of Major Tourist and Transport Routes An assessment of the potential for cumulative effects from all major routes within the study area has been undertaken and includes the following:

119

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

M65 between Blackburn and Colne; National Cycle Route 68/91; Bronte Way between Burnley and Wycoller; and Burnley Way / Pennine Bridleway between Coal Clough and Widdop Reservoir.

A summary of significance of impact is outlined in Table 7.15 at the end of the assessment.

M65 Blackburn to Colne Operational Hameldon Hill is currently visible to road users travelling in both directions in the section between Blackburn and Burnley where it is typically seen on the horizon occupying a minor to moderate extent of the view. For road users travelling towards Burnley where direct views of Delf Hill are predicted to be experienced Hameldon Hill would be seen obliquely to the left and as such, although in the same angle of view, the two would be difficult to view simultaneously. Travelling in the opposite direction as the route passes by Nelson and Burnley there are direct views of Hameldon Hill, however at this point views of Delf Hill are oblique and mostly screened.

Traffic travelling away from Burnley, towards Blackburn has brief visibility of Hyndburn, where it is seen obliquely to the left of the view in the section between Accrington and Blackburn, the high embanks screen many views and at this point Delf Hill has been to the rear for the viewer for some time. Whilst there is theoretical visibility of Coal Clough, actual views are harder to come by, with the built environment around Burnley screening many long range views in this direction. The cumulative magnitude of change is considered to be low.

Consented Higher Micklehurst and the Hameldon Hill Extension will be seen in the same section of the horizon as the current operational turbines at Hameldon Hill, not affecting any new sections of the route. As such the cumulative impact with Delf Hill will be similar to the experienced when viewing the operational turbines and again simultaneous visibility would be limited, with these development most having oblique visibility. The cumulative magnitude of change will remain low.

In Planning There are no planned schemes visible from this route and as such the cumulative magnitude of change will remain low.

120

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

National Cycle Route 68/91 Operational For the opening section between Lane Bottom and the Thursden Valley there is visibility in the distance of Hameldon Hill, however it will be to the rear of the viewer, whilst Delf Hill is obliquely seen in front of the viewer and the two never visible simultaneously. As the route passes through the valley and Hebden Bridge there is neither visibility of Delf Hill nor any other operational schemes. Visibility of turbines would only occur once the route reaches Stansfield Moor, where Coal Clough is visible in the foreground and Hameldon Hill seen in the distance across the dale. At this point there would be no visibility of Delf Hill. Once Delf Hill comes into view the route is passing directly adjacent to Coal Clough and the turbines here are prominent features which characterise the area and the views. At this point Delf Hill will be seen obliquely and would be similar to the views experienced in Viewpoint 10. As the route turns north at Mereclough and views of Delf Hill are more prominent and direct both Hameldon Hill and Coal Clough would be to the rear of the viewer. The cumulative magnitude of change is considered to be medium.

Consented Higher Micklehurst and the Hameldon hill Extension will have a similar impact in terms of cumulative visibility as the operational turbines at Hameldon Hill. In addition to this there will be visibility of the consented projects which sit to the south at Todmorden Moor, Reaps Moss, Gorpley and Crook Hill. These will all be seen in the section which runs across Stansfield Moor before the route reaches Coal Clough. Visibility of these schemes will be oblique and at this point there is no visibility of Delf Hill and as such no simultaneous visibility will occur and sequential visibility will only be minimal as these will be to the rear of the viewer for over ~5km before direct views of Delf Hill occur. Briefly during the first ~3km of Stansfield Moor, after the route heads out of Blackshaw Head there will be visibility to the east of the Ovenden Moor Repower scheme. The cumulative magnitude of change will remain medium.

In Planning There are no planned schemes visible from this route and as such the cumulative magnitude of change will remain medium.

Bronte Way Operational Visibility of Coal Clough would only occur once the route rises from the River Brun and Swinden Water valley up to the site at Delf Hill, here there are views across the dale towards the turbines. Coal Clough would occupy a minor to moderate extent of the view, but would not be visible simultaneously with Delf Hill as once both would become visible south walkers travelling west Coal Clough disappears behind the topography. Hameldon Hill is theoretically visible for much of the same sections as Delf Hill, and for much of the route is

121

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

seen in the opposite direction from the development and the vegetation within the River Brun and Swinden valley will screen most views. Once the route is up on the side of Delf Hill there will be views back towards Hameldon Hill, with the Delf Hill turbines are features of the foreground. This experience of being on the slopes of Delf Hill where there are views to Hameldon Hill and Coal Clough across the dales with Delf Hill seen in close proximity would be brief, rare and create a sense of place for the development as it would feel appropriate being on this moorland viewing other schemes on similar landscapes on opposite moors. The cumulative magnitude of change is considered to be low.

Consented Higher Miklehurst and the Hameldon hill Extension will have a similar impact in terms of cumulative visibility as the operational turbines at Hameldon Hill. No other consented schemes are visible along this route and the cumulative magnitude of change will remain low.

In Planning There are no planned schemes visible from this route and as such the cumulative magnitude of change will remain medium.

Burnley Way / Pennine Bridleway Operational Hameldon Hill is visible in much the same sections as Delf Hill, although for walkers travelling north east this scheme will be to the rear of views and not typically visible. When travelling west along Hameldon Moor there are long range views for ~2km while there are glimpses of Delf Hill through the hills, with blade tips visibility common. This section of the route begins at Coal Clough and as such it is a prominent feature at the start, although quickly passes to the rear of the viewer. Walkers travelling in the opposite direction will have consistent visibility for most of the route from Hameldon Moor to the windfarm itself. For a brief section on Hameldon Moor (~2km) visibility of Scout Moor is predicted, however would be brief and only seen on clear days. The cumulative magnitude of change is considered to be medium.

Consented Higher Micklehurst and the Hameldon Hill Extension will have a similar impact in terms of cumulative visibility as the operational turbines at Hameldon Hill. Ovenden Moor will affect the final ~3km of the route where direct views of this windfarm are predicted, where it will form a distinct feature on the horizon across the dale. At this point there is no visibility of Delf Hill, although it has only just disappeared from view and this will create a minor sequential impact. From brief sections up on Hameldon Moor there will be long distance views towards Todmorden Moor where these turbines will be seen across the dale and in the same angle of view as Coal Clough. During this stretch where intermittent visibility of

122

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Todmorden Moor is predicted Delf Hill is typically only blade tip visibility and seen in the opposite direction as such simultaneous visibility will not happen. The cumulative magnitude of change will remain medium.

In Planning There are no planned schemes visible from this route and as such the cumulative magnitude of change will remain medium.

Table 7.15 - Summary of Cumulative Viewpoint Analysis

Route Sensitivity Magnitude Level of Effect

M65 Blackburn to Colne

Delf Hill and Operational Wind farms Low Minor

Delf Hill and Operational, Consented Wind farms Low Low Minor

Delf Hill and Operational, Consented, Planned Wind farms Low Minor

National Cycle Route 68/91

Delf Hill and Operational Wind farms Medium Major/Moderate

Delf Hill and Operational, Consented Wind farms High Medium Major/Moderate

Delf Hill and Operational, Consented, Planned Wind farms Medium Major/Moderate

Bronte Way, Burnley to Wycoller

Delf Hill and Operational Wind farms Low Moderate

Delf Hill and Operational, Consented Wind farms High Low Moderate

Delf Hill and Operational, Consented, Planned Wind farms Low Moderate

Burnley Way, Coal Clough to Widdop

Delf Hill and Operational Wind farms Medium Major/Moderate

Delf Hill and Operational, Consented Wind farms High Medium Major/Moderate

Delf Hill and Operational, Consented, Planned Wind farms Medium Major/Moderate

7.12 Summary of Assessment Introduction The proposed Delf Wind Cluster is located in an area of moorland to the east of Burnley near Swinden Reservoir and Extwistle Moor. This landscape has been identified as being an area with capacity for development according to the Landscape Capacity Study for Wind Energy Developments in the South Pennines. The project has been designed to have the least impact on the landscape character, the AONBs and any features of cultural heritage such as SAMs. The idea was to development a small to medium scale windfarm within a section of the landscape which was already disturbed by activity such as quarrying. The

123

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

methodology for the landscape and visual impact assessment (LVIA) adopted the guidelines set out by the Landscape Institute and the Institute for Environmental Management and Assessment. Consultation was conducted with representatives from Burnley Borough Council and Natural England to discuss and agree the scope of the assessment and choice of assessment viewpoints.

Landscape Design The project would include three turbines with a hub height of no greater than 85m and a maximum turbine height of 126m to blade tip. The turbine sizes, layout, number and location have been specifically chosen so as to minimise the overall impact of the development on the landscape and when visible allow the development to be read as a simple balanced development, which is in scale with the surrounding landscape and does not offer any visual confusion when seen alongside other schemes in the area such as Coal Clough or Hameldon Hill. The development would be located within the Moorland Fringe LCT, which is outlined as having some capacity for a development of this type, particularly in the slopes to the north west where Delf Hill is situated.

The associated infrastructure of site access tracks and substation has been carefully designed with the access road and the substation located sensitively to minimise visual impact. There will be no significant effects resulting from the construction and operation of the associated infrastructure, although negative effects are anticipated during the temporary construction period. These would be restored and mitigated on completed of the construction period.

Landscape Assessment The proposed Delf Hill Wind Cluster is located within the Moorland Fringe LCT, within the Lancashire Landscape Character Assessment and would affect a proportion of part of this area. As an area of moorland which borders a heavily developed valley, this area has a medium landscape sensitivity and there would be no significant or unacceptable effects on the wider landscape character area. The Moorland Fringe is a transitional landscape that covers the landscape between Burnley and Extwistle Moor and would be suitable for a development such as this, as it is able to accommodate these features without losing any of its existing features or altering its character.

Considering the wider area, the assessment has concluded that there would be no significant indirect effects from any of the other landscape character types or within the study area.

Effects on Designated Landscapes The landscape of the site area is not designated and as such there will be no direct effects of any designated landscape and any effects would be as a result of indirect landscape effects

124

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

from designated areas within the study area. The assessment has concluded that there would be no significant indirect landscape effects on designated landscape areas including National Parks, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty or Registered Parks and Gardens. A number of the viewpoints included within the LVIA were located within these landscapes in order to fully understand the impact on them. There were no significant effects found from these locations and as such the character and setting of these designations would remain intact.

Visual Assessment The viewpoint analysis is contained in Appendix 2.1 and indicates that there would be no significant visual effects occurring beyond ~3km from the wind cluster and that out of the sixteen viewpoints assessed only five had significant effects. The conclusions from the viewpoint assessment have been used to form a view as to the level of overall visual effects within the study area.

Visual Effects: Construction Period There will be no significant visual effects resulting from the construction period and visibility of the ground based activity. Views of concentrated areas of construction could however lead to a temporary and negative effect that in some cases may appear more disruptive than the finished development. Post construction, the appearance of the site would recover a calmer visual character with negligible levels of activity visible on site from the nearest visual receptors.

Visual Effects: Operational Period Significant effects were found from the two closest settlements, although it should be noted that there was almost no impact on any of the larger settlements as the moorland limits visibility greatly to the east. Only one of the residential properties assessed inside 1.2km was found to have significant visual effects on either their environs or windows; however these effects were generally not considered to be unacceptable as due to the distance between the property and the development the turbines are seen alongside the quarry.

Cumulative Landscape and Visual Effects Across the valley on opposite moorlands there is the similar scaled development at Hameldon Hill, and slightly closer the Coal Clough development, which is subject to a repowering. Most developments are situated to the south west of Delf Hill in similar moorlands and affecting similar receptors, however at such a distance that although occasionally simultaneously visible effects tend to be of a minor to moderate level. A number of consented developments are also located in a similar area, such as Todmorden Moor, Crook Hill and Hameldon Hill Extension, the addition of these would increase cumulative visibility slightly but the general effects would be the same as these schemes tend to have more intervisibility with the current operational schemes. Activity to the north

125

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

and east is particularly sparse and the effects would be isolated and typically concentrated to the immediate areas in between Delf Hill and the schemes to the south and south west. Overall the cumulative level of effect caused by the development was found to be of a moderate level.

7.13 Conclusion The Delf Hill turbines would be located within a landscape which has capacity for such a scaled development and will appear alongside other man-made alterations to the landscape such as the quarry and the reservoir. Whilst there are some significant visual effects from the closest areas to the north and west, generally the visibility of the scheme is fairly limited as the moorland provides significant screening to the east and south. The development is in scale with the surrounding moorland and does not diminish its scale nor its character and the hill and moorland still functions as a backdrop and containment to the busier valleys below.

The turbines typically form a simple line which relates to the smooth nature of the moorland and is similar in scale and design to the existing development at Hameldon Hill across the valley. In most instances views are busy as receptors are generally located lower in the landscape where an abundance of development takes place and where man-made objects are commonplace. These tend to screen views and the development is never a prominent or overbearing feature.

126

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

8 Noise

8.1 Introduction In order to assess the likelihood of noise related complaints and to establish noise related planning conditions for the proposal, should it be consented, a background noise survey has been carried out at two properties representative of the nearest noise sensitive receptors. The monitoring locations were agreed in consultation with Burnley Council Environmental Health through a technical note emailed on the 16th of July 2013 and a follow up phone call the following day.

The assessment has been carried out in accordance with the recommendations of ETSU-R- 97, The Assessment and Rating of Noise from Wind Farms and more recent guidelines issued by the Institute of Acoustics in 2009 and 2013.4

Detailed predictions of the operational noise of the Enercon E82 turbine, the candidate model of the proposed three turbine development, have been made and compared with the measured background noise levels used to derive noise related constraints for the project. Using this data, an assessment of the likelihood of the project to meet the derived noise limits has been undertaken.

8.2 Terminology The symbols used for noise levels in this report are:

LWA is the A-weighted sound power level – a measure of the total sound energy emitted by a source of noise;

LA,eq is the A-weighted equivalent continuous sound pressure level, which is a measure of the total ambient noise at a given place at a given time; and

LA90,10min is the A-weighted sound pressure level exceeded for 90 percent of the time in the averaging time period specified – in this case 10 minutes – and is the index most widely used for background noise level measurements.

ETSU-R-97 states that the LA90,10min noise descriptor should be adopted for the noise assessment and that 2dB (A) should be subtracted from LA,eq values, when converting them to LA90,10min values.

4 Institute of Acoustics, ‘Prediction and assessment of wind turbine noise – agreement about relevant factors for noise assessment from wind energy projects’, Acoustics Bulletin, March/April 2009; and, Institute of Acoustics, “A good practice guide to the application of ETSU-R-97 for the assessment and rating of wind turbine noise” –– issued 05-2013

127

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

The wind speeds referred to in this report are:

Measured 10m wind speeds. Values are taken directly from wind speeds measured at 10m height on a 10m met-mast installed 50m from the highest of the proposed turbines for the duration of the background noise survey.

Standardised 10m wind speeds (v10). All turbine sound power levels are quoted with reference to standardised 10m wind speeds. These need to be adjusted in order to reference turbine noise levels to the measured 10m wind speeds. -1 Adjusted 10m wind speeds. These are equal to v10 - 3ms and are used to reference predicted turbine levels to measured 10m wind speeds. This approach is compliant with section 4.5 of ‘A good practice guide.’5

8.3 Guidance

Potential impacts Noise can have an effect on the environment and on the quality of life enjoyed by individuals and communities. The impact of noise can therefore be a material consideration in the determination of planning applications. Noise impacts can arise from three distinct areas of the wind farm development:

The construction of the wind turbine; During operation of the wind turbine; and Resulting from increased traffic flow during the construction and operation stages.

Given the scale of the development, it is anticipated that construction noise will be short term and in the most part will not increase background noise levels beyond the recommended limits set out by the World Health Organisation and the former Department of the Environment. As such we do not believe that it should be necessary to assess the construction phase noise.

National guidelines Guidance for assessing operational noise from wind farms is given in: ‘ETSU-R-97: the Assessment and Rating of Noise from Wind Farms (1997)’; The Department of Trade and Industry. (usually referred to as the Noise Working Group Recommendations); and

5 Institute of Acoustics, “A good practice guide to the application of ETSU-R-97 for the assessment and rating of wind turbine noise”,p23, 2013

128

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

The Institute of Acoustics (IOA) has since provided clarity on requirements for noise assessment of wind turbines in an attempt to encourage a standardised approach to this type of measurement:

‘Prediction and assessment of wind turbine noise – agreement about relevant factors for noise assessment from wind energy projects’, Acoustics Bulletin, March/April 2009, IOA More recently; ‘A good practice guide to the application of ETSU-R-97 for the assessment and rating of wind turbine noise’, May 2013, IOA; and the related Supplementary Guidance Notes that followed.

Noise limits In September 1996, the Noise Working Group published its recommendations in ETSU-R-97. The report describes a framework for the measurement of wind farm noise and includes suggested noise limits, derived with reference to existing standards and guidance relating to the emission of noise from various sources existing at that time.

The ETSU-R-97 guidelines recommend that the wind turbine noise should be limited to an absolute lower limit, of 35 - 40dB(A) [LA90,10min] for quiet daytime periods and 43dB(A) for night-time periods, or 5dB(A) above the background noise levels, whichever the greater. The absolute lower limit for quiet daytime periods was agreed in consultation with Burnley Council on the 15th July 2013 to be 40dB(A), with 43dB(A) identified as the night-time limit. It was also agreed that where a resident has a demonstrable financial interest in the project, a lower fixed limit of 45dB (A) should apply at that property during both quiet daytime and night-time periods.

The quiet daytime periods (amenity hours), are defined as:

18:00 – 23:00 – Monday to Friday; 13:00 – 23:00 – Saturdays; and 07:00 – 23:00 – Sundays.

Night time periods are: 23:00 – 07:00 each day

8.4 Background noise measurements Noise monitoring was conducted at two properties to characterise the prevailing background noise environment of the area. Measurements were made between the 30th of July and the 20th of August 2013.

129

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Location map Figure 8.1 shows the locations of the proposed wind turbines, the 10m met-mast and the nearest potential noise sensitive receptors.

Met-mast position The met-mast was positioned near the highest proposed turbine location on the site (T3). T3 is at 30m higher altitude than T2, which in turn is 30m higher than T1 above ground level. The 60m difference between T1 and T3 will result in hub height wind speeds that vary across the site; T3 will reach maximum sound power levels ahead of the other turbines as wind speed conditions increase. The position of the met-mast will therefore result in an over-prediction of turbine levels for wind speeds up to rated power, leading to a more conservative assessment of impact.

Noise contour The outer contour encloses an area where the worst case turbine noise levels are predicted to exceed 35dB(A) [LA90,10min]. This contour has been used to define the study area. The inner contour encloses an area where the turbine noise level could exceed 45dB(A) [LA90,10min], the maximum permissible fixed level for any property deemed to have a direct financial interest in the project. These contours assume downwind conditions.

130

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Figure 8.1: Map showing turbine positions and potential noise receptors

Key: Proposed wind turbines: T1-3 Met-mast: A1 The nearest potential noise sensitive receptors: H1 – 8

Noise monitoring location 1: Property H4 Known as ‘Monk Hall’ and located on the northern edge of a cluster of dwellings and business premises at Monk Hall Farm. This property was chosen to represent properties H2, H3, H4, H5 and H6. H6 was identified as being the closest property of the group to the development but considerable on-site building work observed during the installation visit gave cause to consider another monitoring location. H2 has been identified as being derelict but is included in the assessment for completeness.

131

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

A reasonably sheltered position was found at Monk Hall (H4) that was deemed sufficiently distant from building facades and vegetation for these features not to cause artificially elevated noise levels to be measured. No boiler flue at the building façade or nearby water course was observed. Figure 8.2Error! Reference source not found. shows the dwellings near Monk Hall in relation to the noise monitoring position.

Figure 8.2: Satellite image showing detail at Monk Hall. ©Google2013

Key Monitoring position Occupied dwellings

The noise monitoring equipment was positioned at the edge of a small paddock to the west of Monk Hall. The position is sheltered from winds arriving from all but the NW quadrant. Exposure to NW winds is limited by a rise in topography to the west of this position. Background noise levels recorded at this position will be used as a proxy for the nearby properties including those at Elders i’ th’ Row (H6). A photograph of the monitoring position in relation to the property façade is shown in Figure 8.3.

132

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Figure 8.3: Noise monitoring position at Monk Hall.

Details of the monitoring equipment used for the assessment is shown in Table 8.1.

Equipment List Sound Level Meter (IEC 651 Class 1): Rion NL-52 – Serial No. 00231693 Sound Level Calibrator (BS7189 Class 1): Rion NC-74 – Serial No. 35125826 Microphone: Instrument standard Tripod: Single integrated pole (1.4m) Wind Shield: Double skin Rion WS-15 Environmental Case: Yes Tripod/measurement GPS position: 388980,434370 Nearest reflecting elements & distances Building façade >8m from microphone: Table 8.1: List of equipment used at Monk Hall

Noise monitoring location 2: Property H7 Known as ‘Holden Farm’ and is the most easterly of three dwellings at that location, the others being Holden Barn 1 & 2. Holden Farm is the nearest of the three to the proposed development. This location was chosen over H8 (Ing Hey) as, of the two, permission had been given to monitor there by the day of installation. The properties at H7 & H8 are in a location that is topographically sheltered from all wind directions although the hills to the south-west are more distant than those in other directions. Error! Reference source not found. shows the dwellings near Holden Farm in relation to the noise monitoring position.

133

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Figure 8.4: Satellite image showing detail at Holden Farm. ©Google2013

Key Monitoring position Occupied dwellings

The noise monitoring equipment was positioned at the west edge of the large amenity area lying to the north of the property; this area was preferred by the resident. This position was chosen to put some distance between it and the row of trees lying to the east, a water course running north-south to the east of the trees, a large dog whose range was limited by a long rope in this area and a sewage system lying to the north that was only audible when standing within 3-4 metres of it. Background noise levels recorded at this position will be used as a proxy for all properties at H7 & H8. Photographs of the monitoring position are shown in Figure 8., the second shows the monitor in relation to the property façade.

Figure 8.5: Noise monitoring kit at Holden Farm.

Details of the monitoring equipment used at Holden Farm are listed in Table 8.2.

134

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Equipment List Sound Level Meter (IEC 651 Class 1): Rion NL-52 – Serial No. 00610174 Sound Level Calibrator (BS7189 Class 1): Rion NC-74 – Serial No. 35125826 Microphone: Instrument standard Tripod: Single integrated pole (1.4m) Wind Shield: Double skin Rion WS-15 Environmental Case: Yes Tripod/measurement GPS position: 388530,433870 Nearest reflecting elements & distances Low garden wall <1m and approximately 0.5m below from microphone: microphone height – therefore microphone in free-field conditions. Neighbouring facade approximately 15m. Property façade is 25m away Table 8.2 – List of equipment used at Holden Farm

Noise monitoring Noise levels were recorded using Rion NL-52 Class 1 integrating sound level meters housed in an environmental case, set to log LA90,10min and LAeq,10min throughout the monitoring period. A double skin wind shield was fitted to the microphone to ensure continued accuracy at the higher wind speeds. Acoustic calibration of the device was carried out before, during and after the monitoring period using a Rion NC-74 Acoustic Calibrator. The acoustic calibrator is calibrated every year, while the sound level meter is calibrated by an external body every two years. This ensures BS EN 61672 Class 1 compliance.

A 10m met-mast was installed at 389980, 433670 on 30th July 2013. Data retrieved from this mast have been used in this noise assessment. Table 8.3 lists the met-mast instruments and calibration dates. Data was recorded by the Le-Net system from Logic Energy and was accessible via GSM. Measurements were made over a sufficient period for an appropriate range of wind speeds to be recorded.

135

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Sensor Model Serial number Date of last calibration 10m Anemometer NRG #40C 1795-00205369 05/09/2012 10m Vane NRG 200P - - Rain gauge Davis II - - Table 8.3: Met-mast instruments and calibration dates

Exclusions – Atypical data Rainfall data recorded at the met-mast was used to flag the presence of rain in the area. Any elevated levels recorded at either property during the hour preceding or following the time that rainfall was recorded, were excluded. Noise data at both properties intermittently showed evidence of a dawn chorus whose presence appeared dependent on weather conditions. Elevated levels deemed to be attributed to the dawn chorus were removed.

Time histories of the noise levels recorded at both properties were interrogated for atypical noise levels that were time dependent or one-off events that appeared not to be associated with the wind conditions. These data were also removed; all excluded data are shown in the resulting scatter plots for information but are excluded from the regression analysis.

Data reduction To establish the applicable noise limits, the remaining data were then plotted against the concurrent 10m wind speeds measured by the 10m met-mast and best fit correlations of noise levels to measured 10m wind speed were established using third or fourth order polynomial functions. Both the function and correlation coefficient (R2) values are stated on the relevant figures.

8.5 Wind turbine noise propagation model

Propagation model The International Standard ISO 9613, ‘Acoustics – Attenuation of Sound During Propagation Outdoors - Part 2’, noise propagation model has been used for the turbine noise calculations. LAeq noise propagation was modelled using WindFarm v4.2.1.7 by ReSoft Ltd, which implements the ISO 9613 model. LA90 levels were derived by subtracting two decibels from the LAeq values as per the ETSU-R-97 guidance.

The follow input parameters are assumed and are consistent with current guidance. Octave band calculations were carried out with measured noise levels obtained via the turbine manufacturer assuming atmospheric attenuation coefficients corresponding to 10˚C and 70% humidity, a ground attenuation factor of G=0.5 (representing semi-soft ground), and a receptor height of 4m. No barrier correction is applicable to the calculations in this case as at least some portion of all three rotors is visible from all sensitive dwellings.

136

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Sound Power Levels The proposed candidate turbine model is the 3.0MW Enercon E82 with a hub height of 85m. Table 8.4 shows the measured octave band levels for the candidate turbine model. These levels do not include a 0.8dB(A) measurement uncertainty (Q).

-1 LAeq (dB) Standardized v10 wind speed (ms ) Octaveband 7 8 9 10 63Hz 88.0 89.1 84.6 85.8 125Hz 94.8 95.7 92.8 93.1 250Hz 99.7 100.0 99.4 99.3 500Hz 98.7 99.4 100.2 100.7 1000Hz 96.5 95.2 96.8 97.8 2000Hz 94.1 91.5 94.3 95.5 4000Hz 88.0 83.8 88.7 91.2 8000Hz 79.8 78.5 82.8 84.4 6 Table 8.4: Measured octave band noise levels as a function of wind speed

Table 8.5 shows the warranted broadband levels for the candidate turbine model.

-1 LAeq (dB) Standardized v10 wind speed (ms ) Broadband 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 *extrapolated 94.0* 98.0 102.0 105.0 106.0 106.0 106.0 7 Table 8.5: Warranted broadband levels as a function of wind speed

-1 The level shown for a v10 wind speed of 4ms is an extrapolation based on the 4dB reduction in sound power level per integer wind speed exhibited between 5ms-1 and 6ms-1. The broadband levels shown in Table 8.5 are used to scale the octave band levels displayed for 7ms-1 so that octave band levels for 6 - 4ms-1 can be derived, i.e. 3dB(A) is subtracted from each of the 7ms-1 octave bands to derive octave bands for 6ms-1 and so on.

Scaled octave band levels for 4 – 6ms-1 are shown in Table 8.6; levels for 7ms-1 are shown for reference.

-1 LAeq (dB) Standardized v10 wind speed (ms ) Octaveband 4 5 6 7 63Hz 77.0 81.0 85.0 88.0 125Hz 83.8 87.8 91.8 94.8 250Hz 88.7 92.7 96.7 99.7 500Hz 87.7 91.7 95.7 98.7 1000Hz 85.5 89.5 93.5 96.5 2000Hz 83.1 87.1 91.1 94.1 4000Hz 77.0 81.0 85.0 88.0 8000Hz 68.8 72.8 76.8 79.8 -1 Table 8.6: Scaled octave band levels for 4 – 6ms

6 Noise Report: Muller-BBM M89031_02 7 Noise Report: SIAS-04-SPL E-82 E3 OM I 3MW Est Rev1_0-eng-eng.doc

137

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

The scaled levels shown in Table 8.6 are used in conjunction with the measured levels shown in Table 8.4 to calculate the noise levels predicted to occur at the named properties. A 1.3dB(A) safety factor is then added to predicted noise levels at all integer wind speeds to take account of measurement uncertainties. This figure is derived from Q x 1.645 as per current guidelines8, where Q = measurement uncertainty.

Atmospheric attenuation The attenuation of noise as it travels through the air varies with frequency. The atmospheric attenuation coefficients are tabulated below in Table 8.7:

Octave Band (Hz) 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000 Attenuation Coefficient 0.0001 0.0004 0.0010 0.0019 0.0037 0.0097 0.0328 0.1170 Table 8.7: Attenuation coefficients used for the noise propagation model

Modelled distances ‘Line of sight’ distances have been assumed and refer to the horizontal distance from the nearest turbine to a position at the property closest to the development. This may be different from the monitoring location and represents a minimum distance from turbine to receptor, shown in Table 8.8 to the nearest 10m.

Reference Name Distance from the proposed turbine (m) H1 Sweet Well House Farm 530 H2 Derelict property 970 H3 Nearest dwelling at Monk Hall Farm 940 H4 Monk Hall 970 H5 Unknown 930 H69 Nearest dwelling at Elders I’ th’ Row 890 H7 Holden Farm 940 H8 Ing Hey 880 Table 8.8: Distance of sensitive properties to the nearest turbine

8.6 Predicted wind turbine noise levels

Table 8.9 shows the predicted turbine LA90,10min noise levels calculated using the previously defined octave band sound power levels. Noise levels are tabulated with reference to Standardised 10m Wind Speeds of 4ms-1 to 12ms-1 and corresponding Adjusted 10m Wind Speeds of 1ms-1 to 9ms-1 (required by the simplified wind shear correction method). The levels presented are inclusive of the +1.3dB safety factor that accounts for measurement uncertainty.

8 Institute of Acoustics, “A good practice guide to the application of ETSU-R-97 for the assessment and rating of wind turbine noise”,p20, 2013 9 See figure 8.1 for location

138

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

With reference to the broadband sound power levels in Table 8.6, the candidate turbine -1 reaches a maximum at v10 wind speeds of 8ms showing no increase for wind speeds of 9 -1 -1 and 10ms . As octave band levels for v10 wind speeds of 10ms are, by a small margin, the loudest, these levels are assumed for wind speeds of 11 and 12ms-1; this assumption is denoted in Table 8.9 by the use of italics. A site map showing noise contours can be found at Appendix 3.

Standardised 10m Wind Speed Predicted Turbine levels 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Representative Properties Adjusted 10m Wind Speed (≡ Measured 10m Wind Speed) House ID Easting Northing 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 389409 434025 30.7 34.7 38.7 41.7 42.0 41.9 42.4 42.4 42.4 2 389327 434503 25.0 29.0 33.0 36.0 36.3 36.1 36.5 36.5 36.5 3 389027 434355 24.9 28.9 32.9 35.9 36.2 36.0 36.4 36.4 36.4 4 388992 434369 24.6 28.6 32.6 35.6 35.9 35.7 36.1 36.1 36.1 5 388923 434330 24.4 28.4 32.4 35.4 35.8 35.6 36.0 36.0 36.0 6 388888 434211 25.1 29.1 33.1 36.1 36.4 36.2 36.6 36.6 36.6 7 388540 433828 24.0 28.0 32.0 35.0 35.4 35.2 35.6 35.6 35.6 8 388557 433670 24.5 28.5 32.5 35.5 35.9 35.7 36.1 36.1 36.1

Table 8.9: Predicted wind turbine noise levels (LA90,10min) at nearby properties. Table 8.9 shows that the predicted turbine noise levels for property H1 (Sweet Well House Farm) could reach 42.4dB (A). The applicable noise limit at H1 is the fixed 45dB(A) limit ascribed by ETSU-R-97 to properties whose residents have a financial interest in the development. Of the remaining properties, the predicted levels for any integer wind speed are within a decibel of each other reflecting the similarity of distance of the properties to the proposed development; the highest levels are predicted to occur at H6 where levels are predicted to reach up to 36.6dB(A).

8.7 Noise impact assessment

Wind data Figure 8.6 shows 10m wind speeds logged during the monitoring period. A direction of zero degrees equates to a northerly wind, 90° = E, 180° = S, 270° = W etc.

Wind shear As wind speeds were measured on a 10m met-mast, the simplified wind shear correction method has been used. This method is ‘worst case’ and makes corrections on the basis of some of the highest wind shear characteristics measured in the UK, characteristic of a lowland site in the vicinity of a significant number of trees. However, the site of the proposed development is an unobstructed hill top location that is open to the prevailing

139

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

south-westerly winds. As such, it is expected that in practice, relatively low levels of wind shear would be present.

For a comparative reference, Supplementary Guidance Note 410 lists indicative wind shear exponents for a ‘clear hill top’ site. From the predicted turbine levels shown in the graphs that follow, it can be seen that the most sensitive wind speed is a standardised 10m wind speed of 7ms-1. The ‘Note 4’ exponents for this wind speed are 0.18 for quiet daytime periods and 0.20 for night-time periods; close to standard conditions and marginally above standard conditions respectively.

As an illustration of how conservative the simplified wind shear correction method is, these exponents equate to no more than a 0.5ms-1 shift for quiet daytime periods and no more than a 1.0ms-1 shift for night-time periods, rather than the 3.0ms-1 required by the method. The result of the 3.0ms-1 shift is to increase the range of conditions that the turbines are predicted to be audible.

Figure 8.6: Variation of Measured 10m Wind Speed with direction measured at 10m height

10 Institute of Acoustics, “A good practice guide to the application of ETSU-R-97 for the assessment and rating of wind turbine noise, supplementary guidance note 4: wind shear” p13, 2013

140

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

NB. Due to exclusions, the analysis is based on a sub-set of the data shown above.

Results – H6 - Elders i’ th’ Row

The following figures and associated tables show the measured LA90,10min background noise levels as a function of Measured 10m Wind Speeds and predicted turbine levels referring to the Adjusted 10m wind speeds shown in Table 8.9 The data are represented by best fit polynomial regression functions from which the noise limits are derived. The figures show the predicted turbine noise levels in relation to the derived limits.

Figure 8.7 shows background levels, derived limits and predicted turbine noise levels for Elders i’ th’ Row during night-time periods.

Figure 8.7: Background levels, derived limits and predicted turbine noise levels for Elders i’ th’ Row during night-time periods.

141

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Measured 10m WS ms-1 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Background Noise Number of values - 120 117 129 74 47 47 45 31 4 Average value LA90,10min dB(A) 24.7 26.5 28.8 31.4 34.1 36.7 39.0 40.7 41.8 Calculated Constraint Average value LA90,10min dB(A) 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 44.0 45.7 46.8 Predicted Turbine Noise Average value LA90,10min dB(A) 36.1 36.4 36.2 36.6 36.6 36.6 36.6 36.6 36.6 Level Difference Exceedence dB(A) -7.0 -6.6 -6.8 -6.4 -6.4 -6.4 -7.4 -9.1 -10.1 Table 8.Table 8.10 shows the tabulated results or Elders I’ the’ Row during night time periods.

Measured 10m WS ms-1 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Background Noise Number of values - 120 117 129 74 47 47 45 31 4

Average value LA90,10min dB(A) 24.7 26.5 28.8 31.4 34.1 36.7 39.0 40.7 41.8 Calculated Constraint

Average value LA90,10min dB(A) 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 44.0 45.7 46.8 Predicted Turbine Noise

Average value LA90,10min dB(A) 36.1 36.4 36.2 36.6 36.6 36.6 36.6 36.6 36.6 Level Difference Exceedence dB(A) -7.0 -6.6 -6.8 -6.4 -6.4 -6.4 -7.4 -9.1 -10.1 Table 8.10: Background levels, derived limits and predicted turbine noise levels for Elders i’ th’ Row during night-time periods.

In terms of the calculated noise constraint from Table 8.10 the most critical wind speeds are 10 to 12ms-1 when the turbines are predicted to be 6.4dB below the noise limit for night time periods. The turbines are increasingly less likely to be audible as wind speeds rise above 10ms-1, when background noise will become dominant.

Figure 8.8 shows background levels, derived limits and predicted turbine noise levels for Elders i’ th’ Row during quiet daytime hours.

142

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Figure 8.8: Background levels, derived limits and predicted turbine noise levels Elders i’ th’ Row during quiet daytime hours.

Table 8.11 shows the tabulated results for Elders i’ th’ Row during quiet daytime hours

Measured 10m WS ms-1 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Background Noise Number of values - 70 54 91 97 91 89 101 40 14

Average value LA90,10min dB(A) 28.1 29.5 31.3 33.3 35.5 37.8 40.2 42.6 44.9 Calculated Constraint

Average value LA90,10min dB(A) 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.5 42.8 45.2 47.6 49.9 Predicted Turbine Noise

Average value LA90,10min dB(A) 36.1 36.4 36.2 36.6 36.6 36.6 36.6 36.6 36.6 Level Difference Exceedence dB(A) -4.0 -3.6 -3.8 -3.4 -3.9 -6.2 -8.6 -11.0 -13.2 Table 8.11 Background levels, derived limits and predicted turbine noise levels for Elders i’ th’ Row during quiet daytime hours.

In terms of the calculated noise constraint in Table 8, the most critical wind speeds are 8 to 10ms-1 when the predicted turbine noise is a minimum of 3.4dB below the noise limit for quiet daytime hours. This reduced exceedence reflects the 3dB reduction in the fixed noise limit for quiet-daytime periods.

143

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Results – H8 – Ing Hey Figure 8.9 shows background levels, derived limits and predicted turbine noise levels for Ing Hey during night-time periods.

Figure 8.9: Background levels, derived limits and predicted turbine noise levels for Ing Hey during night-time periods.

Table 8.12 shows the tabulated results for Ing Hey during night-time periods.

144

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Measured 10m WS ms-1 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Background Noise Number of values - 136 118 135 81 58 75 55 31 7

Average value LA90,10min dB(A) 24.1 24.4 25.3 26.9 29.2 31.9 34.6 36.9 37.8 Calculated Constraint

Average value LA90,10min dB(A) 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 Predicted Turbine Noise

Average value LA90,10min dB(A) 35.5 35.9 35.7 36.1 36.1 36.1 36.1 36.1 36.1 Level Difference Exceedence dB(A) -7.5 -7.1 -7.3 -6.9 -6.9 -6.9 -6.9 -6.9 -6.9 Table 8.12 - Background levels, derived limits and predicted turbine noise levels for Ing Hey during night- time periods.

In terms of the calculated noise constraint in Error! Reference source not found., the most critical wind speeds are 10 to 12ms-1 when the turbines are predicted to be 7.1dB below the noise limit for night time periods. Assuming no increase in absolute level, turbine noise is less likely to be audible above 10ms-1.

Figure 8.10 shows background levels, derived limits and predicted turbine noise levels for Ing Hey during quiet daytime hours.

145

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Figure 8.10: Background levels, derived limits and predicted turbine noise levels Ing Hey during quiet daytime hours.

Table 8.13 shows the tabulated results for Ing Hey during quiet daytime hours.

Measured 10m WS ms-1 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Background Noise Number of values - 69 49 79 91 89 94 91 39 15

Average value LA90,10min dB(A) 25.9 26.5 27.7 29.3 31.3 33.6 36.1 38.5 40.8 Calculated Constraint

Average value LA90,10min dB(A) 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 41.1 43.5 45.8 Predicted Turbine Noise

Average value LA90,10min dB(A) 35.5 35.9 35.7 36.1 36.1 36.1 36.1 36.1 36.1 Level Difference Exceedence dB(A) -4.5 -4.1 -4.3 -3.9 -3.9 -3.9 -5.0 -7.4 -9.7 Table 8.13 - Background levels, derived limits and predicted turbine noise levels for Ing Hey during quiet daytime hours.

In terms of the calculated noise constraint in Error! Reference source not found., the most critical wind speeds are 10 to 12ms-1 when the turbines are predicted to be 4.1dB below the noise limit for quiet daytime periods. Assuming no increase in absolute level, turbine noise is less likely to be audible above 10ms-1.

146

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Tabulated exceedence for all properties during night-time periods Exceedences (dB) are shown in Table 8.14. Colours denote applicable limits; negative numbers show levels below the derived noise limits.

Representative Properties Measured 10m Wind Speeds House ID Name 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 H1 Sweet Well House Farm -14.3 -10.3 -6.3 -3.3 -3.0 -3.1 -2.6 -2.6 -2.6 H2 Derelict property -18.0 -14.0 -10.0 -7.0 -6.7 -6.9 -7.5 -9.2 -10.2 H3 Nearest of cluster at Monk Hall Farm -18.1 -14.1 -10.1 -7.1 -6.8 -7.0 -7.6 -9.3 -10.3 H4 Monk Hall -18.5 -14.5 -10.5 -7.5 -7.1 -7.3 -7.9 -9.6 -10.7 H5 Unknown -18.6 -14.6 -10.6 -7.6 -7.2 -7.4 -8.0 -9.8 -10.8 H6 Nearest of cluster at Elders I’ th’ Row -18.0 -14.0 -10.0 -7.0 -6.6 -6.8 -7.4 -9.1 -10.1 H7 Holden Farm -19.0 -15.0 -11.0 -8.0 -7.6 -7.8 -7.5 -7.5 -7.5 H8 Ing Hey -18.5 -14.5 -10.5 -7.5 -7.1 -7.3 -6.9 -6.9 -6.9 Table 8.14: Tabulated exceedence (dB) for all properties during night-time periods

At Sweet Well House Farm, the minimum exceedence is 2.6dB(A) below the fixed 45dB noise limit for both amenity periods. The predicted noise levels at all other properties are similar and remain more than 6.6dB(A) below the derived noise limits.

Tabulated exceedence for all properties during quiet daytime periods Exceedences (dB) are shown in Table 8.15. Colours denote applicable limits; negative numbers show levels below the derived noise limits.

Representative Properties Measured 10m Wind Speeds House ID Name 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 H1 Sweet Well House Farm -14.3 -10.3 -6.3 -3.3 -3.0 -3.1 -2.6 -2.6 -2.6 H2 Derelict property -15.0 -11.0 -7.0 -4.0 -4.2 -6.7 -8.7 -11.1 -13.3 H3 Nearest of cluster at Monk Hall Farm -15.1 -11.1 -7.1 -4.1 -4.3 -6.8 -8.8 -11.2 -13.4 H4 Monk Hall -15.5 -11.5 -7.5 -4.5 -4.6 -7.1 -9.1 -11.5 -13.8 H5 Unknown -15.6 -11.6 -7.6 -4.6 -4.7 -7.2 -9.2 -11.6 -13.9 H6 Nearest of cluster at Elders I’ th’ Row -15.0 -11.0 -7.0 -4.0 -4.1 -6.6 -8.6 -11.0 -13.2 H7 Holden Farm -16.0 -12.0 -8.0 -5.0 -4.6 -4.8 -5.5 -8.0 -10.2 H8 Ing Hey -15.5 -11.5 -7.5 -4.5 -4.1 -4.3 -5.0 -7.4 -9.7 Table 8.15: Tabulated exceedences (dB) for all properties during quiet daytime periods

The results in Table 8.15 show that the predicted noise levels at all properties remain more than 4.0dB(A) below the derived noise limits for quiet daytime periods with the exception of Sweet Well House Farm.

147

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

8.8 Conclusions

Assessment of noise impact It has been demonstrated that the project would comfortably meet ETSU-R-97 guidance derived noise constraints at the nearest properties in the absence of any mitigating factors.

The 3ms-1 adjustment to all calculated turbine noise levels used here to comply with recent IoA guidance is representative of a very high wind shear normally associated with a lowland area in the vicinity of trees. By contrast, the proposed site is an upland location in which there are no such sheltering features. From experience, typical wind shear characteristics for this type of location would be represented by a shift of a maximum of 1ms-1; this is supported by the indicative levels referred to in Note 4 of the IoA Supplementary Guidance.

At Sweet Well House Farm, whose residents will have a financial interest in the project should it gain consent, it is demonstrated that the minimum headroom below noise limits would be 2.6dB.

Therefore, it is expected that the proposed wind project could be accommodated in this area in noise terms without unacceptable impact on surrounding properties.

Mitigation The project is predicted to meet the noise related constraints required easily, therefore, no mitigation is proposed. It should be noted that none of the properties are downwind of the turbines during the prevailing south-westerly wind conditions; this will limit exposure to the worst case conditions at nearby properties that are presented in this assessment.

Summary Using worst case assumptions, noise constraints have been derived for the closest properties to the proposed wind turbines, based on the variation of background noise with wind speed. It is expected that these constraints would be comfortably met during both night-time and daytime amenity hours.

Noise conditions It is recommended that, if the project is to go ahead, suitable planning conditions are formulated based on the background noise constraints found referenced to 10m measured wind speeds. As discussed, there is a positive indication that on-site wind shear will be significantly lower than that implied by a 3ms-1 adjustment in turbine noise levels.

148

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

9 Cultural Heritage/Archaeology

9.1 Introduction

Development site The proposed development site is situated on the western edge of the South Pennines, 5km to the east of Burnley, and 530m to the east of Sweet Well House Farm. The site covers approximately 100 hectares focused on Delf Hill, which rises to a height of 378m above Ordnance Datum (AOD).

The southern part of the site, within which the proposed infrastructure is located, occupies the south-facing slope of Delf Hill, descending steeply towards the Swinden Water stream, which is fed by the Swinden Reservoir to the immediate south-west of the site. Much of this area is occupied by Delf Hill Quarry, which is still operational, and has been heavily disturbed by quarry activity since the 19th century (Plates 1 and 2 in Appendix 4.1). Away from the active quarrying, the area largely comprises rough pasture, and is crossed by numerous stream channels and drains. An area of exposed and eroded blanket peat is also situated to the north of the summit of Delf Hill.

The northern part of the site consists of rough pasture, occupying a steep north facing slope, which descends from a height of approximately 370m to 290m (Plates 3 and 4 in Appendix 4.1), where the site boundary meets the edge of an area of mixed woodland known as New Plantation. A steep sided valley cuts north-south along the north-western side of the site along which runs Ell Clough, and further smaller streams flow down the hillside to the east (see Plate 9 Appendix 4.1). This northern part of the proposed development site is divided into a number of rectangular fields by relict dry stone walls, and there has been extensive historical quarrying activity within the field around Ell Clough. The ruins of a 19th century farmhouse are also situated on the north-eastern side of the site (Plate 5 Appendix 4.1).

On the western side of the site are three fields of improved pasture, divided by high dry stone walls (Plate 6 Appendix 4.1), although there has been extensive historical quarrying in the northernmost of these.

The proposed development site is crossed by three public footpaths, broadly aligned east- west, the northernmost of which follows the line of a track which served the former farmhouse to the east of Ell Clough. A number of private metalled tracks also provide access to Delf Hill Quarry.

149

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Government and local planning policies Statutory protection for archaeology is outlined in the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act (1979) as amended by the National Heritage Act (1983). A schedule of nationally significant archaeological sites given legal protection is maintained by English Heritage, which provides advice to the Department of Culture, Media and Sport on all archaeological and heritage matters in England. As part of the Act, a system of Scheduled Monument Consent (SMC) is supported requiring permission to be sought from English Heritage before any work can be undertaken on a Scheduled Monument.

Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas receive protection under the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. Any work that may affect the character and appearance of these structures or areas will require approval of the Local Planning Authority and/or English Heritage.

National Planning Policy Framework The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) sets out the government's planning policies for England and how these are expected to be applied, with a central theme of ‘presumption in favour of sustainable development’. Planning policy regarding the historic environment is outlined in Chapter 12 of the framework, with an emphasis on the need to determine the significance of any heritage assets including any contribution made by their setting, which may potentially be affected by a proposed development (paragraph 128). This requires, as a minimum that the relevant historic environment record should be consulted and heritage assets assessed using appropriate expertise. Where a site on which development is proposed includes or has the potential to include heritage assets with archaeological interest, local planning authorities should require developers to submit an appropriate desk-based assessment and, where necessary, a field evaluation.

Burnley Local Plan The Burnley Local Plan (BBC 2006) includes a number of policies relating to the protection and enhancement of heritage assets and the historic environment. Policy E18 relates to the protection of Scheduled Monuments within the Borough of Burnley; Policies E10 and E11 relate directly to the alteration or demolition of Listed Buildings; Policy E19 addresses issues of development and archaeological remains; Policy E17 relates to historic parks and gardens, and Policies E12-15 consider Conservation Areas, and buildings or features assessed to be of local importance.

Planning considerations pertaining to the site The Local Planning Authority is advised on all archaeological matters by the Lancashire County Council Planning Officer (Archaeology). The Archaeology Officer has provided comment at both scoping and following submission of the Desk-based Assessment

150

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

(Appendix 4.1), his comments are outlined in the section entitled ‘Mitigation of Significant Impacts’ below.

Limitations of Scope This assessment is based upon data obtained from publicly accessible archives as described in the Data Sources in Section 9.3 and a walkover survey. The assessment of impact on the setting of heritage assets was made through site visits, GIS analysis and the utilisation of ZTV mapping, wireframes and photomontages as necessary.

9.2 Aims and Objectives

The aim of this study is to identify elements of archaeological and cultural heritage value that may be impacted upon by the proposed wind cluster at Delf Hill. The evidence presented and the conclusions offered provide a comprehensive basis for further discussion and decisions regarding the future of this site and for the formulation of a mitigation strategy, should this be required.

This study assesses the archaeological and cultural heritage implications of the proposed Delf Hill Wind Cluster, by examining current evidence for buried archaeological remains and upstanding monuments both on the proposed development itself and within a wider 2km assessment area surrounding the site. The potential impact of the proposed wind cluster on the settings of designated heritage assets within a 5km radius of the site which have been assessed.

9.3 Methodology

Standards The scope of this assessment meets the requirements of current planning regulations set out in the National Planning Policy Framework (CLG 2012).

AOC Archaeology Group conforms to the standards of professional conduct outlined in the Institute for Archaeologists' Code of Conduct, the IfA Code of Approved Practice for the Regulation of Contractual Arrangements in Field Archaeology, the IfA Standards and Guidance for Desk Based Assessments, Field Evaluations etc., and the British Archaeologists and Developers Liaison Group Code of Practice.

AOC Archaeology Group is a Registered Archaeological Organisation of the IfA. This status ensures that there is regular monitoring and approval by external peers of their internal systems, standards and skills development.

151

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

AOC is ISO 9001:2008 accredited, in recognition of the Company’s Quality Management System.

Data sources The following data sources were consulted during preparation of this environmental impact assessment:

. The English Heritage Archive (formerly the National Monuments Record) (English Heritage, Fire Fly Avenue, Swindon o For aerial photographic data, Listed Building data and Scheduled Monument data on the National Heritage List

. Lancashire Historic Environment Record o For Historic Environment Record data; including records of known heritage assets and previous archaeological reports.

. West Yorkshire Historic Environment Record o For Historic Environment Record data; including records of known heritage assets and previous archaeological reports.

. Lancashire Archives o For early Ordnance Survey mapping and pre-Ordnance Survey historic mapping.

Walkover Survey A walkover survey of the proposed development site was undertaken in April 2013. This involved systematically walking a grid of 50m wide transects, in a north-south orientation, as the natural topography and ground cover allowed.

The details of all identified surface remains were recorded onto pro-forma record sheets in the field. These sheets included a description, measurements, details of form and function, ground cover and any relationships that the feature may have with adjacent features. A central National Grid Reference (NGR) was provided for each feature, using navigation- grade handheld GPS equipment, with an accuracy of +/-5m. Points along the alignments of linear features and enclosure boundaries were also plotted to provide a plan of these features (see Figure 3).

Setting Assessment Data gathering was undertaken which identified all designated heritage assets within 5km of the land-ownership boundary. These assets were mapped in GIS and set against the ZTV to

152

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

identify those from which the proposed turbines would be visible. Those assets outwith the ZTV were scoped out of further assessment. The gazetteer notes assets that are located outside the ZTV.

A large number of heritage assets are located within the urban area of Burnley and its suburbs. The density and height of buildings in these areas mean that the turbines will be largely if not entirely screened from view. Furthermore these areas tend to be located at distances of around 5km from the proposed wind cluster. These areas were visited rapidly during the setting assessment to ensure that visibility beyond the urban area was minimal and this assumption was confirmed. Given this a number of designated heritage assets within urban areas have been scoped out of the assessment. These assets are noted in the gazetteer.

Site visits to designated heritage assets, excepting those noted above as having been scoped out, were made on the 20th and 21st November 2013. Visibility on the 20th was good and clear. The 21st was overcast with occasional rain, however visibility remained good. The assessment considered the condition, scale and significance of each asset visited. The current setting of the asset was recorded including those elements which contributed to the significance of the assets. The assessment has been guided by the methodology set out in this section and Appendix 4.3.

Report structure Each archaeological or historical site, monument or building referred to in the text is listed in the Gazetteer in Appendix 4.4. Each has been assigned a 'Site No.' unique to this assessment, and the Gazetteer includes information regarding the type, period, grid reference, National Heritage List number, HER number, statutory protective designation, and other descriptive information, as derived from the consulted sources. The archaeological and cultural heritage significance of each asset is also noted. For designated heritage assets the gazetteer also notes which assets have been visited for setting assessments and where sites have not been visited notes why they were scoped out.

Each heritage asset referred to in the text is plotted on the location maps (Figs. 1 and 2) using the assigned Site Nos. The proposed wind cluster is shown outlined in red.

All known heritage assets located within a 2 km radius of the edge of the proposed development area have been included in the assessment. The aim of this is to help predict the possibility that similar hitherto unknown archaeological remains survive within the development area and therefore predict the potential for the development to impact upon unknown buried archaeology. Designated heritage assets within 5 km of the proposed development have also been identified with an aim of assessing potential visual impacts upon the setting of these assets.

153

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Impact assessment methodology A glossary defining terms and concepts discussed in this chapter can be found in Appendix 4.3. The method employed in arriving at a predicted significance of impact is outlined below.

Direct Impacts

Establishing cultural value The rating of archaeological and architectural heritage value of the culture heritage features within the proposed development area has been guided by criteria used by English Heritage for scheduling monuments and classifying listed buildings. Monuments are generally considered for scheduling based upon factors such as age, rarity, condition and archaeological context, while listed buildings are designated and graded based upon similar criteria as well as their technical innovation/virtuosity, architectural design and associations with well-known architects, historical persons or events.

In some cases a site or building which does not have a protective designation assigned to it could nonetheless still be rated as having the same significance as another one which is protected. This is because the selection of items for listing and scheduling is an ongoing national activity. Generally, the criteria for judging significance are gradually evolving, with an increasing trend towards including more recent types of structures. In some cases, important buildings or monuments may have been overlooked during listing, or could now be judged worthy of listing, whereas they were not previously.

The criteria used to rate the significance of heritage assets in the proposed development area are presented in Table 9.1.

154

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Significance Type of Heritage Asset

Scheduled Monuments Listed Buildings (Grade I and II*) High Registered Parks and Gardens Registered Battlefields World Heritage Sites Listed Buildings (Grade II) Conservation Areas Medium Heritage Assets identified as being of regional of local importance on the HER Sites identified within this assessment considered to be of regional of local importance

Non-designated Heritage Assets recorded on the HER Low Previously unrecorded sites identified in this assessment and not considered to be significant

Remains of Low significance that have been largely damaged thus severely restricting their Negligible ability to inform and therefore their significance

None Previously recorded heritage assets or sites recorded in documentary sources now destroyed

Potential but previously unrecorded sub-surface archaeological remains Unknown Historical sites or features identified through documentary evidence as part of this assessment

Table 9.1 – Criteria for Rating Significance

Assessing magnitude of physical impact

The magnitude of the physical impact upon monuments caused by the development has been rated using the classifications and criteria outlined in Table 9.2.

155

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Physical Criteria impact High Major loss of information content resulting from total or large-scale removal of deposits from a site whether or not the site is associated with a monument.

Major alteration of a monument’s baseline condition.

Any physical alteration to a Scheduled Monument.

Any alteration to a Grade I or II* Listed Building, or massive alterations to a Grade II Listed Building

Medium Moderate loss of information content resulting from material alteration of the baseline conditions by removal of part of a site whether or not the site is associated with a monument.

Slight alteration of a monument’s baseline condition

Low Minor detectable impacts leading to the loss of information content. Minor alterations to the baseline condition of a monument. Marginal Very slight or barely measurable loss of information content;

Loss of a small percentage of the area of a site’s peripheral deposits.

Very slight and reversible alterations to a monument. None No physical impact anticipated.

Table 9.2 – Criteria for Classifying Magnitude of Physical Impact

The predicted significance of impact upon each asset was determined by considering its significance in conjunction with the magnitude of impact predicted on it. The method of deriving the significance of impact classifications is shown in Table 9.3 below:

156

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Rating of significance

Significance of Heritage Asset

Magnitude of Negligible Low Medium High impact

High Minor- Moderate Moderate- Major Moderate Major Moderate Minor Minor- Moderate Moderate- Moderate Major Low Negligible Minor Minor- Moderate Moderate Marginal Negligible Negligible Minor Minor- Moderate None None None None None None Table 9.3 – Method of Rating Significance of Impact on Heritage Assets by the Proposed Development

Indirect Impacts

Establishing visual sensitivity

The predicted significance of visual impact upon designated heritage assets was determined by considering their relative visual sensitivity, taking account of the heritage significance, in conjunction with the magnitude of visual impact predicted on it. The method of establishing relative visual sensitivity is outlined in Table 9.4.

157

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Sensitivity* Definition

High A heritage asset which retains an overtly intended or authentic relationship within its visual setting and the surrounding landscape. In particular ritual monuments which have constructed sightlines to and/or from them or structures intended to be visually dominant within a wide landscape area i.e. castles, tower houses, prominent forts etc.

A heritage asset, the current understanding of which, relies heavily on its modern aesthetic setting regardless of whether or not this was intended by the original constructors or authentic users of the monument. Medium A heritage asset which had an overtly intended authentic relationship with its visual setting and the surrounding landscape but where that relationship has been moderately compromised either by previous modern intrusion to the setting or landscape or whereby the asset itself is in such a state of disrepair that the relationship cannot be fully determined.

A heritage asset, the current understanding of which relies partially on its modern aesthetic setting regardless of whether or not this was intended by the original constructors or authentic users of the asset. Low A heritage asset which had an overtly intended authentic relationship with its visual setting and the surrounding landscape but where that relationship has been significantly compromised either by previous modern intrusion to the setting or landscape or whereby the asset itself is in such a state of disrepair that the relationship cannot be determined.

A heritage asset whose placement within the landscape was not determined by visual setting but by some other factor whether that be industrial, agricultural of simply functional etc.** Marginal A heritage asset whose placement within the landscape was not determined by visual setting but by some other factor whether that be industrial, agricultural of simply functional etc; and is additionally in such a state of disrepair that its relationship to its setting cannot be fully determined. None A heritage asset that can be defined as a site whose remains are located fully below the current ground surface (i.e. crop mark sites), and subsequently for which neither the full extent nor significance of the site itself nor it setting can be determined without archaeological investigation. * Note that the determination of a monument’s sensitivity is first and foremost reliant upon the determination of its setting; i.e. a country house may have a high sensitivity within its own landscaped park or garden but its level of sensitivity may be less when considered within the wider landscape area.

**While the immediate setting of such monuments is clearly significant, their relationship to the wider landscape is less sensitive to visual change. Where the immediate setting of such sites is to be impacted by development this will be taken into consideration. Table 9.4 – Criteria for Establishing Relative Visual Sensitivity

158

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Classifying magnitude of visual impact The method of classifying the magnitude of visual impact is shown in Table 9.5 below.

Setting Criteria impact High Direct and substantial visual impact on a significant sightline to or from a ritual monument or prominent fort; Direct severance of the relationship between a monument and its setting where that monument has a Low, Medium or High visual sensitivity; Major alteration to the penumbral or close settings of a Scheduled Monument (or asset of comparable importance) with Medium to High visual sensitivity; Major visual imposition within a Cultural Landscape; Major visual imposition within or affecting an Iconic Site or Monument. Medium Oblique visual impact on an axis adjacent to a significant sightline to or from a ritual monument but where the significant sightline of the monument is not obscured; Major visual imposition affecting glacis of a prominent fort (based on the proportion of the glacis that would be obscured); Partial severance of the relationship between an asset and its setting where that monument has a Low, Medium or High visual sensitivity; Significant alteration to the setting of a SAM (or asset of comparable importance) of Medium to High visual sensitivity or significant alteration to the setting of a Grade I, II * or II Listed Building (or asset of comparable importance) of Medium to High visual sensitivity beyond those elements of the setting which directly contribute to the understanding of the cultural significance of the monument; Significant but not major visual imposition within a Cultural Landscape. Low Peripheral visual impact on a significant sightline to or from a ritual monument; Insignificant alteration to the setting of a SAM (or asset of comparable importance) of Medium to High visual sensitivity or insignificant alteration to the setting of a Grade I, II * or II Listed Building (or asset of comparable importance) of Medium to High visual sensitivity beyond those elements of the setting which directly contribute to the understanding of the cultural significance of the monument; Significant alteration to the setting of a SAM (or asset of comparable importance) of Low visual sensitivity or significant alteration to the setting of a Grade I, II * or II Listed Building (or asset of comparable importance) of Low visual sensitivity beyond those elements of the setting which directly contribute to the understanding of the cultural significance of the monument; Minor visual imposition with a Cultural Landscape. Marginal All other visual impacts None No intervisibility. Table 9.5 – Criteria for Classifying Magnitude of Setting Impact

159

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Assessing the significance of visual impacts The predicted significance of setting impact upon each asset was determined by considering its sensitivity, taking cognisance its cultural significance, in conjunction with the magnitude of impact predicted on it. The method of deriving the significance of impact classifications is shown in Table 9.6 below.

Relative Visual Sensitivity Impact Marginal Low Medium High magnitude High Minor Minor-Moderate Moderate Major Medium Negligible Minor Minor-Moderate Moderate Low None/Negligible Negligible Minor Minor-Moderate Marginal None None Negligible Minor The impacts recorded in highlighted cells are ‘significant’ in terms of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2011 Table 9.6 – Significance of the effects of visual impacts on the cultural value of monuments

The assessment of the significance of impact by the development is based upon plans, ZTV data and visualisations supplied by the client to AOC Archaeology Group and site visits.

All sources consulted during the assessment, including publications, archived records, photographic and cartographic evidence, are listed in the Bibliography at the end of this report.

Assessment of Harm The assessment methodology outlined above indicates whether an impact upon a heritage asset is significant in terms of EIA Regulations. The NPPF, where designated heritage assets are concerned, requires us to make an assessment as to the level of harm which could be caused to heritage assets by the proposed development. It requires us to indicate whether that harm is substantial or less than substantial and the level of harm predicted will establish the planning test to be applied.

Harm is defined by English Heritage as ‘Change for the worse, here primarily referring to the effect of inappropriate interventions on the heritage values of a place’ (2008, p 71). Developments can cause harm to heritage assets through direct physical impacts and/or indirect, impacts on the setting of cultural heritage features. Direct impacts cause a reduction or loss of cultural value or heritage significance because the physical alteration of the site, monument, building or feature reduces its ability to inform this and future generations about our past. If the physical impact materially alters the appearance of the site, monument, building or feature it may impact on its aesthetic value.

160

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Conversely, negative indirect impacts on setting commonly reduce the aesthetic value of the cultural heritage asset but in some special cases can reduce the cultural value of a building or monument, principally by interrupting, or in severe cases completely obstructing, some designed-in view to or from the monument or by adversely affecting the ability of the observer to appreciate the heritage value of the asset. Such an impact upon setting would reduce the information content, and thus the cultural value or significance, of the asset and may in addition reduce ability to understand and appreciate that significance.

The assessment of level of harm in this report will be a qualitative one and will largely depend upon whether the impacts predicted would result in a major impediment to the ability to understand or appreciate the significance of the heritage asset in question by reducing or removing its information content.

9.4 Baseline Information

Archaeological and Historical Evidence

Mesolithic period (c. 10000 BC – c. 4000 BC) There is extensive evidence for early prehistoric activity across the study area, although not from within the proposed development site itself. The earliest evidence dates to the Mesolithic period (c.10000 BC– c.4000 BC), and consists of individual finds and assemblages of flint implements. These are primarily microliths, which are the most common implement type to be found in Mesolithic assemblages throughout the South Pennines (Hodgson and Brennand 2006, 27). Such material has been discovered to the south-east of the proposed development site on Westhorpe Moor (99) and on Worsthorne Pasture (102). A concentration of flints was identified in erosion patches on Worsthorne Moor, to the south of the proposed development site (164, 165, 177, 178 and 179), as well as close to the site’s south-eastern corner (195). Mesolithic flints have also been discovered on Extwistle Moor, to the south-east of the proposed development site (257), and to the east of the site across Boulsworth Hill (268, 274 and 295), with a particular concentration around Robin Hood’s House (279, 280, 284-288 and 292).

Neolithic and Bronze Age (c. 4000 BC – 800 BC) The majority of the Bronze Age sites within the study area consist of funerary monuments, including barrows and cairns, numerous examples of which survive as earthworks across the area, as well as at least three extant monuments within the proposed development site itself (207, 212 and 219).

On the eastern edge of the proposed development site, to the east of Delf Hill quarry, is a small circle of seven stones, which originally included a central cairn measuring about 2.4m in diameter and 0.2m high, surrounded by a shallow ditch (207; Scheduled Monument

161

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

1008916; Plate 7 Appendix 4.1). This was investigated in 1842 and three funerary urns discovered, together with human remains and flint arrowheads. The site has been more recently disturbed and the stones are subsequently not in their original position.

A probable Bronze Age ring cairn is situated on the northern side of the proposed development site, approximately 25m to the east of Ell Clough (212; Scheduled Monument 1009117). This consists of a partially disturbed oval of stones, which probably formed the ring bank, measuring 17.6m north-south by 16.8m east-west. The site was investigated by antiquarians in 1887, during which time a cist was uncovered, in which an urn was found containing the remains of two human skeletons; an adult and a child. Animal bones and a bronze pin were also discovered in the burial.

Another well preserved saucer barrow is located 90m to the east of Ell Clough, on the southern side of the loop of a farm track (219; Scheduled Monument 1009116; Plate 8 Appendix 4.1). This consists of a circular mound approximately 14m in diameter and up to 0.4m high, surrounded by a ditch 1.5m wide and 0.2m deep. This is flanked by an outer bank measuring up to 2.5m wide and 0.2m-1m high. The site was investigated in 1887 and charcoal and burnt human bone was discovered. The area of this excavation is marked by a circular hollow in the centre of the monument, approximately 2.5m in diameter and 0.25m deep.

A number of other similar cairns and barrow are situated, or have been recorded, in the surrounding study area surviving as earthworks. The closest group of these lies to the west of the proposed development site, and includes a bowl barrow on Twist Hill (96; Scheduled Monument 1009113), two barrows to the west of Sweet Well House Farm (118 and 119; Scheduled Monuments 1009115 and 1009114) and Pike Low, a barrow situated just to the north of Sweet Well House Farm (137; Scheduled Monument 1008917). A ring cairn is situated on Slipper Hill, on Worsthorne Moor to the south-west of Swinden Reservoir (64; Scheduled Monument 1009112), and two further barrows are located on Hameldon Pasture to the south-west of the proposed development site (114 and 117; Scheduled Monuments 1008919 and 1008918). The sites of a number of other possible barrows have been recorded, but these either no longer appear to be extant as earthworks (69, 126, 146, 158, 197, 227 and 247) or are of debateable form and date (224). The discovery of four possible Bronze Age urns on the east side of Smallshaw Hill, to the south of the proposed development site, may also suggest the presence of a former barrow (196).

Late Neolithic and early Bronze Age activity within the study area is also represented by the discovery of flint implements, such as a dagger discovered on Hazel Edge in 1913 (104) and the site of a Neolithic or Bronze Age flint working site identified on Worsthorne Moor, to the south of the proposed development site between 1935 and 1945 (210). The assemblage from this site included scrapers, flakes and debitage, as well as a leaf-shaped arrow head. A

162

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

flint knife of a probable Bronze Age date was also found to the north-east of the proposed development site in the 1930s or 1940s (262), and a Bronze Age quern has been discovered close to Robin Hood’s House (283).

Iron Age and Roman period (c. 800 BC – AD 410) There is extensive evidence for occupation and activity within the study area through the Iron Age and Roman periods, and numerous enclosures of this date have been recorded surviving as earthworks. In many cases these may represent small farmsteads, perhaps comprising a single round house or houses, together with associated structures, often surrounded by a bank and ditch. It is probable that many of these settlements continued in use through into at least the early Roman period, following the Roman annexation of the Brigantian tribal territory, in which the study area is situated, after AD 71. These settlements mark a significant concentration in north-western England, for which there is otherwise only limited evidence for occupation in the pre-Roman Iron Age (Hodgson and Brennand 2006, 52)

Burwain’s Camp, on the north side of Halifax Road to the north of the proposed development site, represents the earthwork remains of a probable late prehistoric defended settlement (223; Scheduled Monument 1013814). This is approximately 45m in diameter and defined by a bank up to 2m wide and 0.3m high, with a surrounding ditch and opposing entrances.

The nearest of the possible Romano-British enclosures to the proposed development site is Twist Castle, situated on Twist Hill to the west of the site (84; Scheduled Monument 1009497). This consists of a sub-rectangular enclosure formed by a bank approximately 3m wide and 1m high, enclosing an area measuring about 44m by 40m, with an entrance through the centre of the eastern side and a small annexe to the south of the entrance. A bronze coin dating to the reign of Marcus Aurelius (AD 161-180) was apparently found in the area in 1888.

A possible Romano-British farmstead is also situated to the south-west of Swinden Water, known as Ring Stones Camp (73; Scheduled Monument 1009488). This consists of the remains of two phases of a farmstead, surviving as earthworks. The earlier farmstead measured approximately 50m square and has a ditch flanking its southern side, and is partially overlain by the remains of the later settlement. The remains of the later farmstead comprise an earth and stone bank up to 6m wide and 0.5m high which measures 48m along its west side, 33m on its south side, 39m on its east side and 37m on its north side, and is flanked by an outer ditch measuring 3m wide by 0.5m deep. There are two entrances approximately 3m wide on the enclosure’s eastern and western sides. To the northeast is an annexe approximately 10m square with a bank similar to that enclosing the farmstead, which has an entrance on its southern side. Building foundations, an oven and a quern were

163

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

uncovered during antiquarian excavations in 1888, with further investigations in 1925 recording evidence for a cobbled floor. A possibly associated field system (72) and trackway (70) have also been identified in the surrounding area through aerial photographic analysis.

A further Romano-British farmstead, known as Beadle Camp, is situated to the west of Sweet Well House Farm (94; Scheduled Monument 14009487), and is defined by a bank surviving up to 4m wide and 1m high, flanked by an outer ditch, with an entrance through its eastern side.

Other possibly similar enclosures survive as earthworks (83) and have been identified on aerial photographs (92 and 129) near Elders Farmhouse, to the north-west of Sweet Well House Farm, and on Wasnop Edge to the south of the proposed development site (148, 160 and 172).

Although there are no recorded late Iron Age or Romano-British enclosures within the proposed development site, the earthwork remains of a sub-rectangular, D-shaped, enclosure survive on the northern side of the site, surrounding a ridge of high ground on which the Bronze Age saucer barrow is situated (213, 214 and 215; Plate 9 Appendix 4.1). This was depicted on the First Edition Ordnance Survey map of 1848 (see Figure 4 in Appendix 4.1), but there was no subsequent depiction of the feature on later maps, and no other records of its location. It certainly pre-dates the probable late 18th or early 19th century field boundaries, one of which cuts through the eastern side of the enclosure (see Figure 3).

The remains of the enclosure are defined on its north-western side by an external bank, up to 0.4m high and 2m-5m wide, which is followed by an interior ditch 0.5m-1m wide and 0.2m deep. This continues northwards before joining a deeper hollow on the enclosure’s northern side, which may have been later used as a drainage channel. The southern half of the enclosure is defined by a steep scarp up to 1.5m high, cut in to the natural north-facing hill side. It is possible that an area of earthworks within the northern side of the enclosure could be related, although they may be later in date and/or represent quarrying activity (218).

Two circular platforms, measuring between 7m and 8m were also identified on the south- facing hillside, to the east of Delf Hill Quarry during the walkover survey (187 and 192). It is possible that these could represent round house platforms, although the westernmost of the two sites contained an animal drinking trough and may have been formed by erosion due to concentrations of sheep in this specific area.

As well as the enclosures, a copper Roman brooch has been discovered close to Worsthorne (37). Although this was badly damaged, it was probably a bow and fantail type brooch,

164

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

dating to c.50-c.150 AD. A Roman fibula brooch was also discovered on Burnley Moors in 1894, to the south-west of the proposed development site (101).

Medieval period (c. AD 410 – c. 1500) There is limited evidence for post-Roman or early medieval activity within the proposed development site or the study area. A possible early medieval implement (198), of unknown function, was apparently discovered within the northern part of the proposed development site in 1911, however, and the Widdop Cross formerly situated on Entwistle Moor to the east of the site is thought to have been of an Anglo-Saxon date, but was destroyed sometime before 1955 (269).

It is likely that the proposed development site was in use as marginal upland pasture throughout the medieval period, and there is no evidence of any medieval settlement or cultivation within the site dating to this period. It is probable that the area was also used for the extraction of timber, turf, coal and stone through the later medieval period (Bennett 1946, 86). Indeed, the name Delf Hill itself derives from the Old English (ge) delf meaning ‘a digging’ (Sephton 1913, 219), suggesting that quarrying was undertaken from an early date on the site.

The nearest known medieval farmstead to the proposed development site lies over 1km to the east, close to the western side of Widdop Reservoir, where the remains of buildings and associated structures have been recorded. This site is recorded in the 14th century as being the ‘Vaccaria de Wedhope’, indicating that it was used for cattle farming (291). It is also probable that many of the existing post-medieval farms within the study area overlay previously unrecorded medieval precursors.

There is limited evidence for medieval cultivation within the study area, with tracts of ridge and furrow recorded surviving as earthworks in Briercliffe, over 1km to the north-west of the proposed development site (38, 50, 81 and 91), and to the west of Elders Farmhouse (75).

The majority of the recorded medieval features within the study area are wayside crosses (49, 56, 217, 229, 237 and 263), which would have helped to guide travellers over this part of the South Pennines, or boundary stones (276, 289, 291, 293 and 294) defining parish boundaries or the historical county boundary dividing Lancashire from Yorkshire to the east.

The site of the Calf Hey Well, situated approximately 1.5km to the west of the proposed development site, may also have been used as a medieval holy well (35).

165

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Post-medieval and modern period (c. 1500-1950) The post-medieval period saw an increase in coal mining and stone quarrying around Burnley, as the town rapidly expanded from the 16th century. Numerous small pits, identified to the north-west of the summit of Delf Hill, may represent small scale quarrying or possibly bell pits for coal extraction (150, 169, 170, 173, 182, 183, 184, 189, 190, 191, 199, 202, 205, 208, 226, 235, 238 and 254). These pits measure approximately 5m in diameter and are up to 1m deep, and could represent the top of now infilled shafts that were dug down to reach the coal below (Plates 10 and 11 in Appendix 4.1).

This small scale extraction would have been undertaken by landowners and tenants as part of their manorial rights (Bennett 1947, 94 and 97), rather than as part of larger commercial enterprises, which developed later during the Industrial Revolution. An ‘Old Coal Pit’ is also marked on the First Edition Ordnance Survey map of 1848, to the south-east of the proposed development site (see Figure 4 in Appendix 4.1), and the presence of such pits across the area is preserved in the name ‘Coal Pit Pasture’ (see Figure 6 in Appendix 4.1). The Briercliffe with Extwistle Tithe map post-dates the First Edition Ordnance Survey map, and provides no further details of the site (Briercliffe with Extwistle Tithe map 1850).

A rectangular, level terraced area, cut into the natural slope and measuring approximately 8m east-west by 3m north-south (234), is situated adjacent to former quarry workings (235 and 238) on the north-eastern side of the proposed development site. It is possible that this could have been an associated building, such as a quarryman’s hut. A rectangular platform situated on the top of a prominent natural ridge close to the proposed location of Turbine 5 (142; see Figure 2) could represent the site of former building, perhaps again related to the quarry, as could a rectangular earthwork platform situated to the south-west of the summit of Delf Hill (186). A regularly shaped, circular depression situated close to the quarry workings on the western side of the site, measuring 10 in diameter and 1m deep, could represent the site of a further related structure (136).

It is probable that a number of trackways, which survive as shallow hollow ways or terraces across the site, may also be associated with quarrying or mining (135, 168 and 180). One such track on the north-western side of the proposed development site is overlaid by a probable 19th century wall line, and could be associated with medieval or early post- medieval activity (166). It is also, however, cut across by a possible bell pit (182), and may therefore be of an earlier date.

Larger scale quarrying had been undertaken in the proposed development site before the mid-19th century, with the First Edition Ordnance Survey map of 1848 showing ‘old’ sandstone quarries on the proposed development site’s north-western edge, which still survive as substantial earthworks (see Figure 4 in Appendix 4.1; Ordnance Survey 1848; 149, 151, 155, 157 and 159; Plate 12 in Appendix 4.1).

166

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

By the late 19th century large scale industrial quarrying had begun across much of the Delf Hill area, to the south-west of the summit of Delf Hill (see Figure 5 in Appendix 4.1; Ordnance Survey 1894), and new tracks established to provide access from the west (see Figure 6 in Appendix 4.1; Ordnance Survey 1913).

The northern part of the proposed development site remained primarily in use as rough pasture through the post-medieval period. By the mid-19th century a small farm building, possibly used as a dwelling, had been built in this area (242), and is named on later maps simply as ‘Enclosure’ or ‘Inclosures’ (see Figures 4 and 5 in Appendix 4.1; Ordnance Survey 1848; 1894; 1913; 1915). This building is now in a ruinous state, but appears to have measured approximately 8m wide and 10m long, and comprised two rooms, with an extension at its eastern side (Plate 13 in Appendix 4.1). It had at least one small vaulted cellar, which is now visible from the ground due to its partial collapse, which measured about 1.5m wide and 3m long (Plate 14 in Appendix 4.1).

The existing field pattern within the proposed development site is the result of post- medieval enclosure. The irregular field boundaries on the north-western side of the site may represent earlier, piecemeal, enclosure up the hill side, to create new areas of improved pasture. The regularly surveyed field boundaries which divide the north-eastern part of the proposed development site are probably of a late 18th or early 19th century date.

The majority of other recorded archaeological or historical sites within the proposed development site represent either post-medieval farmsteads (3, 5, 10, 20, 21, 22, 27, 33, 36, 52, 58, 65, 67, 77, 93, 98, 241 and 259), sandstone quarrying (30, 31, 32, 34, 40, 44, 48, 51, 71, 74, 78, 79, 90, 121, 127, 143, 159, 174, 200, 206 and 232), limestone extraction and processing (55, 59, 62, 113, 120, 122, 123, 138, 201, 221, 222 and 261) or later 19th century buildings, many concentrated within the village of Worsthorne.

The study area also contains two recorded Second World War sites. A bombing decoy ‘Starfish’ site was built on Hameldon Pasture, to the south-west of the proposed development site in April 1941, which used fires to simulate bomb explosions, to deflect enemy planes from Burnley to the west (111). A Second World War pillbox is also situated on the northern side of Halifax Road, close to its junction with Back Lane (244).

Previous archaeological investigations There have been no recorded archaeological excavations within the proposed development site, or the wider study area. An archaeological watching brief was undertaken at Foulds House, Briercliffe in 1997 (93; Smith 1997), and another watching brief was carried out as part of a pipeline construction between the Laneshaw Water Treatment Works and Coldwell Reservoir by Oxford Archaeology North in 2006 (OAN 2007); neither investigations revealed any significant archaeology.

167

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

A number of archaeological desk-based assessments and associated surveys have been undertaken covering areas within the study area. In 2000 a survey was undertaken as part of an Environmental Statement produced to inform the management of the ‘Forest of Burnley’, which assessed the archaeological resource within area of Worsthorne woodlands (Woolerton Dodwell 2000).

In 2005 a desk-based assessment was undertaken by Oxford Archaeology North of the proposed route of the Coldwell and Trawden water pipeline. The majority of sites identified were of a post-medieval date, although the assessment also identified potential prehistoric and Roman sites (OAN 2005). This was followed in late 2005 by a topographic survey of the earthwork remains of areas of medieval or post-medieval ridge and furrow, lynchets, quarries and a sunken trackway (OAN 2006).

A desk-based assessment was carried out in 2011 on land to the west of Extwistle Moor, Briercliffe by Oxford Archaeology North in advance of the construction of a water pipeline. This assessment showed that the development site, and the surrounding area, contained extensive evidence for prehistoric and Roman period activity (OAN 2011).

A number of historic building surveys have been undertaken within the survey area, including at Higher Bottin Farmhouse (36; Haigh 2011), the barn at Moorfell farm (52; Haigh 2004), the laithe house at New Bridge End (259; O’Flaherty 2009), the doorway of New House Farmhouse (260; Miller 1989) and the laithe house at Cockridge Copy, Briercliffe (264; O’Flaherty 2010).

Archaeological and Cultural Heritage Significance There are numerous heritage assets located within the land-ownership boundary. These range in significance from Negligible to National importance, the latter category including three Scheduled Monuments (207, 212 and 219). However, the majority of the heritage assets within the proposed development site are located at some distance to the north and south of the areas where direct impacts from the proposed development are possible. Only the cultural heritage significance of those assets where such impacts are possible are considered in detail here. The heritage significance of all assets identified by this assessment is noted in the gazetteer in Appendix 4.2.

Turbine 2 and access tracks will be located within the Delf Hill area, Briercliffe (152), the site of Delf Hill quarry. While the Lancashire HER has recorded a ‘camp’ and ‘tumuli’ in this area it has been extensively disturbed by large-scale modern quarrying and is of at most Low significance. The access track also crosses another area of historic quarrying at Delf Hill, Briercliffe (167), where sandstone quarrying took place prior to 1848. Again this is of Low significance. The location of Turbine 3 is in close proximity to four heritage assets (186, 199, 204 and 206). Site 186 is a possible building platform, and may represent the site of a

168

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

building, its significance is deemed to be Low. To the north, Site 199 is a possible bell pit of Low significance. Sites 204 and 206 are a spoil heap and a former quarry. They are of Low significance.

In summary, the Cultural Heritage Value of these remains has been classified according to the methodology shown on Table 1 and the results are presented in Table 9.7 below:

Site Number Site Name Designation Cultural Heritage Value 152 Delf Hill area, Briercliffe Not Designated Low 167 Delf Hill, Briercliffe Not Designated Low 186 Possible building platform Not Designated Low 199 Possible bell pit Not Designated Low 204 Spoil Heap Not Designated Low 206 Quarry Not Designated Low Table 9.7 – Cultural Heritage value of Archaeological and Cultural Heritage Remains

9.5 Development Impacts and Mitigation

Direct impacts Potential impacts on known or unknown buried archaeological remains in the case of this development relate to the possibility of disturbing, removing or destroying in situ remains and artefacts during groundbreaking works (including excavation, construction and other works associated with the development) within the proposed development area.

Table 9.8 below outlines the predicted significance of impact by the development upon the remains found within the proposed development area.

Site Site Name Cultural Heritage Value Magnitude of direct Significance Number Impact from proposed of impact development 152 Delf Hill area, Low Marginal Negligible Briercliffe 167 Delf Hill, Low Marginal Negligible Briercliffe 186 Possible Low None None building platform 199 Possible bell Low None None pit 204 Spoil Heap Low None None 206 Quarry Low None None Table 9.8 – Predicted Significance of Direct Impact by the Development upon Remains

169

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

The proposed development will not impact on the platform at Delf Hill (186), nor will impact upon and the possible bell pit (199) to the south of the proposed location for Turbine 3. No impacts are predicted upon the spoil heap (Site 204) and the quarry (Site 206) to the northeast of Turbine 3. However, there would potentially be direct impacts on two known but undesignated heritage assets (152 and 167) within the proposed development area. However, these comprise the remains of historic quarrying activity at Delf Hill, of Low significance, and any impacts on these quarrying remains would at most represent very slight or barely measurable losses of information content with the loss of small percentages of the areas of quarrying. Additionally, it is certain that the quarrying activity will by its very nature have resulted in the complete removal of any earlier archaeological remains within their footprints. As such, the potential magnitude of direct impacts on both heritage assets is judged to be at worst of Marginal magnitude and Negligible significance.

There is extensive evidence for prehistoric and Roman period activity and occupation within the proposed development site and the wider study area, including extant cairns, barrows and an enclosure. There is therefore the potential for the survival of sub-surface archaeological remains dating to these periods across the proposed development site, outside of areas that have been subject to large-scale historical or modern quarrying.

There is also potential for impacts on medieval or early-post medieval sub-surface archaeological remains although, due to the marginal nature of the land during much of this period, such remains are likely to be restricted to agricultural features or possible early quarry and mine workings that are no longer visible on the surface.

Turbines 1 & 3 are situated in areas that appear to have remained undisturbed by modern quarrying, and there may be potential for the survival of sub-surface archaeological features or deposits in these locations.

Any associated ground works relating to the construction of turbines, access tracks, compounds or other infrastructure could potentially impact upon sub-surface archaeology, outside of areas of former quarry workings.

Indirect Impacts In cultural heritage terms, an indirect impact refers to any change in the baseline condition of a designated heritage asset resulting from a development beyond the boundaries of the asset. Indirect impacts can be positive as well as adverse. In the case of the proposal at Delf Hill indirect impact relates to the potential for impacts upon the setting of designated heritage assets.

A summary of the potential impact of the proposed turbines upon the settings of designated heritage assets is provided in Appendix 4.7.

170

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Designated Assets with no intervisibility with the proposed wind cluster While turbines will be theoretically visible from a number of designated heritage assets within the study area, site visits revealed that in reality there will be no visibility from some of these assets due to intervening buildings, vegetation or both. Given this, no impacts are predicted upon the assets at Tattersall Barn Farmhouse (Site 316) and Heasandford (Site 367).

Designated Assets of Marginal Sensitivity to changes to their settings It is unlikely that turbines will be visible from a listed mounting block (Site 422) at Foxstone Farm. Furthermore, the contribution of the setting to the significance of the asset cannot be said to extend beyond the workshop with which it is associated. Its sensitivity to change is judged to be Marginal and the predicted magnitude of impact Marginal. As such no impact of significance is expected.

Designated Assets of Low Sensitivity to changes to their settings A number of these sites (Site 306, 308, 314, 365, 406, 409, 423 & 438) are secondary residential buildings (i.e. cottages) or functional agricultural buildings associated with large farmstead groups. As such the key elements of their setting, that which contributes most to their significance, comprise the related buildings within the farmstead and the immediately surrounding agricultural land. They are judged to have a Low sensitivity to changes in the wider setting. While Far Side Farmhouse (Site 420) and Lower Fenny Moor Foot (Site 431) are the main residences of similar farmsteads the style and specific placement of the houses do not indicate an intention to be highly visible in the wider landscape. They are considered to be primarily functional farmhouses whose setting is defined by adjacent agricultural buildings and land. As such they are judged to have a Low sensitivity to changes to their wider setting. Site visits have indicated that views of the proposed turbines from these assets will be severely limited if not prohibited by surrounding buildings and vegetation and as such impacts of Marginal magnitude and No significance are predicted.

Designated assets including the barn at Holden Farmhouse (Site 65), the workshop and cottage (Site 318) and the well (Site 319) at Foxstones Farm and the ice house at Ormerod House (Site 397) are deemed, like those assets noted above, to have Low sensitivity to changes to their setting beyond the farms with which they are associated. Views of the turbines are likely to be limited by proximate trees and buildings. The turbines will form an insignificant alteration to the wider setting of these assets and it is not thought that they will adversely affect those elements of setting which directly contribute to the significance of the assets. The predicted magnitude of impact is deemed to be Low and of Negligible significance.

Higher Farmhouse (Site 315), Law House (Site 320), Rowley Farmhouse (Site 346), Towneley Farmhouse and barn (Sites 354 & 355), Cold Weather House (Site 400), Netherwood

171

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Farmhouse (and cottage) (Site 430) and Hollins Farmhouse (Site 435) have primarily been placed to provide access to and exploit agricultural land. Little of their form, scale or orientation indicates relationship with the wider landscape and as such they are judged to have Low sensitivity to change. While the turbines may be visible, this visibility will, in the cases of Rowley and Towneley, be limited by trees and structures. In all cases the turbines will form an insignificant alteration to the wider setting of these monuments resulting in an impact of Low magnitude. Such an impact would be of Negligible significance. Similarly Ringstone Hill Farmhouse (Site 391) is judged to have Low visual sensitivity. However, the farmhouse faces south in the direction of the proposed wind cluster and at 3.14 km two turbines will be visible. These have the potential to form significant alteration to the wider setting of the monument albeit beyond those elements of setting which directly contribute to the significance of the asset. As such the predicted magnitude of impact is judged to be Medium, resulting in an impact of Minor significance.

The ice house (Site 296), stables (now a café) (Site 349), brew house (now Craft Museum) (Site 351) and farmhouse (now golf club) (Site 353) and the relationship between these and Towneley Hall itself and the Registered Park all contribute greatly to the setting and significance of the overall Towneley assets. However, significance and understanding of these assets primarily derives from their association with the estate and being primarily functional buildings their sensitivity to change beyond the estate boundaries is deemed to be Low. Turbines will be set at between 4.73 km and 5.18 km from these assets. It is judged that turbines will form an insignificant alteration to the wider setting of these assets and it is not thought that they will adversely affect those elements of setting which directly contribute to the significance of the assets. The predicted magnitude of impact is deemed to be Low and of Marginal significance.

Elements of the settings of Nos 11-15(odd) Church Square, Worsthorne (Site 12), Walverden Cottage (Site 392) and Croft House (Site 428) which contribute most to these assets are the settlements in which they are located and their sensitivity to change beyond these settlements is judged to be Low. Being located within settlements, adjacent buildings will, if not entirely, mostly obscure any possible views of the proposed turbines. Therefore impacts of Marginal magnitude and No significance are predicted.

A number of other listed buildings are deemed to have Low relative visual sensitivity to changes to their setting for the same reason noted in the paragraph above. These include Wallstreams & Wallstreams Cottage (Site 22) and Southfield Cottages (Site 309). The elements of the settings of these assets which contribute to their significance are primarily contained within the settlements (Worsthorne and Mount Pleasant respectively). While turbines will be visible, visibility will be limited by their immediate surroundings and they will therefore form an insignificant alteration to the wider setting. Furthermore turbines will be located well beyond those elements which directly contribute to the understanding of

172

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

the monument. As such impacts are judged to be of Low magnitude and Negligible significance.

A number of monuments are also classed as having Low sensitivity to changes to their settings. Nogworth Cross (Site 56) is in poor condition with only the base of the cross surviving. Given this poor condition it is difficult to understand the relationship of the cross to its setting. As the cross is no longer visible until one comes within metres of it, it is impossible to know how visible it was from the surrounding landscape when it was intact. It is also impossible to understand what key views to the cross or from it may have particularly contributed to is significance. As such its sensitivity to changes to its setting is deemed to be Low. While the turbines will be visible from the cross, their presences will not affect the setting of the monument such that its significance is reduced in any material way. As such, impacts are deemed to be of Marginal magnitude and No significance. The bell turret at Trawden Hall11 bell turret (Site 387) is also deemed to be of Low sensitivity (additionally it was apparently dismantled in 2010). The turret was apparently originally sited at a mill belonging to John Hopkinson but removed by him to Trawden Hall when it was constructed c. 1900. The turret sits upon a three sided stone pedestal and is ultimately a garden feature. The important elements of its setting therefore relate to its relationship to the hall itself. One or two turbines are theoretically visible from the turret and will be located well beyond those elements of the setting which contribute to the significance of the asset and at c. 5.26 km distance will form an insignificant alteration. As such an impact of not more than Low magnitude is predicted. This will result in an impact of Negligible significance.

The Mackenzie Memorial in Thompson Park (Site 370) and the Commemorative Fountain in Queen’s Park (Site 371) are considered to be highly sensitive to change within their respective parks, however there is little beyond these park settings which contributes to the significance of the assets. As such, their sensitivity to developments beyond the parks is deemed to be Low. Stump Cross (Site 439) was one of five guide stones which formerly marked the line of the Long Causeway and it is this alignment which is the element of setting that contributes most to the significance of the asset. Its sensitivity to changes in the wider landscape is deemed to be Low. For the monuments within the parks and the Stump Cross it is likely that proximate buildings and/or vegetation will obscure views of the turbines, though glimpses cannot be entirely discounted. As such impacts are judged to be of Marginal magnitude and No significance.

A listed war memorial at Towneley Hall (Site 348) dates to 1926 and is set within the formal gardens. Mature vegetation sits behind the memorial. The memorial was constructed to be seen from relatively close proximity. It has also clearly been purposefully set within a formal grounds and it is therefore highly sensitive to changes within those grounds. However, it is

11 The bell turret at Trawden Hall was not accessible during the site visits as it is located west of the hall in its back garden. As such it is unclear whether the turret has been reinstated after its removal in 2010.

173

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

less sensitive to change beyond its immediate setting and its sensitivity to change beyond the bounds of Towneley Park is judged to be Low. The proposed turbines will be located at. c. 4.69 km from the memorial and views of them may be partially limited by trees. As such impacts are deemed to be of Low magnitude and Negligible significance.

The placements of the scheduled Queen Street Mill engine (Site 297) and the listed telephone kiosk in Hurstwood Village (Site 434) are almost entirely functional in nature and as such they are of Low sensitivity to changes beyond their immediate settings. Buildings in their immediate vicinity will likely entirely obscure views of the turbines. As such impacts will be at worst of Marginal magnitude and No significance.

Two bowl barrows (Sites 118-119) at Beadle Hill and a ring cairn (Site 64) at Slipper Hill are in extremely poor condition. The bowl barrows are described on the National Heritage List for England as being c. 0.1 m in height and defined by faint ditches. Given that their upstanding remains are nearly non-existent they could not be identified on the ground with any confidence. They no longer have any visual presences and, excepting their position on a hill, it is difficult to understand their relationship to their setting or how it may have contributed to their significance. The barrows are therefore judged to have Low sensitivity to changes to their setting. The proposed turbines will however be located only c. 0.65 km from the barrows, with all three being visible. It is judged that the turbines will form a significant alteration to the surrounding landscape, albeit they will be located so as not to affect those elements of setting which directly contribute to the significance of the monuments. The magnitude of impact upon the setting of the bowl barrows is therefore judged to be Medium and will result in an impact of Minor significance.

The ring cairn at Slipper Hill (Site 64) is in similarly poor condition with only two or three stones related to the cairn protruding from the ground. It therefore difficult to understand how the cairn would have related to its setting and whether particular views or alignments were of greater or lesser significance. It is judged to have a Low sensitivity to changes to its setting. All three proposed turbines at Delf Hill will be visible c. 1.21 km to the northeast of the cairn. These have the potential to form a significant alteration to the wider setting of the asset beyond those elements which directly contribute to the significance of the asset. A Medium magnitude impact of Minor significance is predicted.

Designated Assets of Medium Sensitivity to changes to their settings A number of listed 17th century farmhouses (Sites 33, 36, 98, 389, 398, 413 & 419) are judged to be of Medium sensitivity to change. While the location of these houses in the landscape would have been chosen to afford access to agricultural land, it is clear from their form and orientation that obtaining views of the wider landscape and visibility of the buildings from the wider landscape were also considerations. The same is true for 16th century Hurstwood Hall (Site 396) which was originally a lesser gentry’s house and latterly a

174

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

farmhouse and the 18th century houses at Catlow (Site 408) and Hill End (Site 432). Site visits indicated that buildings and/or vegetation surrounding these heritage assets would extremely limit, if not prohibit, views of the proposed turbines. As such impacts of Marginal magnitude and Negligible significance are predicted.

A number of other houses, farmhouses and hall’s (Sites 20, 27, 41, 58, 67, 77, 310, 321, 390 and 412) are judged to have a Medium sensitivity to change for the same reasons noted in the paragraph above. These assets are located between 0.95 km and 5.19 km from the proposed turbines. The settings of these buildings are primarily defined by their immediate surroundings, in most cases adjacent farm buildings and agricultural land, though Jackson’s Farm (Site 27) is now located within the village of Worsthorne. These immediate settings will remain unaffected by the proposed turbines and thus those elements of setting which contribute most to the understanding and significance of the assets will remain intact. The turbines are, however, theoretically visible from all of these assets and site visits have confirmed that visibility is likely. The turbines are judged to form insignificant alterations to the wider landscape setting of the heritage assets and impacts are judged to be of Low magnitude. This will result in impacts of Minor significance.

Many of the buildings noted above are located within the Conservation Areas at Worsthorne (Site 458) and Hurstwood (Site 459). Both these villages date to the post- medieval period and contain a number of listed buildings dating to the 16th and 17th century. They are deemed to be highly sensitive to change within the village setting but are less sensitive to changes to the wider countryside. They are judged here to be of Medium sensitivity to change outwith the bounds of the village. Worsthorne is located c. 1.96 km from the closest proposed turbine and theoretically all three turbines would be visible. However, the height and density of buildings within the village would greatly limit views of the turbine as would more modern development on the edges of the village. The proposed turbines are judged to form an insignificant alteration to the setting of the Conservation Area and are located well beyond the village which forms the key setting. This is an impact of a Low magnitude and Minor significance.

Much of the conservation area at Hurstwood would not be intervisible with the proposed turbines. Between one and three turbines will theoretically be visible from the centre of the village and across a portion of open ground to the south. The important elements of the setting are primarily contained within the village along its linear alignment and in the surrounding open agricultural land, a portion of which is included within the bounds of the conservation area. As noted above, the conservation area is deemed to be of Medium sensitivity to changes beyond its bounds. The turbines would be located at c. 2.38 km from the village and, given their limited visibility, would form an insignificant alteration to the wider landscape setting of the village. This impact is of Low magnitude and Minor significance.

175

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

The Grade II Listed Broad Bank House (Site 241) is an 18th century farmhouse. It is located 1.41 km to the north of the proposed turbines and set half way down the slope of the valley above Thursden Burn which runs east/west past it to the south. The house would have primarily been located for its proximity to prime agricultural land but it is clear that views, particularly to the south across the burn valley played a role in its siting and orientation. As such it is judged to have Medium sensitivity to changes to its setting. The main elements of setting which contribute to the significance of the monument are quite proximate and include immediate agricultural land and farm buildings, as well as views along the burn to the south. The turbines are located beyond these elements, however they are relatively close at 1.41 km and will feature in views to the south beyond the burn and Delf Hill forming a significant alteration to the wider landscape setting. As such the magnitude of impact upon the setting of the farmhouse is judged to Medium resulting in an impact of Minor- Moderate significance.

The Grade II Registered Parks and Gardens at Thompson Park (Site 300) and Queen’s Park (Site 301) are respectively 20th and 19th century public parks within Burnley. They provide large open green space within otherwise urban areas. While highly sensitive to changes within their own bounds, their sensitivity to change beyond these bounds is somewhat less and is judged here to be Medium. It is likely that vegetation within the parks and buildings along their edges will completely obscure views of the turbines, however occasional glimpses cannot be entirely discounted. As such impacts of Marginal magnitude and Negligible significance are predicted.

The Church of St James (Site 433) at Harle Syke is Grade II Listed. Elements of its setting which contribute to its significance are primarily contained within the village of Harle Syke (which has now become a suburb of Burnley), though given its spire it is likely that it was meant to be seen from the surrounding landscape, it is therefore judged to be of Medium sensitivity to changes to its setting. Its location within the a suburban context and the extent of mature vegetation within the churchyard means that views of the turbines from the church are likely to be none existent. Furthermore, site visits have not identified any significant views of the spire which will be compromised by having turbines in them. As such impacts of Marginal magnitude and Negligible significance are predicted. The Grade II Listed St John’s Church, Worsthorne (Site 24) is also judged to have Medium sensitivity to changes to its setting. As with the Church of St James, the elements of setting of St John’s Church which contribute most to its significance are its churchyard and the surrounding village. At c. 2.09 km, all three turbines are theoretically visible, though given its location south of Gorple Road near the centre of the village means that intervening structures may partially obscure views of the turbines. The magnitude of the impact is predicted to be at worst Low and of Minor significance.

176

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Burnley Wood and Harle Syke Conservation Areas (Sites 454 & 456) are located at the edge of the built up area of Burnley but are still primarily urban in character. They are judged to be High sensitivity to change within their bounds but less sensitive, i.e. of Medium sensitivity, to change in the wider landscape. Burnley Wood is located some 4.7km from the proposed turbines and to the south of Burnley proper. While all three turbines would be theoretically visible, in reality visibility would be substantially limited as a result of the built up nature of the area. In addition, many of the houses in Burnley Wood were built to take in views of Towneley Hall Park to the southwest and views to the northeast are less sensitive to change. Harle Syke is located c. 2.86 km from the proposed turbines and again while all three turbines would be theoretically visible from the Conservation Area, visibility would in reality be greatly limited. The primary importance of the Conservation Area relates to its place in the history of the development of the weaving industry of the area and how surviving buildings exemplify this. The magnitude of impact upon the setting of these conservation areas is judged to be Low; resulting in impacts of Minor significance.

Trawden Forest Conservation Area (Site 460) takes in a large area of land measuring c. 1,565 ha. The Conservation Area encompasses most of the area that was formerly the royal forest of Trawden. It is characterised by vaccary land divisions and ancient and post-medieval settlements. It is deemed to be of Medium visual sensitivity. There would be no intervisibility with the wind cluster from a large part of the Conservation Area. Visibility would be limited to the western edge, near Beardshaw Head; the north-eastern edge from Laneshaw Bridge to Higher Key Styles Farm, and an area of high ground which runs across the centre of the Conservation Area in a northeast to southwest alignment from Winewall and across Great Hill. The turbines would be located between 2.98km and 7.83km from the Conservation Area. At this distance the turbines would not directly affect those elements of the setting which most contribute to the significance of the Conservation Area, e.g. field boundaries, agricultural elements, settlement patterns. An impact of Low magnitude upon the setting of the conservation area is predicted. This would result in an impact of Minor significance.

A number of scheduled Romano-British assets are located within 5 km of the proposed turbines. These include two farmsteads at Ring Stones Camp (Site 73) and Twist Castle (Site 84) and an enclosed settlement at Beadle Hill Camp (Site 96). All of these assets are comprised of earthwork remains and in addition to the residential and agricultural function have defensive elements which would have influenced choice of location. All are located in relatively prominent locations with open views in all directions and are intervisible with one another. Given all of this the monuments are judged to have Medium sensitivity to changes to their setting. The proposed turbines will be located between 0.49 km and 0.90 km from the monuments and will form significant alterations to the wider landscape setting of the monuments. They will not however affect intervisibility of the sites nor will they intrude in views to low lying land to the west or the valleys between these monuments which they

177

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

would have dominated. As such the proposed turbines would have an impact of Medium magnitude and Minor-Moderate significance upon the assets.

A Bronze Age barrow at Twist Hill (Site 96) is deemed to be of Medium sensitivity to changes to its setting. The barrow at Twist Hill survives as a low earthwork. Its immediate setting has been compromised by the construction of Twist Reservoir to its east. It is clear that the barrow would have been placed in the landscape both to take in panoramic views as well as be seen from the wider landscape. However its denuded state means that it is no longer visible in the wider landscape and in addition modern development has compromised views of the wider landscape from it. The proposed turbines will be located 0.49 km from the Twist Hill barrow. As such they will form significant alteration the current setting. However, it is not considered that they will directly affect those elements of setting which contribute most to the monument e.g. intervisibility between it and other contemporary monuments. Therefore the magnitude of impact is judged to be Medium resulting in an impact of Minor- Moderate significance.

The monument Foldys Cross (Site 350) lies 300 meters southwest of Towneley Hall. It dates to 1520 and commemorates John Foldys; it has also been used as a market cross. It was removed to Towneley Hall from St Peter’s churchyard c. 1789. While the cross is not in its original location it currently forms a focal point on a rise along an avenue which runs southwest from Towneley Hall. From the cross one’s line of sight is directed, by the avenue, back to Towneley Hall and indeed beyond it (by an avenue running northeast from Towneley Hall) to wider countryside. For these reason the cross is deemed to have a medium sensitivity to changes to its setting. The turbines would be located to the northeast of Towneley Hall and therefore present in views in this direction from the cross. Even at c. 5.06 km from the cross they are likely to form a significant alteration to the view along a specific sightline. However, turbines will be set off to the right of the designed view by an angle of c. 11 and as such will not sever or impede the intended sightline, though they may distract from it. When the trees along the avenue are in leaf, it is possible that the turbines will be greatly screened from view. At worst (i.e. when the trees are bare) the potential impact is deemed to be of Medium magnitude and Minor-Moderate significance.

Designated Assets of High Sensitivity to changes to their settings Castercliff hillfort (Site 298) is located 4.97 km to the north of the proposed turbines. It is in relatively good condition with clearly discernible earthwork remains. It is located in a prominent position with open views to all directions. Land to the west and northwest drops away to the Colne Water while land to the southeast flattens and rises slightly towards the horizon. This indicates that the monument was likely sited to look over lower lying ground along the river to the northwest and to appear dominant in views from it. Visual sensitivity for such monuments is deemed to be high given they were purposefully sited to maximise defence, observation and often to dominate areas of land. The turbines will be visible from

178

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

the monument itself but at a distance of nearly 5 km they will likely be insignificant features in the wider landscape. Furthermore the turbines will not feature in views to the northwest and west where the fort looks over the Colne Water. The ZTV indicates that the turbines will not be visible from this lower lying land and so will not affect any views of the fort from these locations. Given this the magnitude of impact is predicted to be Low resulting in an impact of Minor-Moderate significance.

A bowl barrow (Site 117) and a Bronze Age cairn (Site 114) are located on Wasnop Edge just under a kilometre to the south-southeast of the proposed turbines. Both monuments are in good condition with clearly discernible upstanding remains. The assets sit along a ridge overlooking the valleys of the Swinden Water to the north and Hurstwood Brook to the south. Land drops away to the west and rises to the east to Ben Edge and Wether Edge. Views in all direction are readily available and it is clear that the monuments were placed in a prominent landscape location to be seen and to afford wide views of the landscape. As such the sensitivity of the monuments to changes to their setting is deemed to be High. The turbines will be set in relatively close proximity to these heritage assets, though views in this direction have already been compromised by the quarrying at Delf Hill which is highly visible from the monuments. While the turbines will form significant alterations to the setting of the monuments, they will not impede the ability of the observer to understand or appreciate the monument’s placement in the landscape and how it relates to its surroundings. The magnitude of impact upon the setting of the assets is therefore judged to be Medium. This would result in an impact of Moderate significance.

A barrow at Pike Low (Site 137) survives as low earthworks. It sits on the summit of Pike Low above lower ground to the north, west and south. Land to the east rises to Delf Hill. Pike Low provides a prominent location for the barrow and affords panoramic views in all directions. As such, the sensitivity of the setting of the barrow to change is deemed to be High. The most important elements of its setting relate to intervisibility with other contemporary monuments (e.g. Sites 96, 114, 117-119) and land to the north, west and south which it would have dominated and been highly visible from. The proposed turbines would be located c. 0.73 km from the Pike Low barrow and to the south beyond the summit of Delf Hill. While the turbines would form significant new features in the wider landscape setting of this asset they would not sever the barrow from those elements of its setting which are judged to contribute most to its significance. The magnitude of impact upon the setting of the monument is therefore judged to be Medium. This would result in an impact of Moderate significance.

The enclosed settlement at Burwain’s Camp (Site 223) may have been in use since the Neolithic period. It is deemed to have a high sensitivity to visual changes to its setting. The monument is in good condition with clearly discernable earthwork remains. The settlement was clearly sited for defensive purposes, it being located atop a prominent hill overlooking

179

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Thursden Brook to the south. Land also drops away from the monument in all other directions affording wide panoramic views. The proposed turbines at Delf Hill will be located 1.58 km to the south of the settlement remains. They will form a significant alteration to the setting of the monument. However, as they will be located beyond the Thursden Brook valley they will not directly affect the elements of setting which directly contribute to the significance of the monument and its relationship of the monument to its setting will still be readily understandable. The turbines are predicted to have an impact of medium magnitude and Moderate significance on the setting of Burwain’s Camp.

Towneley Hall itself (Site 352) and its associated park (Site 299) are Grade I Listed and Grade II Registered respectively. While the main elements of setting which contribute to the significance of these assets are contained with the registered park itself, there is clearly an intentional interaction with the wider landscape. This is primarily realised in the form of designed views along avenues of trees to the southwest and northeast of the hall. Given this the sensitivity of the assets to the changes to their settings is deemed to be high. Views from Towneley Hall to the southwest are focused on Foldys Cross (Site 350) which sits atop a hill there and will remain unaffected. Views back towards the hall from the cross, and indeed from the hall to the northeast, will however feature turbines. At a distance of c 4.78 km the turbines will not dominate views and they will be set off the designed alignment by c. 11 . That said they will be noticeable as significant new features on the skyline and may distract from the intended lines of sight down the avenues. For these reasons the magnitude of impact upon Towneley Hall and its associated park is judged to be Medium. This will result in impacts of Moderate significance.

Designated Assets within the land-ownership boundary There are three designated heritage assets within the land-ownership boundary at Delf Hill. These include a small stone circle (207), a ring cairn (Site 212) and a saucer barrow (Site 219). The stones circle’s setting is considered to be defined by its spatial relationship with other Bronze Age features in the area, primarily the ring cairn and saucer barrow to the north, as well as its position on a south-facing slope just below the summit of Delf Hill. The ‘stone circle’ has been heavily disturbed over the last two centuries, by both antiquarians and the later re-positioning of the stones. As a result of this disturbance, apart from those factors related to setting noted above, it is difficult to understand in any more detail the relationship of the monument to its setting. This disturbance, and the fact that the stones are no longer in situ, means the extant surface remains do not represent the alignment or form of the original monument and it is impossible to understand whether or not there were in fact particular alignments or other specific relationships with the wider setting. For this reason the monument’s sensitivity to changes to its setting is deemed to be low.

All turbines will be visible from the Bronze Age stone circle on Delf Hill, to the south and southwest (Appendix 4.8). The closes turbine is 100m to the south-west of the stone circle.

180

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

The position of the turbines will not sever any visual relationships or lines of site between the monuments and the barrow and ring cairn further to the north. The monument may have been positioned on the south facing slope just below the summit of the hill to maximise views of it from the south and south-east. The turbines will be present to the left of the monument in views towards it from this direction. Turbine 3 will be prominent in all views towards the monument. For this reason, impacts upon the setting of the circle are deemed to be high. Given its low sensitivity to change the resulting significance of impact is judged to be Minor- Moderate.

The Bronze Age ring cairn (Site 212) within the land-ownership boundary is situated 25m to the east of Ell Clough, on the northern side of the proposed development site. It is considered that its setting is defined primarily by its relationship with the saucer barrow, situated up-slope to its south-east, the possible prehistoric enclosure to its east, and its location on the north-facing hillside close to the edge of the steep sided valley along which Ells Clough runs. Such monuments were often sited to be seen and to command views over the landscape, or specific portions of it. The cairn is judged to have a high sensitivity to changes to its setting.

The proposed location of the turbines lies on the other side (south) of Delf Hill. As such while two of the turbines will be visible at a distance of c. 0.50 km they will be located beyond the valley setting of the cairn and will appear as such when viewed from the north (Appendix 4.8). They will not sever or intrude into views between the ring cairn and the saucer barrow to its south-east. While they will be visible in views towards the stone circle from the cairn the current state of the monuments means that any previously existing visual connection between the two has now been lost.

The setting of the saucer barrow (Site 219) is considered to be defined primarily by its relationship to the ring cairn to its north-west, and its location on a prominent spur of land overlooking the valley to the north. Its setting is also defined by its relationship with the surrounding enclosure (214), in the centre of which the saucer barrow is situated. While all three turbines are theoretically visible from this asset (Appendix 4.8) they will, as with the ring cairn, be set on the other side of Delf Hill and outwith the valley in which the barrow is set. No turbines will be sited which would sever or intrude into views between the saucer barrow and the ring cairn, or the enclosure.

Given the above, the turbines are predicted to have an impact of Medium magnitude upon the setting of the ring cairn and saucer barrow. This will result in an impact of Moderate significance.

181

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Harm It is not predicted that there will be any significant direct impacts upon heritage assets. There is the potential for significant impacts upon the setting of seven designated heritage assets. These include Towneley Hall (Site 352) and its associated registered parkland (Site 299), as well as Scheduled Monuments at Wasnop Edge (Sites 114 & 117), Ell Clough (Sites 212 & 219), and the enclosed settlement at Burwains camp (Site 223). Impacts of Moderate significance are predicted on the setting of all of these assets. The NPPF requires a judgement to be made of the level of harm that would be caused to these heritage assets.

Towneley Hall and RPG In the assessment above Towneley Hall and its RPG are considered to have high visual sensitivity to change and the proposed wind cluster is expected to have impacts of medium magnitude upon the setting of these assets. While the impact of Moderate significance is considered to be significant in terms of EIA regulations, and therefore requires consideration in the planning balance, it is not considered that the proposed turbines would form a major impediment to the ability to understand or appreciate the significance of the heritage assets. Nor is it considered that the development would reduce or remove their information content.

In the main the impact upon Towneley Hall and its RPG will result because of the presence of turbines to the northeast. Designed views along avenues to the northeast from Towneley Hall and over Towneley Hall from Foldys Cross are a key feature of the setting of these assets. While turbines will be located quite close to this alignment they will be set off it at c. 11 and at a distance of between 4.79 km and 5.08 km. While it is possible they could form distracting elements in the view, they will not sever the alignment or obscure any focal points on which the alignment is directed. The observer will still be able to understand the significance of the heritage assets and as such the impact is considered to be less than substantial.

Scheduled Monuments at Wasnop Edge A Bronze Age cairn (Site 114) and a bowl barrow (Site 117) are located upon Wasnop Edge. These monuments are judged to have high visual sensitivity and the proposed wind cluster is expected to have impacts of medium magnitude upon the setting of these assets. While the impact of Moderate significance is considered to be significant in terms of EIA regulations, and therefore requires consideration in the planning balance, it is not considered that the proposed turbines would form major impediment to the ability to understand or appreciate the significance of the heritage assets. Nor is it considered that the development would reduce or remove their information content.

The setting of these monuments clearly contributes to their significance. The setting of such burial/ritual monuments was often key to their placement in the landscape and it is evident

182

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

that these examples were set along a ridge line affording views of them from lower lying land in the surrounding landscape and vice versa. While the turbines will form large and modern new features in the wider landscape they will not detract from the ability to understand the placement of the monuments in the landscape or their relationship to topographical features, each other or indeed additional Bronze Age monuments to the northwest. As such the impact is judged to be less than substantial.

Bowl Barrow at Pike Low A bowl barrow surviving as earthworks is located at Pike Low (Site 137). The barrow is judged to have high visual sensitivity and the proposed wind cluster is expected to have an impact of medium magnitude upon the setting of this asset. While this impact, of Moderate significance, is considered to be significant in terms of EIA regulations, and therefore requires consideration in the planning balance, it is not considered that the proposed turbines would form major impediments to the ability to understand or appreciate the significance of the heritage asset, nor is it considered that the development would reduce or remove its information content, in which its cultural value lies.

The setting of this monument clearly contributes to its significance. The setting of such burial/ritual monuments was often key to their placement in the landscape and it is evident that the barrow at Pike Low, which is located on a prominent hilltop, was placed to both be seen from and overlook the surrounding landscape, particularly lower lying ground to the north, west and south. While the turbines would form large and modern new features in the wider landscape, they would not detract from the ability to understand the placement of the monument in the landscape or its relationship to topographical features or other Bronze Age monuments in the surrounding area. As such the impact is judged to be less than substantial.

Burwains Camp Burwains Camp (Site 223) is an enclosed and defended prehistoric settlement and it is judged to have high visual sensitivity and the proposed wind cluster is expected to have impacts of medium magnitude upon the setting of the asset. While the impact of Moderate significance is considered to be significant in terms of EIA regulations, and therefore requires consideration in the planning balance, it is not considered that the proposed turbines would form major impediment to the ability to understand or appreciate the significance of the heritage asset. Nor is it considered that the development would reduce or remove its information content.

The setting of this monument contributes to the ability to understand its defensive nature. While the turbines will be highly visible new additions to the wider setting of the asset they will clearly be located beyond the elements of the topographical landform which form the most integral elements of the monument’s setting. They will not sever the relationship

183

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

between the monument and its setting and they will not impede the ability to understand the relationship of the monument to its setting, nor will they materially impede the ability to understand the contribution of setting to significance. As such the impact is judged to be less than substantial.

Scheduled Monuments at Ell Clough A saucer barrow (Site 219) and a ring cairn (Site 212) are located nears Ell Clough within the land-ownership boundary. These monuments are both considered to have high visual sensitivity and the proposed wind cluster is expected to have impacts of medium magnitude upon the setting of these assets. While the impact of Moderate significance is considered to be significant in terms of EIA regulations, and therefore requires consideration in the planning balance, it is not considered that the proposed turbines would form major impediment to the ability to understand or appreciate the significance of these heritage assets. Nor is it considered that the development would materially reduce or remove its information content.

The main elements of the settings of these two monuments that contribute to their significance are their relationship to one another and to the steep sided valley of Thursden Brook which the monuments lie to the south of and upslope from. The proposed turbines would lie further to the south and beyond the summit of Delf Hill, clearly located within the next valley down. As such, while they will be relatively close to the funerary monuments at Ell Clough, the turbines will be clearly topographically separated and will not therefore impede an understanding of the significance of the monuments and the contribution of their settings to that significance. The impacts are judged to be less than substantial.

Mitigation of significant impacts National planning policies on the historic environment are detailed in NPPF (CLG 2012) while local policy is provided by the Burnley Local Plan, outlined in Section 9.1 of this report. These policies require that a mitigation response that is designed to investigate the potential for archaeological remains within the development area and hence allow the preservation or recording of any significant remains.

This assessment has identified the potential for direct impacts upon two known heritage assets (Sites 152 and 167) within the proposed development area. However, these comprise the remains of historic quarrying activity at Delf Hill. These assets are deemed to be of Low significance, and any impacts would at most represent very slight or barely measurable losses of information content with the loss of small percentages of the areas of quarrying. Additionally, it is certain that the quarrying activity will by its very nature have resulted in the complete removal of any earlier archaeological remains within their footprints. As such, the potential magnitude of direct impacts on both heritage assets is judged to be at worst of Marginal magnitude and Negligible significance. Given that quarrying will have removed any

184

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

previous archaeological remains, no mitigation measures are deemed to be necessary within these areas.

There is the potential that, outwith the quarried areas, the development could encounter hitherto unknown buried remains. Desk-based assessment has indicated a number of prehistoric remains both within the land-ownership boundary and the surrounding area. As such it is possible that similar or related remains survive below the surface. Lancashire County Archaeology Service was consulted following the production of the desk-based assessment and has requested that an evaluation, by geophysical survey and trial trenching, be undertaken at the proposed locations of turbines and other infrastructure. This would be limited to areas which have not historically been subject to quarrying. The Archaeology Service has requested that such an evaluation is undertaken pre-determination so that, where archaeological remains are encountered, full options for preservation in situ and/or further mitigation through preservation by record (e.g. full excavation, post-excavation analysis and publication as deemed necessary) can be considered.

With regard to the County Archaeology Services request for archaeological evaluation; there may be limited scope for undertaking a geophysical survey across the areas of Turbine 1, and most usefully, Turbine 3, followed by targeted trenching and possibly a watching brief. The area in which Turbine 2 is proposed is very heavily disturbed by historical and ongoing quarrying. This quarrying will have removed any archaeological deposits and it is argued that there would be no need for evaluation in this area.

This assessment has identified the potential for significant impacts, in terms of EIA Regulations, upon eight designated heritage assets. These comprise impacts of Moderate significance upon the Bronze Age cairn and bowl barrow at Wasnop Edge (Sites 114 & 117), the bowl barrow at Pike Low (Site 137) the Bronze Age ring cairn and saucer barrow at Ell Clough (Sites 212 & 219), the prehistoric defended settlement at Burwains Camp (Site 223) and Towneley Hall and its park (Sites 299 & 352). Impacts upon these assets have been judged to be of Moderate significance and as such will require consideration in the planning balance. These impacts are all judged to be less than substantial in terms of the NPPF.

Indirect impacts upon the setting of these heritage assets have been mitigated through the iterative design process. The original five turbine layout saw two turbines located to the north of Delf Hill and near the summit of Delf Hill itself. Such a layout would have seen the three Scheduled Monuments within the land-ownership boundary dominated by turbines. Following production of the Archaeological Desk-based Assessment (Appendix 4.1) the number of turbines was reduced to three and these were all placed to the south of Delf Hill in and around the area of quarrying. This has reduced the potential impact upon the setting of all of these monuments. In the case of the Ell Clough monuments the impact can be judged as having been reduced from Major to Moderate significance.

185

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

The reduction in turbine number and the relocations of turbines has also lessened the impact upon Burwains Camp (Site 223) and Pike Low (Site 137) by removing turbines from the Thursden Brook valley slopes and south of the summit of Delf Hill. These changes will have also reduced impacts upon Towneley Hall and its registered park (Sites 299 & 352) as turbines placed further to the north than those currently proposed, would have brought turbines closer to, perhaps even directly along, the northeast facing avenue alignment. In general the reduction in and relocation of proposed turbines has resulted in a reduction in impacts upon the setting of heritage assets, particularly for those assets located to the north and west of the proposed wind cluster.

Beyond mitigation by design, as discussed above, it is not considered that there is any practicable mitigation which could be offered to further lessen the impact upon the setting of heritage assets. It should however be noted that impacts upon the setting of the above noted monuments are limited to the 25 year operational period of the wind cluster, after which time the landscape would be returned to its current state. While it is acknowledged that 25 years is a considerable amount of time for a person, it is an insignificant amount of time in the life of these monuments. As such it is argued that the temporary nature of the proposed wind cluster mediates in part the impacts upon the setting of nearby cultural heritage assets.

9.6 Summary and Conclusions AOC Archaeology was commissioned by Green Cat Renewables Ltd to undertake Archaeology and Cultural Heritage Environmental Impact Assessment to form a chapter of an Environmental Statement submitted with a planning application for the construction of three wind turbines on Delf Hill, to the east of Burnley, Lancashire (centred at SD 8985 3375). The assessment included the collation and analysis of records of all heritage assets within 2km of the site boundary. Designated assets within 5km of the site boundary have also been identified and potential impacts upon their settings assessed.

The landholding on which the turbines are proposed contains three Scheduled Monuments, comprising a Bronze Age cairn, a saucer barrow and a ‘stone circle’, which is also likely to represent the remains of a cairn. The saucer barrow is situated at the centre of an enclosure which is similar in form to Iron Age and Roman period enclosures recorded in the wider study area. Much of the site was probably used as marginal, rough pasture throughout the medieval period, but the remains of numerous bell pits across the site attest to increased coal mining through the later medieval or early post-medieval periods. From the 19th century much of the site was occupied by Delf Hill Quarry, which continues in operation today.

The proposed development would not have a direct impact upon any of the Scheduled Monuments within the site. The only known heritage assets that would be impacted are

186

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

areas of historic quarrying, which by their nature will have already destroyed any earlier archaeological deposits. Beyond areas already disturbed by quarrying, there is the potential for impacts on unrecorded sub-surface archaeological remains dating from the prehistoric period onwards. Given this potential, Lancashire County Archaeology Service has requested that an archaeological evaluation, by geophysical survey and trial trenching, be undertaken pre-determination to inform the planning decision. There may be limited scope for undertaking a geophysical survey across the areas of Turbine 1, and most usefully, Turbine 3, followed by targeted trenching and possibly a watching brief. The area in which Turbine 2 is proposed is very heavily disturbed by historical and ongoing quarrying. This quarrying will have removed any archaeological deposits and it is argued that there would be no need for evaluation in this area.

There are numerous designated heritage assets in the surrounding area. These include Scheduled Monuments, Listed Buildings, Conservation Areas and Registered Parks and Gardens. The potential for impacts upon the settings of these assets by the proposed wind cluster has been assessed here. Eight assets, including a Bronze Age cairn and a bowl barrow on Wasnop Edge (Sites 114 & 117); a bowl barrow at Pike Low (Site 137); a ring cairn and saucer barrow at Ell Clough (Sites 212 & 219); an enclosed prehistoric settlement at Burwains Camp (Site 223), and Towneley Hall and its associated park (Sites 299 & 352) would be subject to impacts on their settings of Moderate significance. Such impacts are deemed to be significant in terms of EIA regulations, but less than substantial in terms of the NPPF.

Impacts upon the settings of designated heritage assets has been mitigated through the design process, which has seen a reduction in the number of turbines proposed from 5 to 3 and a relocation of those turbines closer to the quarry area. This is discussed in the ‘Mitigation of significant impacts’ section of this chapter.

Beyond mitigation by design, there is no direct mitigation that can be offered to mitigate impacts upon the settings of designated assets affected by this proposal. However, it should be noted that while the impacts would be long term they will in fact be temporary as, following a 25 year operational period, the turbines would be removed and the landscape returned to its current state.

9.7 References

Bibliographic References

BBC, 2006 Burnley Local Plan, Burnley Borough Council

Bennett, W, 1946 The History of Burnley to 1400, Burnley

187

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Bennett, W, 1947 The History of Burnley 1400 to 1650, Burnley

Department for Communities and Local Government, 2012, NPPF, National Planning Policy Framework, (Published by The Stationery Office)

English Heritage 2008 Conservation Principles Policies and Guidance

English Heritage 2010 The Historic Environment Planning Practice Guide

English Heritage 2011 The Setting of Heritage Assets: English Heritage Guidance

HMSO 1979 Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979

HMSO 1983 National Heritage Act 1983

HMSO 1990 Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990

Hodgson, J and Brennand, M, 2006 ‘Prehistoric Period Resource Assessment’ in M Brennand (ed.), The Archaeology of North West England. An Archaeological Research Framework for North West England: Volume 1, 21-58

Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2011

Fernie, E 1995, Art History and its Methods, a Critical Anthology

Haigh, S 2004, ‘Barn at Moorfell Farm, Hurstwood, Burnley, Lancashire: Archaeological Building Recording’, unpublished report

Haigh, S 2011, ‘Higher Bottin Farmhouse, Extwhistle Road, Worsthorne, Lancashire: Historic Building Recording’, unpublished report

ICOMOS 1999, The Burra Charter

ICOMOS 2005 X’ian Declaration on the Conservation of the Setting of Heritage Structures, Sites and Areas

IfA, 2012 Standard and Guidance for historic environment desk-based assessment

Miller, G, 1989 ‘New House Farmhouse’, unpublished report

188

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

OAN, 2005 ‘Coldwell and Trawdon Raw Water Transfer Pipeline to Laneshaw WwTW, Lancashire: Desk-Based Assessment and Walkover Survey’, Oxford Archaeology North unpublished report

OAN, 2006 ‘Coldwell and Trawdon Raw Water Transfer Pipeline to Laneshaw WwTW, Lancashire: Topographic Survey’, Oxford Archaeology North unpublished report

OAN, 2007 ‘Coldwell and Trawdon Raw Water Transfer Pipeline to Laneshaw WwTW, Lancashire: Watching Brief Report’, Oxford Archaeology North unpublished report

OAN, 2011 ‘Blackburn Concessionary Supplies, Briercliffe, Lancashire: Historic Research and Walkover Survey’, Oxford Archaeology North unpublished report

O’Flaherty, C J, 2009 ‘Historic Building Record ‘New Bridge End’: A barn with an attached former cottage to the south of Boulsworth End Farm, Ridehalgh Lane, Briercliffe, Burnley’, unpublished report

O’Flaherty, C J, 2010 ‘Historic Building Record: Former laithe house (cottage with attached barn) known as ‘Cockridge Copy’, North of Halifax Road, Briercliffe, Burnley, Lancashire’, unpublished report

Sephton, J, 1913 A Handbook of Lancashire Place-names, Liverpool

Smith, J G, 1997 ‘Archaeological Watching Brief at Foulds House Briercliffe’, unpublished report

UNESCO 2003 Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage

UNESCO 2009 World Heritage Cultural Landscapes

Woolerton Dodwell, 2000, ‘The Millennium Forest of Burnley, Worsthorne Woodlands - Environmental Statement’

Cartographic References

Briercliffe with Extwistle Tithe Map, 1850, Lancashire Archives ref. DRB 1/26

Ordnance Survey 1848 (surveyed 1844) First Edition County Series 6 inch scale maps (Lancashire), Sheets 56, 57, 64, 65

189

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Ordnance Survey 1894 (revised 1890-2) County Series 6 inch scale maps (Lancashire), Sheets 56 SE, 57 SW, 64 NE, 65 NW

Ordnance Survey 1913 (revised 1905/6 and 1909) County Series 6 inch scale maps (Lancashire), sheets 64 NE, 65 NW

Ordnance Survey 1915 (revised 1905/6 and 1909) County Series 6 inch scale maps (Lancashire), sheets 56 SE, 57 SW

Photographic references

Vertical black and white aerial photographs

Sortie Number Frame Number Centre Point Date Scale RAF/540/ 1673 52 SD 900 335 12/07/1955 1:10,000 ADA/BKS/2911 148 SD 906 339 20/11/1979 1:10,000 OS/92316 122 SD 895 336 17/05/1992 1:8,500 OS/99982 406 SD 902 337 19/12/1999 1:10,400 OS/99982 407 SD 895 337 19/12/1999 1:10,400

Oblique colour aerial photographs

Photo Film No. Frame Number Centre Point Date Reference SD 9033/1 NMR 17738 /12 SD 900 334 12/08/2002 SD 9034/1 NMR 20945 /08 SD 903 342 11/09/2009 SD 9034/5 NMR 20942 /23 SD 902 341 11/09/2009 SD 9034/7 NMR 20942 /25 SD 904 341 11/09/2009

190

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

10 Surface and Groundwater Hydrology

10.1 Introduction This chapter presents the impact assessment of the proposed development on the water environment. The assessment has considered the development impacts on water quality, drainage and flood risk.

Understanding surface and groundwater environments is critically important to designing a successful project. Surface water includes watercourses, water bodies and run-off. It provides important water resources for potable and other supply, amenity, aesthetic value, conservation, ecological environments and recharge to groundwater systems.

Groundwater includes all water stored in permeable underground strata (or aquifers). Groundwater is also an important resource, providing more than a third of the potable water supply in the UK. In addition it provides essential baseflow to rivers and wetland areas, often supporting important ecological systems.

Although hydrological issues are likely to be relatively minor at this site, the risk of pollution or disruption of watercourses, groundwater bodies and private water sources within or near the site needs to be assessed and appropriately mitigated where necessary.

10.2 Potential Impacts The potential impacts this development could have on the water environment of the site and the surrounding area can be broadly summarised as follows:

Disruption to surface and subsurface run-off and watercourses; Sedimentation, erosion, and production of silt-laden run-off; Chemical pollution of watercourses or groundwater; Increase in run-off; Lowering of the water table.

These impacts could occur during the construction, operational lifetime, and decommissioning of the development. They can potentially have many adverse effects to ecology and human amenity.

10.3 Guidance Statutory, general, national and local guidance consulted during this assessment is listed as follows:

EA Groundwater protection: Principles and practice (GP3) (November 2012)

191

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

EA General guide to the prevention of pollution: o PPG 1, May 2001; o Works and maintenance in or near water: PPG 5; o Above ground oil storage tanks: PPG 2, August 2011; o Concrete bunds for oil tanks - Environment Agency/Construction Industry Research and Information Association (CIRIA) Joint Guidelines; o Pollution incident response planning: PPG 21, March 2009; o Dealing with spills: PPG 22, April 2011; Water Quality Compliance Document Map; CIRIA Report C502: Environmental Good Practice on Site; and CIRIA Report C532: Control of Water Pollution from Construction Sites.

10.4 Methodology The method adopted to assess the impact on the water environment was:

Determination of the baseline hydrological conditions and the sensitivity of the site and adjacent receptors; Review of the proposed development to determine the predicted impacts posed by the development itself; Evaluation of the significance of predicted impacts, taking into account impact magnitude (before and after mitigation) and baseline environmental sensitivity.

The assessment is based on:

A desk-based study using information from published material: o Ordnance survey 1:10,000 map data; o Geological Maps, 1:10,560 and 1:1,000; o EA Groundwater Vulnerability Zones Map Consultations with statutory bodies, principally the Environment Agency (EA) and the Local Planning Authority; The land owner’s own knowledge of the site; and A site walkover undertaken by a suitably qualified engineer to support these findings and to check for any hydrological features on site that may be missing from the desk- based study.

Given the scale of the development, a conservative study boundary of 1.2km radius around the turbines, has been used for this assessment. All sensitive receptors within this 1.2km study boundary, which can be seen in Figure 10.1 (included as Appendix 5.1), have been identified and the impacts assessed.

192

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

The analysis of the significance of each impact is based on its magnitude, scale and the likelihood of occurrence. A significance rating of ‘High’, ‘Medium’, ‘Low’ or ‘Negligible’ is then given to each impact. By conducting this analysis before and after mitigating factors are taken into account, the significance of the predicted impact and the residual impact is determined.

10.5 Baseline This section presents an overview of the baseline water environment at the site, including: the location and quality of surface and groundwater resources, drainage, and flood risk. Figure 10.1 shows the local context of the site.

Terrain description The land around the site comprises a mix of grazing land, and an active quarry. Swinden Reservoirs are located approximately 450m from the closest proposed turbine. Delf Hill is the dominant terrain feature in the area, the summit of which is located 160m from the closest turbine location, at an elevation of 379m AOD. The site is positioned on the south face of a shoulder of this hill. The track and turbines lie at elevations of between approximately 220m and 370m above sea level. There are slopes down from the site of up to 27% to the west, and to the south.

South Pennine Moors (SSSI) are located adjacent to site, passing the site perimeter approximately 50m east of Turbine 3. The Pennine Moors host a variety of flora, notably NVC’s M19, M16, U4 and U5. The condition of Pennine Moors is ‘Unfavourable recovering’, and burning should not be permitted.

Hydrology Any runoff generated by rainfall on the proposed track hard standing areas currently tends to flow downhill to the south, as can be seen in the runoff catchment area shown on Figure 10.1. The runoff flows into a series of unnamed field drains, prior to flowing into Swinden Water and subsequently Swinden Reservoirs, the closest of which is located approximately 400m from the proposed infrastructure.

The Swinden Water Body becomes the River Brun downstream, approximately 3.5km west of the site. The site is predominantly dry underfoot, with localised wet and boggy sections, the largest of which is situated to the south of the proposed location of Turbine 1.

From the OS 1:10,000 map data, and through discussions with the landowner and the local council, a number of wells and springs were identified within the study boundary. These are depicted in Figure 10.1, and their nature of use given in Table 10.1.

193

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Table 10.1. Wells and Springs within 1.2km of development Well/Spring NGR Nature of use Well A 389470, 833750 Supply to cattle at Property 1 Spring 1 388950, 432590 Supply to cattle trough Spring 2 388920, 432590 Supply to cattle trough Spring 3 388940, 433980 Unused Spring 4 389070, 434380 Previous supply to Cluster 11 – Now unused Spring 5 389400, 434700 Unused

Swinden Reservoir, recently the recipient of a £4.5 million investment for upgrading, supplies over 150,000 customers in the Burnley area with clean drinking water. It is also used as a stocked Fishery.

Existing Condition of Proposed Crossing – Swinden Water (SD 8835 3354)

Photo 1: Condition of Previous Crossing, Looking Photo 2: View of crossing looking towards the site Downstream

The proposed crossing over the Swinden Water is located at a former crossing point. Two embankments and elements of previous bridging infrastructure are clearly visible; the remainder of the structure indicates it had approximately a 3m span. It is expected that a bottomless arch structure of 7m span will be used to bridge the stream in this location.

It is anticipated that detailed design of the bridge shall be set out in a planning condition; detailed design will be undertaken in consultation with the EA prior to commencement of construction. An indicative design is provided in APP-008.

Local water supplies All properties within 1.2km of the proposed development have been identified and their water source determined with the results tabulated below.

194

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Table 10.2 - Water Supplies to Properties within 1.2km of development ID Property NGR Source 1 Sweet Well House Farm 389400, 434030 Mains 2 Clough Croft 388660, 433790 Mains 3 Ing Hey 388550, 433680 Mains 4 Extwistle Cottage 388240, 433640 Mains 5 Swinden Bridge 388268, 433680 Mains 6 Roggerham Gate Inn 388250, 433780 Mains 7 Highland Cottage Flats 388250, 433800 Mains 8 Highland Cottage 388290, 433810 Mains 9 Holden Farm Cluster* 388520, 433860 Mains 10 Elders I’ the’ Row Cluster* 388870, 434230 Mains 11 Monk Hall Farm Cluster* 389000, 434350 Mains *Cluster denotes multiple holdings in a small area.

Surface and Groundwater Classification The Environment Agency (EA) classifies all significant waters in England. The nearest classified surface water features have been identified as the River Don (Thursden Brook) located approximately 900m to the north, and the River Brun, located approximately 3km to the south west of the proposed turbines.

The EA have classified the River Don as “Poor”. This means the EA are “quite certain” the River Don has a “Poor” ecological status; the chemical status has been deemed to “Not Require Assessment”. The River Brun has been classified as having “Moderate Ecological Potential”; the river has been altered in the past, and is now classified as having a “Heavily Modified” Hydromorphological Status. The Swinden Reservoirs have local ecological significance, but are not classified by the EA.

The EA also classifies significant groundwater bodies which at the proposed site are “Douglas, Darwen and Calder Carboniferous Aquifers”. The overall status of this groundwater has been classified as ‘Poor’. The quantity of groundwater has been classified as ‘Good’ with uncertainty and has a chemical status of ‘Fail’.

Flooding Risk From the Risk of Flooding from Rivers and Sea (available on the EA website) it can be seen that there is no areas deemed to be at risk from flooding within the study boundary. The nearest area deemed to be at risk from flooding is small areas along the banks of Swinden Water proximate to Lee Green Reservoir, approximately 1.4km to the west of the nearest proposed turbine location. The project is unlikely to have any impact on the flooding risk of these areas.

195

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Hydrogeology The EA Groundwater Map indicates that the strata beneath the site are classified as Secondary A, which is moderately permeable.

The BGS Geology of Britain Viewer (1:625000) indicates that the project is located in a region underlain by Old Lawrence Rock. The bedrock in the area is likely to comprise sandstone and mudstone, often within fairly substantial beds. Water flow is expected to be in fissures and other discontinuities, and consequently permeability is likely to be higher where the rock is more fractured, by activities such as mining.

The Geology of Britain viewer indicates that there is a superficial layer of diamicton, specifically Devensian Till, present in parts of the region. The 1:10000 scale geological maps compliment this information, indicating that drift deposits are likely to be thin or absent in the area.

Intrusive investigations Intrusive ground investigations will be completed prior to turbine construction to gain final information on groundwater levels, soil permeability and geology.

10.6 Predicted Impacts This section presents an assessment of impacts on the water environment which may occur during the construction, operational and decommissioning phases of the development. The sensitive receptors are identified and the predicted impacts are assessed and their significance rated.

Details of the site and the works to be conducted can be found in Chapter 2: The Proposed Development.

Sensitive Receptors The identification of sensitive receptors, taking into account baseline conditions, is summarised in Table 10.3 below. It should be noted that a distinction has been made between properties that draw water from the water table, and the overall condition of the water table itself.

196

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Table 10.3 - Sensitive Receptors Receptor Comment The River Don has been classified as having a Poor ecological status by the EA. The River Brun has been classified as having Moderate ecological potential. Swinden Watercourse Water has local ecological significance, but it is a diminutive watercourse and has not been classified by the EA. Groundwater The region is located in an area underlain by moderately permeable strata. Properties with a There are no private water supplies found within the study boundary. Private Water Supply Reservoirs The Swinden Reservoirs are used to supply water to Burnley and the surrounding area. The reservoirs are also used as a stocked Fishery. SSSI The Pennine Moors host a variety of Valley Mire flushes and other NVC classifications. The Moors are noted to be in unfavourable condition, but are showing signs of recovery.

Predicted Construction Impacts The most disruption, and therefore the greatest risk of impact to the water environment, will occur during the construction phase of the project.

Disruptions to flow paths The development requires the crossing of the Swinden Water. The proposed bridge over the burn poses the largest potential impact to the fluvial system and must be designed and built in line with best practice regulations to keep potential impacts to an acceptable level.

Poorly designed and constructed crossing can lead to a variety of detrimental impacts including:

Pollution of the watercourse; Corrosion of the stream bed; Sedimentation; Obstruction to riverine fauna; Blockages due to a build-up of debris; Hydraulic steps in flow; Creation of a barrier to fish or other wildlife; Prevention of the watercourses natural movements.

The significance of this impact is considered to be medium.

The track and associated drainage could impede existing surface runoff routes, particularly during periods of heavy rainfall. This can lead to pooling, or cause new flow paths to be created. The impact caused by these disruptions to flow could be of medium significance.

197

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

There is potential for the development to have an impact on the flow paths towards the Swinden Reservoirs and the Pennine Moors. Any potential impact is expected to be insignificant because the development is near the top of the catchment area.

Sedimentation and Erosion It is predicted there may be an impact caused by erosion of track and hard-standing surfaces and of excavated spoil material. This could lead to sediment being carried with the runoff and reaching a watercourse or the SSSI. Cable laying also has the potential to damage soils and introduce new drainage pathways which could generate silt laden run-off. The amount of the resultant suspended solids pollution will be greater during heavy rainfall events, although the dilution potential of the watercourses is also at its greatest during these periods. At times of low flow, it is very unlikely that silt could reach a watercourse or reservoir. Should no drainage be installed, the rough grazing land present across site would aid in filtering sediment from runoff, as a result of this, any fine particulate pollutants reaching Swinden Reservoirs will be limited. The significance of this impact is considered to be low.

Increase in runoff Construction of the access tracks, sub-station and crane hard-standings will result in localised changes to the surface water hydrology. The cambered tracks may interrupt natural flow paths. The new track will also shed water more quickly than the existing ground. An increase in runoff in the area can compound various other predicted impacts, such as chemical pollution, erosion and sedimentation. Furthermore, increased runoff could add to a flood risk in the area.

The cumulative area of tracks and hardstanding on the proposed site is expected to only lead to a very slight increase to runoff. It is unlikely any runoff would affect the areas at risk of flooding on the banks of the Swinden Water. The magnitude of the impact is taken to be low.

Chemical Pollution There are several potential sources of chemical pollution to both surface water and groundwater during the construction phase of the development. The spillage or leakage of construction associated oil, grease, fuel, concrete, cement, foul water or other chemicals can have a serious negative impact on the quality of surface water and/or or groundwater. Runoff or groundwater could also carry spills or leakages resulting in pollution of a sensitive receptor, such as Swinden Reservoirs. Local topography limits the potential for polluted runoff to travel, so polluted runoff contaminating a watercourse is predicted to be of medium significance.

198

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

The moderate permeability of the strata beneath the site, means groundwater travel is likely to be limited, so polluted runoff contaminating groundwater is predicted to be of medium significance. Table 10.4 includes a summary of the predicted impact from chemical pollution at each private water supply within the 1.2km study boundary. The impact at each PWS is predicted to be negligible.

Lowering of the water table Given what is known about the ground conditions in the area and the extents of the excavation works, groundwater is not expected to enter the foundation excavations. As such, dewatering should not be required and therefore the groundwater table would not be affected by the works. Furthermore, General Binding Rule (GBR) 15 (from the Water Environment (Controlled Activities) (Scotland) Regulations 2005) states that “(d) groundwater shall not be abstracted from any excavations, well or borehole that are within 250 metres of any abstraction that is not for the sole purpose of dewatering an excavation”. Therefore, any private water supply outside of a 250m ‘dewatering boundary’ is not predicted to suffer an impact. There is a presumption that cable trenches and access roads may disrupt the groundwater flow directions by creating shallow drainage and preferential pathways and, as such, a further boundary of 100m around cable trenches and access tracks has been applied. Table 10.4 includes a summary of the predicted impact from dewatering at each private water supply within the 1.2km study boundary.

Table 10.4 - Analysis of Potential for Impact on Sensitive Water Features within 1.2km of development Well/ Surface Water Runoff Pollution Impact Dewatering Impact Spring Impact Analysis Significance Impact Analysis Significance Well A Not used as a potable water source. Negligible Potential receptor, as on the edge of Low The source is used solely by the the applied 250m boundary around applicant in his farm buildings. dewatering activities. Unlikely pathway as receptor is located north of the site and local topography suggests run-off will be to the south. Spring 1 Unlikely pathway as receptor is located Negligible Unlikely as receptor is outside of both Negligible on raised ground beyond Swinden the applied 250m and 100m boundaries Water. around dewatering activities. Spring 2 Unlikely pathway as receptor is located Negligible Unlikely as receptor is outside of both Negligible on raised ground beyond Swinden the applied 250m and 100m boundaries Water. around dewatering activities. Spring 3 Unlikely pathway as receptor is located Negligible Unlikely as receptor is outside of both Negligible north of the site and local topography the applied 250m and 100m boundaries suggests run-off will be to the south. around dewatering activities. Spring 4 Unlikely pathway as receptor is located Negligible Unlikely as receptor is outside of both Negligible north of the site and local topography the applied 250m and 100m boundaries suggests run-off will be to the south. around dewatering activities. Spring 5 Unlikely pathway as receptor is located Negligible Unlikely as receptor is outside of both Negligible north of the site and local topography the applied 250m and 100m boundaries suggests run-off will be to the south. around dewatering activities.

199

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

The Pennine Moors (SSSI) is also susceptible to the impacts of dewatering. A small portion of the SSSI lies within the potential zone of influence of dewatering, but ground conditions indicate any impacts of dewatering are likely to be highly localised, the impact on the SSSI is expected to be Negligible.

Predicted Operational Impacts There will be a few on-site activities during operation of the wind turbines relating to regular maintenance or repair of the machines. During these activities there will be a need to bring small quantities of oil, greases and other materials on to the site. The sub-station, access tracks and crane hard-standings will result in localised changes to the surface water hydrology for the duration of the project, with the potential effects of erosion, sedimentation and increased runoff as discussed in Construction Impacts.

Predicted Decommissioning Impacts The activities during decommissioning are broadly similar to those during construction, however, the level of activity will be less as some of the roads and sub-surface elements will be left in place.

10.7 Mitigation The potential impact of the project on water quantity is minimal, so the mitigation measures focus on preventing water pollution. There are a number of recognised best practices and measures to mitigate and eliminate the predicted impacts previously discussed. A full intrusive ground investigation will be carried out to provide data for designing appropriate mitigating measures before construction begins.

Construction The following measures will be implemented to manage the predicted impacts at the site during the construction phase. Construction will be carried out according to EA and CIRIA guidance for site works.

Disruption to existing flow Following good practice guidance in the design and construction of the proposed culvert will ensure that the crossing is correctly designed in a way that will minimise or completely remove possible impacts. The design will ensure that the culvert is of a sufficient size such that the soffit is higher than the bank, and the width is at least that of the natural channel. The culvert will be correctly aligned and sloped to the drain. Existing flow depths will be maintained, and the culvert base will be of natural substrate.

200

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Sedimentation and Erosion During construction of the track, drainage will be controlled by placing drainage ditches on the uphill slopes. All earth bunds, soil and waste material storage areas will be located as far as possible from site watercourses and will be well managed to minimise runoff and erosion. The project drainage will be designed such that access tracks will be cambered to shed surface water into a suitable drainage system.

Adoption of sustainable drainage principles, such as making use of vegetation to slow water flows and filter sediments, should minimise the risk of sediments reaching watercourses. The new drainage network will be kept separate from the existing field drain network to avoid any potentially contaminated runoff from the new infrastructure discharging into local watercourses. If this is not practical, drains will be installed along the length of the tracks which would feed into a soak-away. The soak-away would incorporate an overflow for periods of heavy rainfall. A possible drainage layout solution is shown on Figure 10.1. Methods incorporated are designed to be sustainable and to cope with storm events.

To minimise disturbance impacts, cables will be laid in small trenches along the side of the access tracks as far as possible. Trenches will be dug during drier periods, as far as practicable, and spoil material will be temporarily placed on the uphill slope to reduce the likelihood of runoff entering the excavations. The electric cables will be laid quickly and backfilled to minimise water ingress to the trenches. Their actual impact in terms of creation of new drainage pathways, or damage to soil profile, is likely to be negligible provided the best practice methods are followed.

Chemical Pollution Construction traffic will use specified roads and parking areas at all times, where practicable, to reduce compaction and associated run-off in the wider area. Appropriate control measures, such as shallow vegetated channels, will be installed to convey haul road and hardstanding runoff and treat pollutants.

Concrete will be delivered in ready-mix wagons which will only be allowed to ‘wash-out’ in designated areas where suitable control measures are in place. Full details of the foundation construction will be provided in the construction method statement. We anticipate this being required as a planning condition. Once construction is complete and the soil has been replaced over the foundation and reseeded, the change to surface water runoff and risk of pollution is predicted to be negligible.

A pollution incident response plan will be developed in accordance with EA PPG 21. Spill response measures will be put in place to ensure that any accidental spillages at the surface can be contained and quickly removed from site.

201

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

All fuel and other chemicals will be stored and managed in accordance with best practice procedures. Best practice is included in EA Pollution Prevention Guidance Notes (PPGs). All fuel will be stored in a bunded container. Oil spill kits will be stored in the site office. All oils, greases and chemicals will be stored in a locked bunded container near the site office. Where oils and diesel are brought on to site for refuelling or maintenance, these operations will be carried out in designated areas of hardstanding located at least 20m from the nearest watercourse or drain. Standard methods will be adopted within these designated areas that minimise the risk of spillage. Contingency plans will also be in place for dealing with any spillage that may occur.

Any contaminated material encountered during construction will be dealt with according to environmental best practice, following suitable chemical analysis. Such material will be contained, treated, or disposed of, to a suitably licensed disposal facility.

Implementation of the procedures described above will mitigate the significance of a chemical pollution impact to low.

Increase in runoff Adoption of sustainable drainage, as discussed in the Sedimentation and Erosion section above, will allow for the capture of runoff from the site, and render impacts caused by runoff negligible.

Lowering of the water table Should planning permission be granted, an intrusive investigation will be carried out and groundwater monitoring standpipes installed at the locations of each of the turbines. The investigation will include an assessment of the ground permeability and water potential. Mitigating measures for any potential dewatering and disposal of groundwater will be provided in a construction method statement.

Operation The proposed mitigation for the construction of the access roads will continue to function through the life of the project. Routine maintenance for the roads will be carried out in summer months when the tracks are dry. Operational best practice procedures will continue to be adopted, with the risk of water pollution from such activities considered to be negligible.

The proposed mitigation for fuels and chemicals used during the construction phase would be applied at all relevant times during the lifetime of the project. The concrete used will be of a high grade that is not prone to leaching alkalis. As such the ongoing risk of pollution on the site after construction is considered to be very low.

202

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Decommissioning It is envisaged that detailed method statements, in compliance with relevant current legislation, will be drawn up prior to decommissioning. However, similar mitigation methods to those employed during construction (updated to take account of legislation current at the time of decommissioning) are likely to be appropriate.

10.8 Assessment of Residual Impact The residual impacts after mitigating factors have been taken into account are analysed with respect to their significance. Table 10.5 below includes a summary of the residual impacts, and it can be seen that there are no residual impacts of major significance expected to occur as a result of the development.

Table 10.2 - Summary of Impact Assessment

Project Sensitive Initial Residual Effect Description of Mitigation Element Receptor Significance Significance

Detailed water crossing design to Crossing of a Drop in hydraulic be undertaken in dialogue with Watercourses Medium Negligible watercourse gradient the LPA and the EA as a planning condition. Disruption to field Incorporating lateral drainage Watercourses Medium Negligible drainage flow paths across tracks in design Implementation of a Sustainable Drainage system to capture Watercourses Low runoff. Negligible Adherence to best practice Access Track Erosion and the procedures. & cabling; generation of silty Implementation of a Sustainable Hardstanding runoff Drainage system to capture s Reservoir Low runoff. Negligible Adherence to best practice procedures. Implementation of a Sustainable Increase in runoff Watercourses Low Drainage system to capture Negligible adding to flooding runoff. Implementation of a Sustainable Drainage system to capture runoff. Adherence to best Keeping and practice procedures in the using Polluted runoff handling, use and storage of fuel, concrete, contaminating a Watercourses Medium Low oils and chemicals. Concrete will chemicals/ watercourse be delivered in ready mix fuel onsite; wagons. Wagons only to ‘wash- refuelling. out’ in areas where suitable

control measures are in place. Polluted runoff Implementation of a Sustainable Groundwater Medium Low contaminating Drainage system to capture

203

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Project Sensitive Initial Residual Effect Description of Mitigation Element Receptor Significance Significance

groundwater runoff. Adherence to best practice procedures in the handling, use and storage of fuel, oils and chemicals. Concrete will be delivered in ready mix wagons. Wagons only to ‘wash- out’ in areas where suitable control measures are in place. Runoff will not flow near any private water supplies - no Polluted runoff Private or mitigation required. Concrete will contaminating Public Water Negligible be delivered in ready mix Negligible potable water Supply wagons. Wagons only to ‘wash- supply out’ in areas where suitable control measures are in place. Implementation of a Sustainable Drainage system to capture Polluted runoff runoff. Adherence to best SSSI Medium Low contaminating SSSI practice procedures in the handling, use and storage of fuel, oils and chemicals. Dropping of the Private water supplies are water table Private Water outside of the area of effect of Negligible Negligible harming potable Supply dewatering - no mitigation Excavation of water supply required. track and Mitigating measures for any foundation Dropping of the potential dewatering and water table SSSI Negligible disposal of groundwater will be Negligible harming SSSI provided in a construction method statement.

10.9 Conclusion

A desk-based study and site walkover were conducted to establish the baseline water environment of the site, whereby predicted impacts caused by the development were identified. The majority of potentially significant negative impacts on water quality are only predicted to occur in the short term through potential increased sedimentation and pollution during the construction phase. Although there is a slight risk of spillages of concrete or chemicals reaching a local potable water source during maintenance work, the risk is held to be greater during the construction phase. The same would apply to the risk of contamination of groundwater. It is anticipated that the adoption of best practice management and control procedures by all site personnel, and the implementation of the mitigation methods proposed, will bring these risks down to acceptable levels.

204

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

11 Existing Infrastructure, Telecommunications, Television, Aviation and Electromagnetic Interference

11.1 Introduction Operational wind turbines have the potential to interfere with:

Communication networks that use electromagnetic signals; Civil aviation radars; Safeguarding radars operated by the MOD; and Other types of infrastructure such as high pressure gas, water pipes or electricity lines and cables.

The potential impact of the proposed wind turbine on this infrastructure is considered in this chapter.

11.2 Guidance Guidance for assessing the potential impact of wind turbines on electromagnetic infrastructure is given in:

Planning for Renewable Energy: A Companion Guide to PPS22; Tall structures and their impact on broadcast and other wireless systems, Ofcom, 2009; and Wind farms assessment tool, BBC

Guidelines and publications for assessing potential impact on aviation activities are:

Wind Energy and Aviation Interim Guidelines, BWEA, 2002; CAP 428 - Safety Standards at Unlicensed Aerodromes, CAA, 2004; and CAP 764 – Policy and Guidelines on Wind Turbines, CAA, 2012.

11.3 Methodology A list of consultees with aviation, telecommunications, television and other infrastructure interests in the area was identified based upon advice given in planning policy. These consultees are listed in Table 11.1.

205

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Table 11.1 – Infrastructure, telecommunications and other infrastructure consultation

Consultee Response Comments Received Aviation CAA / BAA / NATS No No longer comment pre-application. Objection expected from NATS due to impact on St Annes radar.

MOD Yes Informal notification that objection will be raised regarding impact on Warton.

Telecommunications Ofcom Yes Identified the interested operators below JRC Yes No objection Atkins Yes No objection

Other Met Office Yes Acceptable impact on Hameldon Hill Weather Radar

11.4 Assessment of Impact

Civil aviation The British Aviation Authority (BAA), the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) and National Air Traffic Services (NATS) now no longer comment on proposals at the pre-application stage.

An independent aviation study has been commissioned to look in detail at the likely impacts on civilian and military aviation. The main findings are outlined below.

Ministry of Defence (MOD) The independent aviation study has identified that the development is likely to be visible to the radar at RAF Warton, which may trigger an initial objection. Although this radar is approximately 50km from the proposed site location, Warton are known to have objected to wind turbine developments to the north-west of Burnley.

Should this be the case, it is proposed that an in-fill radar solution be developed by a specialist aviation consultancy and a suitable planning condition agreed with the MoD.

NATS En-Route (NERL) The development may be visible to the St Annes Primary Surveillance Radar, which would trigger a NATS objection. There is overlapping coverage from the radar at Clee Hill and potentially from Manchester Airport. It is therefore likely that the St Annes radar could be blanked with effective in-fill coverage provided by other NATS radars.

206

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Should this be the case, it is proposed that suitable mitigation be agreed with NATS at the post-planning stage.

Other infrastructure The Met Office has been consulted regarding the impact on the Hameldon Hill weather radar. Following an initial conflict, the layout was amended so that the turbines align more closely with a radial from the weather radar. The Met Office has confirmed that the latest layout, although visible to the radar, is acceptable in terms of its operation.

Telecommunications Ofcom responded to say that there are no fixed link end(s) or fixed link paths in the vicinity of the proposed development. As this response to the co-ordination request is only in respect of microwave fixed links managed and assigned by Ofcom within certain frequency bands a copy of the co-ordination request was issued to Atkins Global and JRC.

JRC, which analyses proposals for the potential impact upon radio systems associated with the fuel and power industry, responded to say that they did not have any objection to make with respect to radio link infrastructure.

No objection was received from Atkins Global who are responsible for providing support services for ‘The Telecommunications Association of the UK Water Industry’ (TAUWI).

No other telecommunication links were identified in the vicinity of the site.

Television

The digital switchover for the whole of the UK has been completed.

A 2009 Ofcom report stated that:

“Digital television signals are much better at coping with signal reflections, and digital television pictures do not suffer from ghosting. However a digital receiver that has to deal with reflections needs a somewhat higher signal level than one that has to deal with the direct path only. This can mean that viewers in areas where digital signals are fairly weak can experience interruptions to their reception should new reflections appear.

Over time, this problem is expected to diminish as the power of transmitters is increased as digital switchover continues across the UK. However, higher transmitter powers will not be a solution in all situations which means that reflections may still affect digital television reception in some areas, although the extent of the problem should be far less than for analogue television.”

207

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

There are a number of technical solutions available should interference be proven as an issue as a result of the turbine and if there are any impacts they are considered to be of temporary nature until a technical alternative can be put in place. Overall, any potential effects on television are considered to be negligible.

11.5 Impacts, Issues and Mitigating Actions There is a possibility that the MoD may object to the development based upon the potential impact to the radar at RAF Warton. Should this be the case, it is proposed that an in-fill radar solution be developed by a specialist aviation radar provider and a suitable planning condition agreed with the MoD. Negotiations with the MoD will be undertaken post- submission, if required.

There is also a possibility that the CAA may object to the wind cluster based upon the potential impact on the NERL St Annes radar. It is likely that impact upon the St Annes radar could be mitigated through effective in-fill coverage provided by other NATS radars.

208

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

12 Shadow Flicker This section of the report looks at the possible effects on local amenity caused by shadow flicker at residential properties.

12.1 Background Tall structures such as wind turbines cast shadows. The shadows vary in length according to the sun’s altitude and azimuthal position. Under certain combinations of geographical position and time of day, the sun may pass behind the rotor of a wind turbine and cast a moving shadow over neighbouring properties. Where this shadow passes over a narrow opening such as a window, the light levels within the room affected will decrease and increase as the blades rotate, hence the shadow causes light levels to ‘flicker’ - an effect commonly known as 'shadow flicker'.

Whilst the moving shadow can occur outside, the shadow flicker effect is only experienced inside buildings where the shadow passes over a narrow window opening. The seasonal duration of this effect can be calculated from the geometry of the machine and the latitude of the site. A single window in a single building is likely to be affected for a few minutes at certain times of the day for short periods of the year. The likelihood of this occurring and the duration of such an effect depend upon:

The direction of the residence relative to the turbine(s); The distance from the turbine(s); The turbine hub-height and rotor diameter; The time of year; The proportion of day-light hours in which the turbine operates; The frequency of bright sunshine and cloudless skies (particularly at low elevations above the horizon); and The prevailing wind direction.

The further the observer is from the turbine the less pronounced the effect will be. There are several reasons for this:

There are fewer times when the sun is low enough to cast a long shadow; When the sun is low it is more likely to be obscured by either cloud on the horizon or intervening buildings and vegetation; and, The centre of the rotor's shadow passes more quickly over the land reducing the duration of the effect.

At a distance, the blades do not cover the sun but only partly mask it, substantially weakening the shadow. This effect occurs first with the shadow from the blade tip, the tips

209

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

being thinner in section than the rest of the blade. The shadows from the tips extend the furthest and so only a weak effect is observed at a distance from the turbines.

12.2 Baseline and Methodology

Identification of Receptors Planning for Renewable Energy, ‘A Companion Guide to Planning Policy Statement 22 (“PPS”) provides technical information on a range of renewable energy technologies, including onshore wind power. This information is relevant throughout the UK.

Although it has since been superseded for planning purposes, the Companion Guide is the accepted industry standard in describing the conditions in the UK under which flicker may occur and states that the effect diminishes with distance.

The guidance further states that flicker effects are known to occur within ten rotor diameters and 130 degrees either side of north relative to wind turbines. In the case of the Delf Hill project, a distance of ten rotor diameters equates to 820m.

These sensitive receptors include residential properties including care homes; educational buildings, hospitals, cemeteries; some visitor facilities and accommodation; and proposed development areas.

Significance Criteria Northern Ireland’s Best Practice Guidance to Renewable Energy12, which has been approved by DECC13, states that an acceptable shadow flicker level at residential properties is 30 hours per year.

Methodology The software models shadow flicker effects by using simple geometric considerations: the position of the sun at a given date and time; the size and orientation of the windows that may be affected; and the size of the turbine that may cast the shadows. The model adopts a conservative approach by assuming that:

Turbines are facing the sun at all times of the day;

12 Best Practice Guidance to Planning Policy Statement 18: Renewable Energy, Department of the Environment (Northern Ireland), (2009). http://www.planningni.gov.uk/index/policy/policy_publications/planning_statements/planning_policy_statem ent_18__renewable_energy__best_practice_guidance.pdf 13 Update of UK Shadow Flicker Evidence Base, DECC (2011) http://www.decc.gov.uk/assets/decc/What%20we%20do/UK%20energy%20supply/Energy%20mix/Renewable %20energy/ORED/1416-update-uk-shadow-flicker-evidence-base.pdf

210

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

It is always sunny; The turbines are always operating; and There is no local screening.

Baseline There is one receptor within 10 rotor diameters of the proposed development: Sweet Well House Farm. This property is owned and occupied by the landowner who has a financial interest in the project and is therefore considered to be less sensitive to the effects of shadow flicker. Although there are no third party properties within ten rotor diameters of the turbines, a shadow flicker map has been produced using ReSoft’s WindFarm software to assess whether any properties could potentially experience more than 30 hours of shadow flicker per year.

12.3 Assessment Figure 12.1 shows the predicted area where theoretical shadow flicker impacts are predicted to exceed 30 hours per year, in relation to the turbine locations and the nearest properties.

211

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Figure 12.1 – Theoretical Area of Shadow Flicker

Key: 10 rotor diameters (820m) Boundary Turbine >30 hours per year of theoretical shadow flicker Receptors

The map shows that the area predicted to receive >30 hours of theoretical annual shadow flicker impact is primarily limited to within 820m of the turbines, and that no third party properties are located within this area. In reality, actual impacts would be less than this as a result of the following factors:

The annual average amount of sunlight for the Briercliffe area, which is ~1,142 hours. This has been estimated from the 1981-2010 met office mapped14 average sunlight hours for Malham Tarn – the nearest met office station. This means that on average over a year, it is sunny for ~26% of daylight hours.

14 http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate/uk/averages/19812010

212

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

The rotor of a modern wind turbine can be expected to turn approximately 90% of the time. According to the Danish Wind Energy Association website, shadow flicker is reduced to 63% of the maximum possible if the wind turbine is assumed to be randomly yawed relative to the sun position.

The realistic results are therefore 15% of the theoretical total (0.26 x 0.90 x 0.63= 0.147). This means that if a receptor was expected to experience 30 hours of theoretical shadow flicker per year, in reality it would be more likely to experience around 6 hours.

This further supports the assessment that the nearest properties will not be adversely affected by shadow flicker from the proposed three turbine development.

Calculations show that the closest property, and the only receptor within 820m ( ten rotor diameters), Sweet Well House Farm is expected to receive 10.3 hours of actual shadow flicker per year, well below the 30 hour threshold suggested by PPS.

12.4 Summary and Conclusion DECC’s guidance suggests that an acceptable level of shadow flicker at residential properties is 30 hours per year. PPS guidelines suggest that shadow flicker impacts should not be problematic beyond a distance of 10 rotor diameters from a wind turbine.

A shadow flicker map has been produced for the Delf Hill turbines, based on conservative assumptions, which demonstrates that:

The only property located within 820m is expected to experience around 10 hours of shadow flicker effects per year. This property has a financial interest in the project; There are no third-party properties within 820m of the nearest turbine; and No properties are likely to experience shadow flicker in excess of 30 hours per year as a result of the development.

Given these findings, it is not expected that shadow flicker will be problematic as a result of the development.

213

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

214

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

13 Climate Change

13.1 Introduction The UK Government has developed ambitious targets for tackling climate change:

The UK Government in the 2008 Climate Change Act made a commitment to reduce

the UK’s emissions of CO2 by 34% (on 1990 levels) by 2020 and 80% by 2050. The Climate Change Act 2008 sets in statute the Government’s Economic Strategy target to reduce Scotland’s emissions of greenhouse gases by 80% by 2050 (on 1990 levels).

These targets will be achieved through an investment in energy efficiency and clean technologies such as renewable energy generation. The UK Government published its ‘UK Renewable Energy Roadmap’ in 2011. This stated that,

“The Coalition Government has made clear its commitment to increasing the deployment of renewable energy across the UK in the sectors of electricity, heat and transport. This will make the UK more energy secure, will help protect consumers from fossil fuel price fluctuations, is driving investment in new jobs and businesses in the renewable energy sector, as well as keep us on track to meet our carbon reduction objectives for the coming decades. Renewables will be a key part of the decarbonisation of the energy sector necessary by 2030, alongside nuclear, carbon capture and storage, and improvements in energy efficiency”.

The overall target set out in the Roadmap is for 15% of the UK’s energy consumption to come from renewable sources by 2020. The Roadmap estimates that between 10% and 14% of this target will be met by onshore wind deployment.

13.2 Potential Impacts The main greenhouse gas pollutants associated with conventional power stations include: carbon dioxide (CO2); sulphur dioxide (SO2); and oxides of nitrogen (NOX).

Table 14.1, which has been adapted from Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) guidance (in the absence of specific guidance from the UK Government), summarises the potential CO2 savings and costs associated with different aspects of each wind development:

215

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Table 14.1 – Carbon savings / losses associated with wind developments

Potential Carbon Savings Potential Carbon Losses Carbon emission savings when compared to Production, transportation, erection, operation emissions from different power sources and decommissioning of the wind farm Improvement of habitat Requirement for backup power generation Loss of carbon fixing potential of peatland Loss and/or saving of carbon stored in peatland (by peat removal or changes in drainage) Loss and / or saving of carbon fixing potential as a result of forestry clearance

In assessing the overall impact of the project on climate change, the full lifecycle of the wind turbines need to be considered. The remainder of this chapter quantifies each of the different elements presented above.

13.3 Guidance This section has been written with reference to SNH’s Technical Guidance Note, 2.0.1, 2011. SNH published a Technical Guidance Note in 2003 for calculating carbon ‘payback’ times for wind farms. The 2003 guidance adopted a relatively simple approach towards impacts on peatland hydrology and stability. This was updated in 2008 to include the impacts of wind farms during construction and operation on soil stability and long-term greenhouse gas emissions. The 2011 Technical Guidance Note (SNH/Scottish Government) presents a more comprehensive approach towards these issues.

Baseline Data The annual carbon dioxide emissions saving of a wind turbine are estimated as:

CO2 emissions saving = total electricity generation expected [MWh] x Emission Factor of Displaced Generation [tCO /MWh] 2

The SNH Technical Guidance Note states that, “in most circumstances it is not possible to define the electricity source for which a renewable electricity project will substitute”, although it does state that as nuclear power generation is not affected by renewable energy generation “this suggests that carbon emission savings from wind farms should be calculated using the fossil fuel sourced grid mix as the counterfactual” SNH’s Technical Note (SNH/Scottish Government, 2011) presents result for each of the three sets of figures, as shown in Table 14.2.

216

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Table 14.2 – Counterfactual emission factors

Energy Emission Factor (tCO2 per MWh) Grid Mix 0.43 Coal Fired 0.86 Fossil Fuel Mix 0.607

Within this section, the predicted carbon savings against both the Grid Mix and the Fossil

Fuel Mix are presented. The Grid Mix figures present a more conservative estimate of CO2 emission savings.

Capacity Factor A wind project capacity factor has to be determined in order for the total electricity generation of the wind project to be calculated. This is the ratio of the actual energy generated to the theoretical amount that the machine would generate if running at full rated power during a given period of time. The average capacity factor observed for onshore wind farms throughout the UK in 201215 was 26.2%16.

13.4 Carbon Balance

Project CO2 emission savings The calculation was carried out in accordance with SNH Technical Note version 2.0.1, 2011, using the overall grid mix and fossil fuel sourced grid mix figures to produce the counterfactuals for comparison. Results are presented in Table 14.3.

15 This is the last year for which complete data is available. 16 DECC ‘Energy Trends September 2013’

217

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Table 14.3 – Calculated CO2 emission savings

Power Generation Characteristics Number of turbines 3 Turbine Capacity 3.0MW Capacity Factor 26.2 % Lifetime 25 years Annual Energy Output ~20,656 MWh/yr

Counterfactual Emissions Factors

Overall ‘grid’ mix generation 0.43tCO2 /MWh

Fossil fuel sourced mix 0.607tCO2 /MWh

Project estimated CO2 emission savings over: Grid mix generation 8,882 tCO₂ /yr Fossil fuel mix generation 12,538 tCO₂/yr

Assuming 1 tCO2 = 0.27 tC:

Total Project Estimated Carbon saving over: 2,398 tC/yr Overall ‘grid’ mix generation 59,954 tC/25yr 3,385 tC/yr Fossil fuel mix generation 84,633 tC/25yr

Based upon an average electricity consumption of 4,226 kWh per household17 the Delf Hill development is expected to provide enough electricity to power approximately 4,900 homes.

Projected carbon savings and costs The potential carbon savings and carbon costs associated with wind farm development are as follows:

Carbon emission savings (based on emissions from different power sources); Loss of carbon due to production, transportation, erection, operation and decommissioning of the turbines; Loss of carbon from backup power generation; Loss of carbon-fixing potential of peatland; Loss and/or saving or carbon stored in peatland (by peat removal or changes in drainage); Carbon saving due to improvement of habitat; and

17 DECC ‘Energy Consumption in the UK 2013’ Table 3.07 – Temperature adjusted figure

218

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Loss and/or saving of carbon-fixing potential as a result of forestry clearance.

An assessment of the Delf Hill Wind Cluster against each of these elements is presented below.

Production, transportation, erection, operation and decommissioning of the wind cluster In the absence of a specific life cycle assessment for the turbine, the SNH Technical Guidance Review recommends using the following equations:

For turbines <1MW: Llife = (517.62*Cturbine)-0.1788

For turbines >1MW: Llife = (934.35*Cturbine)-467.55

Where Cturbine is the capacity of each machine.

Using this formula, the lifecycle CO2 emissions of the three turbines can be estimated to be 7,010 tonnes which corresponds to a payback time of around 10 months against the grid mix generation. This corresponds to 1,890 tonnes of carbon.

Requirement for backup power generation Wind generated energy is inherently variable, which means that some degree of backup power generation is required to provide a stable supply to the consumer. The SNH Technical Guidance Review states that the extra capacity required for backup power generation is estimated to be 5%, if wind energy contributes more than 20 % to the national grid.

The guidelines estimate that the contribution of wind power to the national grid will not exceed 20% until 2038, therefore no additional CO2 loss from back up generation requirements can be attributed to the project.

Peat No areas of peat will be affected by the proposal, either through direct impacts or indirectly through impact upon drainage.

Forestry No areas of forestry are expected to be cleared as a result of the proposal.

Results The following table summarises the overall carbon balance of the wind cluster over its 25 year lifecycle, based upon the overall grid mix counterfactual, which represents a conservative estimate.

219

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Table 14.4 – Predicted carbon savings / losses

Element: Predicted lifetime savings / losses (tC) Projected carbon savings compared to grid mix -59,954 Production, transportation, erection, operation and +1,892 decommissioning Requirement for backup power generation 0

Peat losses / savings 0 Forestry losses / savings 0 Total -58,063

Table 14.4 shows that over its 25 year lifecycle the project is expected to result in a carbon saving of ~58,063 tonnes.

Other Polluting Gas Emissions Savings Other gas emissions resulting for fossil fuel sourced electricity generation are sulphur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen dioxide (NOx), both responsible for acid rains. Emissions savings relating to the project can be calculated using the RenewableUK guidance. This suggests that the SO2 and NOx emissions savings are, respectively, 10 and 3 kg per MWh. This translates to emissions factors of 0.01 and 0.003 [tonnes/MWh] respectively. The following table shows the predicted savings for these gases.

Table 14.5– Predicted emission savings for other polluting gases

Project total emission savings of:

SO2 ~5,164 tonnes /25yr NOx ~1,549 tonnes /25yr

13.5 Mitigation As the development as a whole is expected to have a beneficial effect on climate change in terms of offsetting greenhouse gas emissions, no mitigating actions are suggested.

13.6 Summary It is concluded from the above that the development would have an overall positive effect in reducing UK greenhouse gas emissions. Therefore the development is assessed to have a small, positive impact on climate change.

Besides reducing CO2 emissions, the development of clean, low carbon methods of generating electricity will also help the UK to diversify its energy supply away from non- sustainable fossil fuels. Furthermore, the harnessing of national renewable energy resources can be seen as a wise strategic move in that it reduces the UK’s dependency on energy imports from foreign countries.

220

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

13.7 References Department of Energy and Climate Change (2013), Energy Trends September 2013, DECC

Department of Energy and Climate Change (2013), Energy Consumption in the UK 2013, DECC

Scottish Natural Heritage (2003), Windfarms and Carbon Savings, Technical Guidance Note, Scottish Natural Heritage.

Scottish Natural Heritage (2008), Calculating Carbon Savings from Wind Farms on Scottish Peat Lands – A New Approach, Scottish Natural Heritage.

Scottish Natural Heritage/Scottish Government (2011), Calculating Potential Carbon Losses & Savings from Wind Farms on Scottish Peatlands, The Scottish Government.

UK Government (2008), Climate Change Act 2008, UK Government.

UK Government (2011), UK Renewable Energy Road Map, UK Government.

221

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

222

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

14 Traffic and Transportation

14.1 Introduction This section considers the traffic and transportation impacts of the Delf Hill Wind Cluster. It presents:

Details of the proposed site access junction; The predicted traffic generation of the development; Details of the abnormal loads that will access the site; The proposed routes to site for construction traffic; Swept path analysis of pinch points and the requirements for temporary works and third party land take; and An outline Route Management Plan

During operation the wind turbines would operate automatically and be monitored remotely, requiring only occasional maintenance visits. As such the traffic impact of the development during the operational phase is not considered to be significant and has not been assessed.

The vast majority of traffic movements will be associated with the construction and decommissioning stages of the wind farm.

14.2 Scoping Consultation Consultation regarding the access route and the information to be submitted with the Environmental Statement has been discussed with Lancashire County Council’s Abnormal Loads Team.

14.3 Site Access Junction The site would be accessed from the west via a new access junction which would leave the public road to the south of the Swinden Bridge and enter the site at its western edge via a trackway running eastwards up the broad saddle of Twist Hill.

This requires the construction of a steel multiplate arch bridging structure across the Swinden Water to the west of Ing Hey, the design of which is presented in APP-008. This is the old historical access route to the quarry, as evidenced by the remains of bridging points over the Swinden Water and the still-visible base of the track as it heads eastwards up Twist Hill.

223

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

14.4 Traffic Generation and Phasing The traffic generated by the development will consist of:

Deliveries of the turbine components (blades, tower sections and turbine nacelles); Deliveries of crushed stone for the site access tracks and crane hardstandings (which will be won on site). In this instance crushed stone is available on site and will not need to be imported; Concrete deliveries during the foundation pour; and Personnel trips to and from the site.

Table 14.1 gives an estimate of the volume of traffic likely to be involved during the construction phase. Table 14.1 – Construction Traffic

Load Number of deliveries Type of vehicle Aggregate for new and Standard Heavy Goods upgraded track and crane ~2,800 m3 0 Vehicles hardstanding Concrete turbine Standard Heavy Goods ~1,540 m3 192 foundations Vehicles Reinforcement steel 270 tonnes 14 Standard flatbed lorry Cabling 3 Standard flatbed lorry Personnel - 6-10 arrivals a day at peak time Cars / Light good Vehicles Turbine components Specialised non-standard - 18-24 articulated lorries articulated vehicles

This will remove the need for ~470 deliveries (940 vehicle movements) of stone on the public road network which would otherwise have been sourced from the most convenient nearby quarry.

Concrete deliveries Each turbine foundation will require 478m3of concrete, resulting in 1,535m3 in total. This would require 192 deliveries (384 vehicle movements), plus a further 14 deliveries of steel (28 vehicle movements).

224

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Turbine components Approximately 18 articulated low loader deliveries would be required to deliver the towers, the nacelles and the blades and one further lorry-load would be required to transport the necessary cabling to the site. In addition, two cranes are required for the erection of the wind turbines. Specifications for the turbine delivery vehicles and cranes are included in the ‘Abnormal Loads’ section below.

Site personnel In addition to HGV / Abnormal load deliveries, there would be ~10 trips per day (20 vehicle movements) made by various site personnel in cars, utility vehicles and LGVs.

Phasing The construction phase would start after the financial and due diligence process has been completed and would be on-going for approximately 5 to 7 months, from construction of the access track through to erection and commissioning of the wind turbines. Table 14.2 presents an indicative programme.

Activity Timescale (months from planning decision) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Roads, hard-standings and drainage Foundation excavation Foundation reinforcement Foundation structural concrete pour Sub-station construction On-site cabling Turbine delivery Turbine erection Turbine commissioning

Figure 14.2 – Indicative construction programme

Deliveries of concrete during the foundation pour represent the most intensive period of traffic associated with the development. In total 192 deliveries will be required on site over a period of 6 days – 2 days per turbine. On average this would result in 30 deliveries per day, arriving at the rate of 5 per hour over a 6 hour period.

14.5 Abnormal Loads Turbine components There are three different types of components to be delivered to site, which will arrive on specialist Turbine Delivery Vehicles (TDV):

225

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Turbine blades – 42m in length, which are the longest components transported to site; Turbine tower sections– four sections per turbine. The longest of these is 28.5m long; and Turbine nacelles – these are the widest components transported to site, 5m in width.

Details of the Turbine Delivery Vehicle required to transport one E82 Turbine Blade is illustrated below in Figure 14.2.

Figure 14.2 – E82 Blade delivery vehicle

Cranes Two cranes will be required on site to erect the turbines. The base unit of the largest crane proposed to be used on site, the Liebherr Crane LG 1750 is 18.9m long and 3.0m wide. The crane has 8 axles, all of which have axle loads of 12 tonnes, with the total vehicle weight of 96 tonnes. The requirements for the cranes are:

A minimum carriageway width of 3.5m A minimum carriageway clearance width of 4.0m A minimum clearance height of 4.6m A minimum ground clearance of 0.15m Structures along the access route will have to be able to withstand loads up to a maximum axle load of 12 tonnes and a maximum overall weight of up to 120 tonnes.

226

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

14.6 Access Routes Different access routes are proposed for the Turbine Delivery Vehicles (TDV) and cranes and the other HGVs that will access the site.

TDVs and Cranes It is not known whether turbine components will arrive in the UK via an east or west coast port. However, they will be transported via the motorway network and arrive in Burnley via the M65. TDVs will leave the M65 at Junction 12, and head south on the A682 towards Burnley.

Following this the route continues past the Crooked Billet Public House and out of Worsthorne towards the site.

Beyond Worsthorne, the TDVs will follow Extwistle Road past Lower Bottin and High Halstead to the site entrance.

Concrete Deliveries It is proposed to route HGV deliveries via Briercliffe, with deliveries arriving from the north. HGVs would travel from the A6114 onto Briercliffe Road, passing through Briercliffe itself and onwards towards Haggate. At the crossroads between Burnley Road and Nelson Road they would turn right onto Todmorden Road, which travels southwards to join Shay Lane. Vehicles would then turn right at the Shay Lane junction and pass the Roggerham Gate Inn before reaching the site entrance. As shown in Table 14.1, approximately 192 deliveries of concrete would be required over a six day period.

227

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

14.7 Swept Path Analysis The following potential pinch-points were identified through consultation with Burnley Council and as part of the Access Study:

PP1 - Left turn from Brunshaw Road onto Brownside Road at SD 8623 3231 PP2a - Slight right bend entering Worsthorne on Brownside Rd, at SD 8741 3218 PP2b - Sharp left turn in Worsthorne onto Extwistle Rd at SD 8758 3242 PP2c – Narrow section of Extwistle Road at the Crooked Billet Public House PP3 - S-bend (north) on Extwistle Rd at Bottin Farm, at SD 8792 3307 PP4 – Section of Extwistle Rd approaching High Halstead, SD 8796 3348

The location of these pinch-points is shown in Appendix 6. Swept Path analysis has been completed for both the blades (the longest vehicles) and cranes (the widest vehicles), and is presented in the Section below.

PP1 - Left turn from Brunshaw Road onto Brownside Road

Approaching Brownside Road from the west View of the turn onto Brownside Road

Figure 14.3 – Photographs of Pinch Point 1

228

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Figure 14.4 – Swept path analysis of Pinch Point 1

As shown in Figure 14.4, the TDV’s wheels would over-run the eastern kerb on Brownside Road, and the blades would oversail the kerbs on both Extwistle Road and Brownside Road. This manoeuvre would require the temporary removal of the central bollards and signposts on Brunshaw Road and Brownside Road, the lamppost on the northern side of the junction and the small bollards on the east of Brownside Road. PP2a – Right hand bend entering Worsthorne on Brownside Rd

Approaching right bend on Brownside road Exiting bend towards Worsthorne square

229

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Figure 14.5 – Photographs of Pinch Point 2a

Figure 14.6 – Swept path analysis of Pinch Point 2a

Figure 14.6 shows that the manoeuvre can be completed with the tractor trailer riding on the pavement to the north and west of the bend.

230

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

PP2b - Sharp left turn in Worsthorne onto Extwistle Rd

Approaching left turn of junction in Worsthorne Exit of junction onto Extwistle Rd

Bollards, signpost and parking area on the corner of Brownside Road

Figure 14.7 – Photographs of Pinch Point 2b

231

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Figure 14.8 – Swept path analysis of Pinch Point 2b Figure 14.8 shows that the TDV would need to pass over the kerb and parking area on the corner of Brownside Road and Extwistle Road. This would require the temporary removal (and subsequent reinstatement) of the bollards and black signpost shown in in Figure 14.7. The swept path shows that the stone monument and telephone box would not need to be removed. A small area of grass may need to be temporarily reinforced.

PP2c – Narrow section of Extwistle Road at the Crooked Billet Public House

Figure 14.9 – Photograph of Pinch Point 2c

232

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

The section of Extwistle Road adjacent to the Crooked Billet Public House was identified as potentially too narrow to allow passage of the generator, the widest delivery to access the site. A topographic survey was undertaken, which confirmed that the width was sufficient.

PP3 - S-bend (north) on Extwistle Rd at Bottin Farm

Approaching S-bend on Extwistle Rd Mid-section of S-bend

Second bend heading north Exit of S-bend

Figure 14.10 – Photographs of Pinch Point 3

233

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Figure 14.11 – Swept path analysis of Pinch Point 3

Analysis shown in Figure 14.11 shows that the TDV may oversail the right hand bend on the approach to this section of road, which would conflict with a stone wall as shown in Figure 14.10. An agreement has been reached with the land owner that this stone wall would be temporarily removed or lowered to allow passage of the TDV.

The remainder of this section is passable by the TDV without any further works.

234

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

PP4 – Section of Extwistle Rd approaching High Halstead

Figure 14.12 – Swept path analysis of Pinch Point 4

This section of the route is bounded by stone walls of varying height on either side of the road. Figure 14.12 shows that verge reinforcement and the removal / lowering of the wall on the eastern side of the road is required to allow passage of the TDV. There are a further two points on the east of the road at which stone walls would need to be lowered or removed. An agreement has been reached with the landowner that these works can be carried out as required.

235

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Weight restrictions

TDV’s have a total travelling weight of between 44 tonnes and 60 tonnes. They generally have six or more axle vehicles with loads of between 8 and 11 tonnes per axle, although the number of axles can potentially be increased if required.

Two cranes will be required on site to erect the turbines. The base unit of the largest crane proposed to be used on site, the Liebherr Crane LG 1750 is 18.9m long and 3.0m wide. The crane has 8 axles, all of which have axle loads of 12 tonnes, with the total vehicle weight of 96 tonnes. The largest crane would have a travelling weight of 96 tonnes on eight axles with a maximum axle load of 12 tonnes, with steering on all axles to help navigate bends.

Roadways, bridges and access tracks therefore have to be able to withstand loads up to a maximum axle load of 12 tonnes and a maximum gross weight of 96 tonnes.

The proposed route crosses Brownside Road Bridge, which consists of a masonry arch with a span of 20m, which appears to be in a good condition. Lancashire County Council has indicated that the bridge has an assessed capacity of 40 tonnes and HB load of 21, with an assessed carriageway capacity 21HB. It is anticipated that the bridge will be able to accommodate the proposed loads. A full structural survey will be undertaken at the post- planning stage as part of the detailed design process.

14.8 Other potential effects The increases in site traffic have the potential to result in the following environmental effects.

Traffic noise and vibration The potential effect on residential receptors would mostly be felt in settlements along Brownside Road, Extwistle Road, Briercliffe Road and Todmorden Road. These effects are likely to be small in nature given the small percentage increase in traffic on the road network. The biggest impact would be felt on Briercliffe Road and Todmorden Road during the concrete delivery period, which is estimated to last for six days.

Disruption and driver delay These effects would mainly occur during the movement of abnormal loads to the site. The transportation of abnormal loads would be undertaken outside of peak hours, and the overall aim would be to minimise disruption to other road users.

The exact details of planned traffic management will be provided in a Route Management Plan that will be agreed with Lancashire County Council and the Highways Agency.

236

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Increased risk of accidents Due to the small percentage increases in traffic on the road network the increase in accidents as a result of increased traffic is expected to be minimal. However, the presence of slow moving, abnormal loads can cause driver frustration which can lead to accidents.

Severance, intimidation and pedestrian delay An increase in traffic flows, particularly on fast-moving roads through settlements can lead to increased pedestrian delay and intimidation, increasing severance between local facilities. The small percentage increase in traffic on these routes as a direct result of the Delf Hill development is unlikely to significantly add to these effects.

Dust and Dirt HGVs have the potential to spread dust and dirt from the site itself onto the road network. These effects are more pronounced in the vicinity of the site. Measures such as wheel baths and regular road cleaning can mitigate these effects.

Visual effects The movement of HGVs and abnormal loads could be considered to be visually unattractive. These effects are likely to be temporary in nature (for the duration of the construction period) and not particularly noticeable given the small percentage increases in traffic.

Road condition It is proposed that a route condition survey would be undertaken prior to the construction phase in conjunction with Lancashire County Council. A similar survey would be undertaken post-construction to enable any degradation as a result of the development to be clearly identified.

Cumulative Impacts In terms of potential cumulative traffic from other wind farms, we are not aware of any consented projects within 30km of Delf Hill where construction is expected to be concurrent. On this basis it has been assumed that there will be no cumulative traffic impacts.

Impact during Operation Once erected the wind turbines would operate automatically; requiring regular visits to the site by the turbine manufacturer’s maintenance staff. Typically, Enercon maintenance teams for electrical, mechanical, greasing and visual aspects are scheduled to conduct one check per year on the wind cluster. These are undertaken on a quarterly basis, as a result; every three months one team of technician-personal conduct the maintenance.

237

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Should, for any reason; there be an issue with any turbine(s), and maintenance is required, then an unscheduled maintenance operation will be completed.

These maintenance operations will be conducted and accessed in light commercial vehicles such as vans, cars or similar vehicles. As such the traffic impact of the development during the operational phase is not considered to be significant.

Impact during Decommissioning The turbine components would be removed from the site, but the foundations are likely to be grassed over and remain in place. The same number of abnormal loads as required during construction would be needed, but the number of ‘normal’ HGV trips would be reduced.

14.9 Mitigation

Use of on-site stone The number of construction vehicles will be reduced by sourcing all of the aggregates for the roads and crane hardstandings on site. These measures have the potential to significantly reduce the number of HGV trips by 470 trips (940 vehicle movements) during the first phase of construction.

The route to be followed by the Turbine Delivery Vehicles (TDVs) and HGVs; The schedule of deliveries. Deliveries will be scheduled outside of peak hours to minimize impact on the road network; Suitable escort arrangements for each turbine convoy, from the port of entry to the site access itself; Traffic management measures during delivery of turbine components and concrete deliveries; Confirmation of construction traffic numbers and construction phasing; Appropriate road signs warning other road users of increased HGV activity and abnormal loads in the vicinity of the site. This will be particularly pertinent on Todmorden Road and Extwistle Road; Information to be supplied to the general public regarding the movement of abnormal loads, and any road closures or diversions; and

238

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Considerate construction methods to be employed such as wheel cleaning and road sweeping.

Burnley Council has indicated that the following requirements are likely to be incorporated as Planning Conditions, namely:

A before and after route condition survey of the local road network; Abnormal load trial runs; and Traffic management during deliveries.

Scheduling of turbine deliveries It is envisaged that the components of each turbine would be delivered over a single day, with all of the turbines delivered over a period of three days. Deliveries would be staged for the quietest times of the day (in traffic terms) to minimise disruption. The turbine delivery schedule would be made publicly available to ensure that local residents were aware of planned deliveries.

Components are likely to travel in either one convoy of six vehicles or in two convoys of three vehicles to minimise disruption.

During operation No specific mitigation measures are proposed during the operational phase.

During decommissioning No specific construction measures are proposed during the decommissioning phase. A RMP for the decommissioning stage would be produced, with a similar scope to the construction RMP.

14.10 Residual effects The measures described above will mitigate the majority of traffic impacts, which are mainly associated with the construction phase. Any residual effects are likely to be small and temporary in nature.

14.11 Summary of effects Table 14.6 summarises the potential effects, mitigation measures and residual effects presented within this section

239

Delf Hill Wind Cluster – Environmental Statement

Table 14.6: Summary of effects, mitigation and residual effects

Potential effects Mitigation Residual Effects

Source of stone on-site and use of Increase in traffic on the trunk Negligible, not significant and existing access tracks wherever road network temporary possible. Source of stone on-site and use of Increase in traffic on the local Minor, not significant and existing access tracks wherever road network temporary possible. Escort for abnormal loads. Potential traffic delays on the Convoys scheduled for quiet times of Minor, not significant and road network caused by the day. temporary abnormal loads Production of RMP Increased risk of accidents and RMP including appropriate signage Minor, not significant and road safety impacts. Escort of abnormal loads temporary

14.12 Statement of Significance This section has assessed the likely significance of traffic and transportation effects associated with the proposed Delf Hill Wind Cluster during the construction, operational and decommissioning stages.

The suggested mitigation measures and ongoing dialogue with Lancashire County Council and other consultees will minimise the impact of the development.

The residual traffic and transport effects are considered to be temporary and have been assessed as having an impact of either minor or negligible significance.

240

APPENDICES

241

242

Appendix 1 – Ecology

243

244

Appendix 1.1 – Phase 1 Habitat Map

245

246

Appendix 1.2 – Ecology NVC Tables

U4 Festuca ovina – Agrostis capillaries –Galium saxatile grassland U4 (n=2) Species Frequency Domin range Festuca ovina 2 6-7 Juncus squarrosus 2 4-6 Galium saxatile 2 4-5 Agrostis capillaries 1 5 Carex nigra 1 5 Dicranum scoparium 1 4 Rumex acetosella 1 4 Juncus effusus 1 5 Nardus stricta 1 4 Polytrichum formosum 1 4 Potentilla erecta 1 4 Rhytididadephus squarrosus 1 5

M17 (n=8) Species Frequency Domin range Calluna vulgaris 8 4-8 Potentilla erecta 6 2-7 Molinia caerulea 5 4-7 Sphagnum papillosum 4 4-9 Sphagnum capillifolium 7 4-9 Eriophorum vaginatum 7 4-10 Eriophorum angustifolium 6 2-9 Carex echinata 1 5 Juncus squarrosus 2 4 Erica tetralix 7 4-8 Polytrichum commune 2 2-5 Rhytidiadelphus loreus 1 5 Narthecium ossifragum 6 2-7 Carex echinata 2 2 Pleurozium schreberi 1 4 Trichophorum cespitosum 2 5-9 Drosera rotundifolia 2 2 Vaccinium oxycoccos 1 3 Bare ground 1 4 Vaccinium myrtilus 1 4

247

Hyloconium splendens 1 5 Plagiothecium undulatum 1 2

248

M20 Eriophorum vaginatum blanket and raised bog M20 (n=3) Species Frequency Domin range Calluna vulgaris 3 4 Potentilla erecta 2 3-4 Molinia caerulea 3 4 Sphagnum papillosum 3 4 Sphagnum capillifolium 2 5 Eriophorum vaginatum 3 8-9 Polytrichum commune 1 4 Trichophorum cespitosum 2 6

M25 Molinia caerulea - Potentilla erecta M25 (n=4) Species Frequency Domin range Calluna vulgaris 2 2-4 Potentilla erecta 3 4-7 Carex echinata 1 5 Molinia caerulea 4 9-10 Erica tetralix 2 1-5 Sphagnum papillosum 4 4-9 Juncus acutiflorus 2 4-8 Narthecium ossifragum 1 5 Vaccinium myrtilus 1 5 Hyloconium splendens 1 4

M18 Erica tetralix – Sphagnum papillosum mire M18 (n=2) Species Frequency Domin range Calluna vulgaris 1 4 Erica tetralix 1 5 Sphagnum papillosum 1 5 Trichophorum cespitosum 1 8 Rhytidiadelphus loreus 1 5

249

E1 Bog: E2.1 Acid/neutral flush

M6 Carex echinata – Sphagnum fallax/denticulatum mire M6 (n=6) Species Frequency Domin range Juncus effuses 1 8 Juncus acutifolium 3 6-9 Sphagnum papillosum 5 3-9 Sphagnum compacticum 1 4 Sphagnum denticulatum 1 5 Potamogeton polygonfolius 1 6 Myrica gale 3 4-8 Polytrichum commune 1 9 Potentilla erecta 3 2-6 Eriophorum vaginatum 1 4 Water 2 5-7 Trichophorum cespitosum 1 5 Succisa pratensis 3 2-3 Carex echinata 2 6-7 Viola palustre 1 4 Rannunculus acris 1 4 Molinia caerulea 1 7 Erica tetralix 2 2-4 Calluna vulgaris 1 4 Vaccinium oxycoccos 1 2 Eriophorum angustifolium 1 4

250

Appendix 2 – Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

251

252

Appendix 2.1 – Landscape and Visual – Viewpoint Assessment

Figure 7.13 Viewpoint 1: Pennine Bridleway

Description Viewpoint 1 is taken from E389718 N432365, from the Pennine Bridleway, a long distance footpath which runs from Stainforth in the north to Middleton in the south. The view faces north towards the proposed development which is located 1.1km from the viewer. The view is very enclosed from this location by two local summits which, roll up sharply in front of the viewer and sit to the right and left. The landscape slopes towards the centre of the view, where the nearby summit of Delf Hill can just be seen over the near horizon. The land cover is dominated by rough grassland, which covers the whole of the foreground, while around the summit of Delf Hill, the landscape has been scarified by the quarry works. A post and wire fence bounds the path, running across the foreground, while a stone wall runs over the nearby hillside to the left of the view. Despite the enclosed nature of this view, to the rear the valued views occur as the landscape rolls away, offering a more long distance and open vista over the surrounding landscape.

Sensitivity The viewpoint represents walkers, horse riders and cyclists who frequent the pathway and as such is considered to be of high sensitivity.

Magnitude of Change Receptors of this view would be 1.1km from the proposed turbines. The turbines are fairly prominent, adding three significant vertical features to the view. The intervening landscape does allow for some screening, which reduces the vertical extents of the two outermost turbines in the cluster. The visible portion of all three turbines would be viewed backdropped by the sky from this location. The turbines would occupy a major extent of the vertical and horizontal view. The overall magnitude of change for the development is considered to be high, the turbines would be obvious features in this view, leading to a major level of effect.

Cumulative Impact Operational The Hameldon Hill and extension turbines appear to the left of the view, appearing in successive views with the Delf Hill wind cluster. The turbines are predominantly viewed across the valley, against the landscape from this location. On the distant horizon the Hyndburn windfarm is also theoretically visible, sharing the same view as the Hameldon turbines from this location. At this distance it is not an overly prominent feature in the more open view across the valley, appearing solely against the sky. The cumulative magnitude of change for operational projects would be negligible. Operational, Consented The Micklehurst turbine appears in the view alongside the Hameldon wind turbines. The single turbine is a barely distinguishable feature in this view, the intervening landscape screening views of all but the hub and blades of the turbine which would appear completely backdropped by the surrounding landscape. The cumulative magnitude of change for consented projects would remain negligible. Operational, Consented, In Planning There are no planned developments visible from this location The cumulative magnitude of change for planning projects would remain negligible.

Type of Effect On completion of the development the visual effect from this viewpoint would be permanent (reversible) and direct. The development would lead to a high magnitude of change and despite the careful design of the project a man-made vertical structure in this area would always lead to a negative effect.

Assessment of Visual Effects Sensitivity: High

Magnitude: High

Type of Effect: Permanent, direct and negative

Level of Effect: Major

253

Figure 7.14 Viewpoint 2: Worsthorne

Description Viewpoint 2 is taken from E387844 N432936, taken at the side of the local minor road to the north-east of the settlement of Worsthorne. The view faces in a generally easterly direction towards the proposed development which is located 1.7km from the viewer. The view feels fairly open from this location. The foreground is taken up by an area of agricultural land, with rough and improved grass the dominant land covering. A wooden fence separates the fields, running through the view from left to right. Over the middle ground the landscape rolls away from the viewer, the valley containing the Swinden Reservoirs sits within the valley created below, although there are no views of the reservoirs from this location. An area of woodland, associated with the nearby water feature can be seen running through the middle ground from the left to the centre of the view, this helps to break up the foreground and the more distant landscape which rises beyond the valley, forming a gentle, rolling horizon. The landscape beyond the valley follows a similar pattern to the foreground with large arable fields providing the predominant land covering.

Sensitivity The viewpoint represents the local residents of Worsthorne and as such is considered to be of high sensitivity.

Magnitude of Receptors of this view would be 1.7km from the proposed turbines. Change The turbines are fairly prominent features in this view. They are viewed predominantly against the sky, although the nearest turbine breaks the horizon, with the lower tower section visible against the landscape. The turbines appear in the view alongside other vertical features including several metal electricity pylons which traverse the view and provide some scaling features. From this location the proposed turbines are tightly clustered and would occupy a high extent of the vertical view and a medium extent of the horizontal view. The turbines are located in the more enclosed section of the view with an open panorama occurring over the valley to the west of the settlement, this would remain intact with the addition of the proposed turbines. The overall magnitude of change for the development is considered to be high, the turbines would be obvious features in this view, leading to a major level of effect.

Cumulative Operational Impact The Hameldon and Hameldon extension turbines appear to the rear of the view from this location, in the opposite direction to the proposed Delf Hill wind cluster. The turbines sit on a ridge line below the larger scale landscape to the west which provides a significant back drop to the turbines from this location, with only the blades breaking the horizon. The cumulative magnitude of change for operational projects would be negligible. Operational, Consented To the right of the view there are successive views with the Coal Clough and Todmorden Moor windfarms, the two developments appearing as a single development from this location. The intervening landscape limits potential views to the upper sections of around 8-9 turbines. The visible portions of the turbines appearing over the horizon, viewed against the sky. The single turbine of Micklehurst appears in the same view as the Hameldon Hill turbines, to the rear of the view. The intervening landscape provides a significant amount of screening of this development with only the hub and blades appearing over the ridge line, this visible portion of the turbine are further back dropped by the landscape to the west reducing the visibility of the development in this view. The cumulative magnitude of change for consented projects would become low. Operational, Consented, In Planning There are no views of any planned developments from this location. The cumulative magnitude of change for planning projects would remain low.

Type of On completion of the development the visual effect from this viewpoint would be permanent (reversible) and direct. The Effect development would lead to a high magnitude of change and despite the careful design of the project a man-made vertical structure in this area would always lead to a negative effect.

Assessment Sensitivity: High of Visual Effects Magnitude: High

Type of Effect: Permanent, direct and negative

Level of Effect: Major

254

Figure 7.15 Viewpoint 3: Ridehalgh Lane

Description Viewpoint 3 is taken from E389969 N434935, taken at the side of a local minor road to the north of the proposed turbines. The view faces in a generally southerly direction towards the proposed development which is located 1.3km from the viewer. The view is very enclosed from this location. The landscape rises slightly in front of the viewer, rolling away over the middle ground, with the Thursden Brook passing through the area, although hidden from view by the surrounding landscape. On the opposite side of Thursden Brook the landscape rises sharply forming the local summit at Delf Hill limiting any views beyond. The land cover is dominated by rough grassland, which covers the hillside as well as the foreground landscape, providing grazing land for livestock. There are also some rocky outcrops poking through the grassland covering giving clues to the nearby quarry landscape which is located on the opposite side of the hill. Woodland features prominently, particularly on the lower slopes of Delf Hill around the river valley, as well as lining the boundary of the nearby property which is partially visible to the left of centre of the view. Drystone walls and post-and-wire fencing mark field boundaries within the view. A wooden telegraph pole can be seen to the left of the view, closely associated with the other man made features in the view.

Sensitivity The viewpoint represents local residents and as such is considered to be of high sensitivity.

Magnitude of Change Receptors of this view would be 1.3km from the proposed turbines. The intervening landscape provides a great deal of screening from this location. The towers of two turbines are almost completely hidden from view, while the third turbine tower is also partially screened. The visible portion of the turbines would be viewed over the horizon against the sky. The development would occupy a high extent of the horizontal view and low to medium extent of the vertical view without controlling or dominating the horizon. The overall magnitude of change for the development is considered to be medium, the turbines would be visible and easily discernible features in this view, leading to a major/moderate level of effect.

Cumulative Impact Operational The Hameldon Hill and extension turbines appear to the right of the Delf Hill turbines from this location. The Hameldon developments appear as a single windfarm from this location. The turbines are viewed against the open landscape which allows the development to be absorbed slightly. The cumulative magnitude of change for operational projects would be negligible. Operational, Consented The single Micklehurst turbine appears in the same general view as the Hameldon turbines, visible to the right of the Delf Hill cluster in the valley landscape below. The turbine is viewed solely against the landscape from this location. The cumulative magnitude of change for consented projects would remain negligible. Operational, Consented, In Planning There are no views of any planning developments from this location. The cumulative magnitude of change for planning projects would remain negligible.

Type of Effect On completion of the development the visual effect from this viewpoint would be permanent (reversible) and direct. The development would lead to a medium magnitude of change and despite the careful design of the project a man-made vertical structure in this area would always lead to a negative effect.

Assessment of Visual Effects Sensitivity: High

Magnitude: Medium

Type of Effect: Permanent, direct and negative

Level of Effect: Major/Moderate

255

Figure 7.16 Viewpoint 4: Thursden Picnic Area

Description Viewpoint 4 is taken from E390124 N435139 taken from the Thursden Picnic Area. The view faces in a generally southerly direction towards the proposed development which is located 1.5km from the viewer. The view feels fairly open from this location, despite the Delf Hill ridge limiting long distance views to the left of the vista. The Landscape falls away quickly over the foreground, overlooking the valley landscape below, before rising beyond the middle ground, the sloping ridge culminating in the summit of Delf Hill. The ridge line slopes gently from left to right, allowing for longer distance views to the right of the vista over the surrounding landscape. The foreground land cover is maintained grassland which makes up the picnic area and is bound by a post and wire fence. Beyond the picnic area the valley below is peppered with trees which sit on the lower slopes of the opposing hills. While the upland areas of Delf Hill are covered in rough grassland which is utilised as grazing land for livestock. To the far right of the view the edge of Burnley is visible, sitting within the valley below, adding a significant man made feature to the view.

Sensitivity The viewpoint represents visitors to the picnic area and as such is considered to be of high sensitivity.

Magnitude of Receptors of this view would be 1.5km from the proposed turbines. Change The proposed turbines appear on the nearby horizon, on the opposite side of the valley from the viewer at this location. The turbines are spread along the ridge line occupying a medium extent of the horizontal view, although there are more open views to the right which are largely unaffected by the presence of the turbines and a medium extent of the vertical view. The intervening landscape does provide some screening of the turbine towers, reducing the vertical extents of the turbines particularly the central and right sided turbines. The development appears backdropped by the sky from this location. Given the larger scale of the surrounding landscape the development does not dominate or control the view, despite the relative proximity to the development. The overall magnitude of change for the development is considered to be medium, the turbines would be easily discernible features and a noticeable change to the baseline in this view, leading to a major/moderate level of effect.

Cumulative Impact Operational There are theoretical views of the Scout Moor development beyond the Delf Hill turbines. These views are extremely limited with only the blade tips of three turbines theoretically visible. At this distance it is unlikely that they will be easily discernible in the view given the proximity of the larger scale Delf Hill turbines from this location. Further to the right of the view the Hameldon Hill developments are visible, the turbines appearing successively in this view alongside Delf Hill. The turbines are viewed against the landscape from this location. In the same view the Hyndburn windfarm is theoretically visible, limited to blade tips the views are not likely to be prominent from this location. The cumulative magnitude of change for operational projects would be negligible. Operational, Consented The single turbine at Micklehurst appears in a similar area of landscape as the Hameldon Hill developments, backdropped also by the landscape. The turbine would be visible in the same general view as the Delf Hill cluster, although not as prominent a feature. The cumulative magnitude of change for consented projects would remain negligible. Operational, Consented, In Planning There are no planning developments visible from this location. The cumulative magnitude of change for planning projects would remain negligible.

Assessment of Sensitivity: High Visual Effects Magnitude: Medium

Type of Effect: Permanent, direct and negative

Level of Effect: Major/Moderate

256

Figure 7.17 Viewpoint 5: Haggate

Description Viewpoint 5 is taken from E387313 N435285 the viewpoint is located at the side of the local road on the eastern edge of the settlement. The view faces to the south-east towards the proposed development which is located 2.7km from the viewer. The view faces out over the nearby Thursden Brook Valley, offering a fairly open vista to the viewer. The gently rolling landscape stretches out in front of the viewer and is typical of the wider area. The foreground contains the pavement which runs alongside the local road, while a wooden fence bounds the nearby fields. The view quickly becomes rural beyond the foreground, overlooking an agricultural landscape, consisting of a mixture of arable and pasture farmland. The fields are large and tend to be rectilinear in shape, bound by a mixture of drystone walls, post-and-wire fencing, hedgerows and the occasional shelterbelt plantation. Scattered throughout the view are various farms, outbuildings and clusters of dwellings, primarily farm conversions and new builds. As well as the properties a series of metal electricity pylons run through the valley below, adding further man made features to the view. The view is pleasant, with a distinctly man modified feel.

Sensitivity The viewpoint represents local residents of Haggate and as such is considered to be of high sensitivity.

Magnitude of Change Receptors of this view would be 2.7km from the proposed turbines. The proposed development is viewed predominantly against the sky form this location. The lower tower sections of the central and right most turbines appear against the landscape. The development occupies a low extent of the horizontal view, the gentle rolling and uniform height of the majority of the horizon is not dominated by the addition of the turbines. The turbines would occupy a medium extent of the vertical view as fairly obvious vertical features within the view, which contains several other vertical elements including pylons and streetlights from this location. The overall magnitude of change for the development is considered to be medium, the turbines would be easily discernible features and a noticeable change to the baseline in this view, leading to a major/moderate level of effect.

Cumulative Impact Operational There are no views of any operating developments from this location The cumulative magnitude of change for operational projects would be none. Operational, Consented The Coal Clough, Todmorden Moor and Crook Hill windfarms all appear in the same general view as the Delf Hill cluster from this location. The three developments appear as a single larger windfarm on the horizon to the right of the view. The turbines are viewed on the horizon backdropped by the sky from this location. The windfarms appear clustered into one area of the view as opposed to intermittently across the horizon, creating two distinct areas of development with the Delf Hill cluster, leaving the majority of the vista open. The cumulative magnitude of change for consented projects would become negligible. Operational, Consented, In Planning There are no planning developments visible from this location. The cumulative magnitude of change for planning projects would remain negligible.

Assessment of Visual Effects Sensitivity: High

Magnitude: Medium

Type of Effect: Permanent, direct and negative

Level of Effect: Major/Moderate

257

Figure 7.18 Viewpoint 6: Boulsworth Hill

Description Viewpoint 6 is taken from E387313 N435285 the viewpoint is located at the side of a local access road to the Dove Stones by Boulsworth Hill. The view faces to the south-west towards the proposed development which is located 2.4km from the viewer. The view feels very open from this location. The elevated position of the viewer offers long distance views over the nearby lower lying Delf Hill to the gently undulating hills which rim the valley below. The foreground rolls away from the viewer, covered in rough grassland, with the access road stretching away from the viewer before it disappears. The middle ground is taken up by the Delf Hill ridge line, which slopes gently from left to right, before sloping quickly down to the nearby Thursden Brook Valley to the right of the view, the valley is covered by woodland, limiting views of the Brook contained within. The land cover is similar to the foreground with a predominance of rough grassland. Beyond Delf Hill the gently undulating horizon that is made up of more distant hill tops ring the surrounding valley which contains the settlement of Burnley and outlying hamlets and villages.

Sensitivity The viewpoint represents hill walkers and as such is considered to be of medium sensitivity.

Magnitude of Receptors of this view would be 2.4km from the proposed turbines. Change The proposed turbines are viewed around the summit of Delf Hill in the middle ground of the view. Two turbines are partially screened by the intervening landscape, reducing the vertical extents of the development, while the third turbine is visible in full on the horizon. The development would occupy a low extent of the horizontal and medium extent of the vertical view from this location. The overall magnitude of change for the development is considered to be medium, the turbines would be easily discernible features and a noticeable change to the baseline in this view, leading to a moderate level of effect.

Cumulative Operational Impact The operating windfarms of Hameldon, Hyndburn and Scout Moor appear in the same general view as the Delf Hill cluster from this elevated location. The Hameldon turbines appear beyond the Delf Hill turbines, viewed against the landscape. The Hyndburn windfarm is visible to the left of the proposed cluster, the turbines sitting near the horizon, the upper sections of the turbines appearing against the sky. Further to the left of the view, the Scout Moor windfarm stretches across the horizon, sharing a similar view to the Delf Hill cluster it would be possible to view both developments simultaneously from this position. The intervening landscape provides some screening with predominantly the upper sections of the windfarm visible over the horizon. The visible portions of the turbines appear against the sky from this location. The cumulative magnitude of change for operational projects would be low. Operational, Consented The single turbine of Higher Micklehurst is visible to the left of the Delf Hill cluster, backdropped by the landscape it is unlikely to feature prominently in this view. The Rooley Moor windfarm appears to the far left of the view, the development appears as part of the large Scout Moor windfarm, adding to the horizontal extents of the operating development. The Coal Clough turbines also appear in this view although it is difficult to tell the separate developments apart as they amalgamate to create a single large windfarm. The cumulative magnitude of change for consented projects would remain low. Operational, Consented, In Planning There are no views of any planning developments from this location. The cumulative magnitude of change for planning projects would remain low.

Type of Effect On completion of the development the visual effect from this viewpoint would be permanent (reversible) and direct. The development would lead to a medium magnitude of change and despite the careful design of the project a man- made vertical structure in this area would always lead to a negative effect.

Assessment of Sensitivity: Medium Visual Effects Magnitude: Medium

Type of Effect: Permanent, direct and negative

Level of Effect: Moderate

258

Figure 7.19 Viewpoint 7: Red Lees Road

Description Viewpoint 7 is taken from E386871 N431681 the viewpoint is located at the side of Red Lees Road to the south-east of Burnley. The view faces to the north-east towards the proposed development which is located 3.1km from the viewer. The view feels fairly open from this location. The landscape rises slightly across the foreground but not sufficiently to limit further views over the surrounding rolling countryside that occupies the remainder of the view. The view is predominantly rural in nature overlooking an expanse of rolling countryside dominated by large rectilinear fields. Over the middle ground the topography begins to rise with the formation of Delf Hill and other local summits limiting further views to the north-east. The hamlet of Worsthorne is nestled amongst an area of woodland in the middle ground, breaking up the field pattern. The varying field coverings combine to create a slight patchwork effect across the landscape from this location. Field boundaries are marked by a series of drystone walls, hedgerows and post-and- wire fences. Woodland is concentrated primarily around the edge of the settlement and around the dispersed properties which pepper the landscape, marking boundaries. These properties, primarily farms, provide further modification to the working landscape. A series of metal electricity pylons traverse the horizon, viewed against the sky from this location.

Sensitivity The viewpoint represents local residents and also forms part of National Cycle Route 68 and as such is considered to be of high sensitivity.

Magnitude of Change Receptors of this view would be 3.1km from the proposed turbines. The proposed turbines are viewed predominantly against the sky from this location; two turbines are viewed in full, with the lower tower sections visible against the landscape. The third turbine is partially screened by the intervening landscape. The turbines appear to follow the rise in the topography from this location. The turbines would be obvious features in this view, viewed alongside a number of man made features present in the view. The turbines would occupy a low extent of the horizontal view and a medium to low extent of the horizontal view from this location. The overall magnitude of change for the development is considered to be low, the turbines would be easily discernible features, however they would not be overbearing and would not dominate or control the view, leading to a moderate level of effect.

Cumulative Impact Operational There are no cumulative views between Delf Hill and any operational developments from this location. The cumulative magnitude of change for operational projects would be none. Operational, Consented There are no cumulative views between Delf Hill and any consented developments from this location. The cumulative magnitude of change for consented projects would remain none. Operational, Consented, In Planning There are no cumulative views between Delf Hill and any planned developments from this location. The cumulative magnitude of change for planning projects would remain none.

Type of Effect On completion of the development the visual effect from this viewpoint would be permanent (reversible) and direct. The development would lead to a low magnitude of change and despite the careful design of the project a man-made vertical structure in this area would always lead to a negative effect.

Assessment of Visual Effects Sensitivity: High

Magnitude: Low

Type of Effect: Permanent, direct and negative

Level of Effect: Moderate

259

Figure 7.20 Viewpoint 8: The Straight Mile Canal

Description Viewpoint 8 is taken from E384317 N432118 at the side of the Straight Mile Canal within the settlement of Burnley. The view faces to the north-east towards the proposed development which is located 5.3km from the viewer. The view is fairly open from this elevated location, the canal sits higher than the surrounding settlement, offering views beyond the city limits to the countryside beyond. The canal itself occupies the foreground running from left to right across the view. The tow path on the opposite bank is covered in overgrown vegetation and rough grassland. Beyond the grass verge the settlement of Burnley including the stands at the nearby Turf Moor stadium are visible, covering the landscape to the left of the view. To the right of the view the landscape takes on a more rural feel as the settlement gives way to a series of rolling agricultural fields, with a gently undulating horizon beyond. A large chimney stack, sits in the centre of the view, breaking the horizon. The view is heavily man modified with the settlement and examples of previous industry all present.

Sensitivity The viewpoint represents local residents and as such is considered to be of high sensitivity.

Magnitude of Change Receptors of this view would be 5.3km from the proposed turbines. The turbines are visible on the more distant horizon from this elevated position. They are viewed alongside the other man made features present in the view including a local chimney stack, the prominence of the chimney giving perspective of the distance between the viewer and the turbines. The turbines are clustered together with two of the turbines appearing in line with one another, while the third sits just to the right. The overall magnitude of change for the development is considered to be low, the turbines would be easily discernible features, however they would not be overbearing and would not dominate or control the view, leading to a moderate level of effect.

Cumulative Impact Operational There are no cumulative views between Delf Hill and any operational developments from this location. The cumulative magnitude of change for operational projects would be none. Operational, Consented The Coal Clough windfarm appears in successive views to the right of the Delf Hill wind cluster from this location. The windfarm is viewed on the distant horizon with the turbines viewed against the sky. The intervening landscape provides some screening, limiting views to the upper sections of the turbines. This screening limits the prominence of the development in the view. The cumulative magnitude of change for consented projects would become negligible. Operational, Consented, In Planning There are no cumulative views between Delf Hill and any planned developments from this location. The cumulative magnitude of change for planning projects would remain negligible.

Assessment of Visual Effects Sensitivity: High

Magnitude: Low

Type of Effect: Permanent, direct and negative

Level of Effect: Moderate

260

Figure 7.21 Viewpoint 9: Towneley Hall

Description Viewpoint 9 is taken from E385564 N430905 within the grounds of Towneley Hall to the south-east of Burnley. The view faces to the north-east towards the proposed development which is located 4.6km from the viewer. The view feels fairly enclosed from this location. The landscape slopes gently away from the viewer, overlooking a large playing field, with a set of football goals sitting in the middle of the area. The area of open space is bound on all sides by avenues of trees to the left and right, while a dense band of mature shelterbelt woodland runs through the centre of the view. The River Calder flows amongst the trees, however, due to the dense nature of the woodland the river is completely screened from view. Beyond this shelterbelt the landscape begins to rise, enclosing the area. The landscape beyond the boundary of Towneley Hall retains a similar feel with woodland covering large swathes of the landscape adding to the enclosure. A large building is located at the far end of the playing fields, located amongst the trees, adding a man made feature to this view.

Sensitivity The viewpoint represents visitors to Towneley Hall and as such is considered to be of high sensitivity.

Magnitude of Change Receptors of this view would be 4.6km from the proposed turbines. The turbines are theoretically visible on the horizon, viewed solely against the sky. The intervening woodland provides a great deal of screening from this location. Restricting views of the turbines significantly. The development would occupy a negligible extent of both the horizontal and vertical view from this location. The overall magnitude of change for the development is considered to be low, the turbines would be easily discernible features, however they would not be overbearing and would not dominate or control the view, leading to a moderate level of effect.

Cumulative Impact Operational There are no cumulative views between Delf Hill and any operational developments from this location. The cumulative magnitude of change for operational projects would be none. Operational, Consented There are no cumulative views between Delf Hill and any consented developments from this location. The cumulative magnitude of change for consented projects would remain none. Operational, Consented, In Planning There are no cumulative views between Delf Hill and any planned developments from this location. The cumulative magnitude of change for planning projects would remain none.

Assessment of Visual Effects Sensitivity: High

Magnitude: Low

Type of Effect: Permanent, direct and negative

Level of Effect: Moderate

261

Figure 7.22 Viewpoint 10: Limestone Trail

Description Viewpoint 10 is taken from E389139 N429155 from the Limestone Trail, a scenic viewpoint near the Coal Clough Wind Farm. The view faces to the north towards the proposed development which is located 4.3km from the viewer. The view is fairly open from this location, though the left of the view remains enclosed by the intervening topography. The landscape slopes sharply from the left, opening up the view across the centre and right of the view. The landscape rolls away gently from the viewer across the foreground, giving way to a more dramatic upland landscape beyond, rising from the middle ground, creating an undulating horizon that encloses the area. The foreground is covered in rough grassland, with a post- and-wire fence running alongside the worn in walking track that stretches away from the viewer. The landscape beyond retains the rough grassland covering, interspersed with rocky outcrops which protrude through the land covering, hinting at the past quarrying industry of the local area.

Sensitivity The viewpoint represents walkers tackling the limestone trail as well as the Burnley Way and the Pennine Bridle Way which pass near to the viewpoint and as such is considered to be of high sensitivity.

Magnitude of Change Receptors of this view would be 4.3km from the proposed turbines. The turbines appear as a well balanced linear development following the ridge line from this location. The proposed turbines would occupy a low extent of the horizontal view and a medium extent of the vertical view, with the full extents of each turbine theoretically visible, although the base of the towers would be viewed against the landscape the majority of the turbines are viewed against the sky. The overall magnitude of change for the development is considered to be low, the turbines would be easily discernible features, however they would not be overbearing and would not dominate or control the view, leading to a moderate level of effect.

Cumulative Impact Operational There are no cumulative views between Delf Hill and any operational developments from this location. The cumulative magnitude of change for operational projects would be none. Operational, Consented The Coal Clough windfarm appears directly behind the viewer from this location due to the proximity to the viewer the turbines are prominent features in the view to the south. The turbines are partially screened by the intervening landscape viewed over the horizon they are backdropped by the sky. In the distance part of the Todmorden Moor windfarm is also visible, this appears much smaller in scale due to the Coal Clough turbines in this view and would not be an overly prominent feature when looking southwards. The cumulative magnitude of change for consented projects would become negligible. Operational, Consented, In Planning There are no cumulative views between Delf Hill and any planned developments from this location. The cumulative magnitude of change for planning projects would remain negligible.

Assessment of Visual Effects Sensitivity: High

Magnitude: Low

Type of Effect: Permanent, direct and negative

Level of Effect: Moderate

262

Figure 7.23 Viewpoint 11: A671 layby at Easden

Description Viewpoint 11 is taken from E386099 N428847 from the Singing Ringing Tree, a scenic viewpoint and monument at the side of the A671. The view faces to the north-east towards the proposed development which is located 5.7km from the viewer. The view is very open from this location, due to elevated position of the viewer. Overlooking the surrounding rolling agricultural landscape. Views over the foreground are limited by a line of vegetation; however, these do not limit views over the wider landscape. The landcover is dominated by the agricultural farming practices, with large rectilinear fields spreading across the landscape. These fields are bound by a mixture of post-and-wire fencing, drystone walls, hedgerows and occasional shelterbelts. Settlements such as Southward Bottom, Over Town as well as the eastern fringes of Burnley and Worsthorne are visible in the wider landscape, breaking up the agricultural landscape and adding a distinctly man modified feel to the view. As well as these defined settlements there are a number of individual properties and farms scattered throughout the view. The view is fairly pleasant and typical of this area.

Sensitivity The viewpoint represents visitors to the monument and as such is considered to be of high sensitivity.

Magnitude of Change Receptors of this view would be 5.7km from the proposed turbines. The turbines appear breaking the distant horizon from this location. Two turbines break the horizon with the lower tower sections viewed against the landscape, while the third turbine sits on the horizon, viewed solely against the sky. The turbines would occupy a low extent of both the horizontal and vertical view in this open vista. The development appears well balanced and in keeping with the large scale of the surrounding landscape. The overall magnitude of change for the development is considered to be low; the turbines would appear alongside a number of manmade features already contained within the view, leading to a moderate level of effect.

Cumulative Impact Operational There are no cumulative views between Delf Hill and any operational developments from this location. The cumulative magnitude of change for operational projects would be none. Operational, Consented The Coal Clough windfarm appears to the right of the view, visible successively from this location with the Delf Hill cluster. The windfarm is viewed breaking the horizon from this location, the upper sections of the turbines are viewed above the horizon against the sky. The windfarm is also heavily screened by the intervening vegetation from this location and is unlikely to feature prominently in this view. The cumulative magnitude of change for consented projects would become negligible. Operational, Consented, In Planning There are no cumulative views between Delf Hill and any planned developments from this location. The cumulative magnitude of change for planning projects would remain negligible.

Assessment of Visual Effects Sensitivity: High

Magnitude: Low

Type of Effect: Permanent, direct and negative

Level of Effect: Moderate

263

Figure 7.24 Viewpoint 12: Nick of Pendle

Description Viewpoint 12 is taken from E377253 N438450 from the Nick of Pendle, part of Pendleton Moor. The view faces in a generally easterly direction towards the proposed development which is located 13.1km from the viewer. The view feels very open from this location, due to the elevated position of the viewer. The landscape rolls away over the foreground, rising slightly in the middle ground, forming a small ridge that breaks up the view but does not limit further views across the wider landscape. In the distance the landscape rises forming a gently rolling horizon that encloses the area. The foreground overlooks a typically rural countryside scene, with large arable fields, bound by hedgerows, shelterbelt trees and drystone walls, to the left of the view the Churn Clough Reservoir is visible, while the settlement of Sabden nestles in the valley below, interspersed with mature trees that screen parts of the settlement form view. Beyond the ridge the landscape changes to a much more urban picture, overlooking the sizable settlements of Nelson and Burnley, which occupy much of the landscape. Beyond the settlements, the landscape rediscovers its rural feel with rough grassland covering the distant hills that form the encircling horizon. This is a heavily man modified view, with the larger settlements, local roads, reservoirs and other infrastructure all present. As well as these features there are some which remain hidden by the intervening landscape such as the M65 and other major roads which serve Burnley and the surrounding settlements.

Sensitivity The viewpoint represents visitors to the Nick of Pendle and as such is considered to be of high sensitivity.

Magnitude of Receptors of this view would be 13.1km from the proposed turbines. Change The proposed development would be viewed predominantly against the landscape from this location. The hub and blades of one turbine would be viewed breaking the horizon. The turbines would occupy a low extent of both the horizontal and vertical view from this location. The turbines would appear in the view alongside a number of man made features including the operating windfarm of Coal Clough which sits up on the horizon in a more prominent location than the proposed development. The overall magnitude of change for the development is considered to be negligible, the turbines would appear alongside a number of manmade features already contained within the view, including wind turbines, leading to a moderate/minor level of effect.

Cumulative Impact Operational Successive views occur from this location Hameldon Hill and extension, the turbines appearing solely against the landscape from this elevated position. The openness of the view would allow the turbines to be absorbed slightly into the landscape. Sitting on the horizon above Hameldon there are views of the Scout Moor windfarm, although these are limited by the intervening landscape, limiting potential views to the upper sections of the turbines. Further to the right of the view the Hyndburn windfarm is also theoretically visible, the full extents of the windfarm are visible on the horizon, with the wind turbines viewed against the sky. The cumulative magnitude of change for operational projects would be low. Operational, Consented The Coal Clough windfarm is visible to the right of the Delf Hill Cluster, the windfarm is viewed in full on the horizon, sitting fairly prominently in this view. Further right the windfarms of Todmorden Moor, Gorpley, Reaps Moss and Crook Hill are partially visible over the horizon. The developments merging to form one larger windfarm from this location. Successive views occur with Rooley Moor which appears as part of the operating Scout Moor windfarm, increasing the horizontal extents of the operating windfarm. The cumulative magnitude of change for consented projects would become medium. Operational, Consented, In Planning There are no cumulative views between Delf Hill and any planned developments from this location. The cumulative magnitude of change for planning projects would remain medium.

Type of Effect On completion of the development the visual effect from this viewpoint would be permanent (reversible) and direct. The development would lead to a negligible magnitude of change and despite the careful design of the project a man-made vertical structure in this area would always lead to a negative effect.

Assessment of Sensitivity: High Visual Effects Magnitude: Negligible

Type of Effect: Permanent, direct and negative

Level of Effect: Moderate/Minor

264

Figure 7.25 Viewpoint 13: Mellor

Description Viewpoint 13 is taken from E367193 N431930 from the side of a local road to the east of the settlement of Mellor. The view faces in a generally easterly direction towards the proposed development which is located 22.3km from the viewer. The view feels fairly open from this location, despite the roadside hedgerow which encloses the left hand side of the view slightly. The centre and right hand side of the view remain open to the viewer, overlooking the surrounding undulating countryside. The road which dominates the foreground stretches out in front of the viewer, running through the centre of the view, turning to the left, before it disappears behind the intervening vegetation. The road reappears, meandering through the countryside across the middle ground. The land cover is dominated by agricultural land which blankets the surrounding landscape either side of the road. The fields are broken up by shelterbelts, hedgerows and drystone walls. To the right the Browhill area of Blackburn is visible, the settlement is located in the valley below and backed by an area of mature woodland. As well as the settlement there are a number of farms and individual properties scattered across through the landscape. A series of wooden pole electricity pylons run alongside the road, linking with the nearby settlement, further pylons including large scale metal pylons can be seen in the valley below, viewed against the surrounding landscape.

Sensitivity The viewpoint represents road users on the local road, primarily local residents and as such is considered to be of medium sensitivity.

Magnitude of Change Receptors of this view would be 22.3km from the proposed turbines. From this location the proposed development appears predominantly against the large scale surrounding landscape. The turbines are tightly clustered together occupying a negligible extent of the horizontal view as well as a negligible extent of the vertical view. At this distance it is unlikely that the proposed development will be a prominent feature in this vista. The overall magnitude of change for the development is considered to be negligible, the turbines would appear in the view alongside several man made features, including many vertical features including the nearby electricity poles which would reduce the scale of the turbines in this view, leading to a minor level of effect.

Cumulative Impact Operational Views occur with the Hameldon Hill windfarm from this location. The windfarm combines the existing turbines and the more recent extension and is viewed against the landscape within this vista. The large scale landscape would absorb the turbines slightly within this view. Success views are also theoretically possible with the Scout Moor windfarm which sits on the horizon to the right of the view, although these views would be screened by localised vegetation from this location. The cumulative magnitude of change for operational projects would be negligible. Operational, Consented There are theoretical views of the Ovenden Moor windfarm to the right of the Delf Hill cluster, although the intervening landscape limits these potential views to blade tips it is unlikely that the development will be an easily discernible feature in this view. Further to the right there are views of the Coal Clough, Todmorden Moor, Reaps Moss and Gorpley windfarms. None of the developments are overly prominent features within this view with the intervening landscape screening large portions of the windfarms from view. The cumulative magnitude of change for consented projects would become low. Operational, Consented, In Planning There are no cumulative views between Delf Hill and any planned developments from this location. The cumulative magnitude of change for planning projects would remain negligible.

Assessment of Visual Sensitivity: Medium Effects Magnitude: Negligible

Type of Effect: Permanent, direct and negative

Level of Effect: Minor

265

Figure 7.26 Viewpoint 14: Longridge Fell

Description Viewpoint 14 is taken from E366587 N439735 from the scenic viewpoint at Longridge Fell. The view faces in a generally easterly direction towards the proposed development which is located 22.7km from the viewer. The view from this location is very open and far reaching, with long distance views occurring over the landscape to the east. The foreground overlooks a gently undulating landscape with a horizon that slopes from left to right, never reaching an elevation to limit views over the landscape beyond, except for the far left of the vista. The landscape is a mixture of arable and pasture farming, with large fields and bands of mature shelterbelt woodland providing the dominant land coverings. The fields are bound by a mixture of shelterbelt woodland, wooden fencing and drystone walls. To the right of the view there are glimpses of the River Ribble between the woodland. Beyond the middle ground the landscape falls away, hidden from view, the river valley below is hidden from view, as well as the settlements that are contained within the valley landscape. The landscape opposite the valley landscape rises significantly forming a strong horizon, comprising the local peaks to the east. The upland landscape in the distance shares some of the characteristics of the foreground with a predominantly pastoral land cover, becoming rough moorland around the summits.

Sensitivity The viewpoint represents visitors to the scenic viewpoint which offers long distance views over the landscape, primarily to the east and south and as such is considered to be of high sensitivity.

Magnitude of Change Receptors of this view would be 22.7km from the proposed turbines. The turbines would be viewed predominantly against the landscape from this location. The development would occupy a negligible extent of both the horizontal and vertical view in this open vista. At this distance it is unlikely that the proposed turbines will be an overly visible feature in the view. The overall magnitude of change for the development is considered to be negligible, the turbines are viewed at a considerable distance and would not interfere with the more open sections of the vista to the right of the viewer, leading to a moderate/minor level of effect.

Cumulative Impact Operational The operational windfarm of Hameldon Hill appears in the same view as Delf Hill from this location, the turbines are visible to the right of Delf Hill sitting within the upland landscape as opposed to on the ridge line. This allows the development to blend into the open vista to a degree, it does create a prominent feature within the view. Successive views occur with the large scale windfarms at Hyndburn and Scout Moor. The developments are located along the ridge line to the right of the viewer. The Hyndburn windfarm appearing slightly more prominent as it is located on the top of the horizon, both developments appearing against the sky. The cumulative magnitude of change for operational projects would be negligible. Operational, Consented The Coal Clough windfarm sits between Delf Hill and Hameldon Hill, the windfarm sits on the horizon, with the full extents of the turbines visible from this location. At this distance and viewed against the sky neither Delf Hill nor Coal Clough are expected to be prominent features in the view. Further to the right the Todmorden Moor, Reaps Moss and Gorpley windfarms are partially visible over the horizon, sitting behind the Hameldon Hill windfarm. The developments appear as part of a single windfarm from this location, views are extremely limited with only the upper sections of a handful of turbines theoretically visible. The Rooley Moor windfarm is also visible to the far right of the view, the large windfarm appears as part of the operating Scout Moor development from this location, extending the horizontal views of the windfarm. The cumulative magnitude of change for consented projects would become low. Operational, Consented, In Planning There are no cumulative views between Delf Hill and any planned developments from this location. The cumulative magnitude of change for planning projects would remain low.

Assessment of Visual Sensitivity: High Effects Magnitude: Negligible

Type of Effect: Permanent, direct and negative

Level of Effect: Moderate/Minor

266

Appendix 2.2 – Landscape and Visual – Residential Assessment

267

268

Appendix 3 – Noise

Figure A3.1 - Site map with 10ms-1 noise contours and nearby properties

The L90 noise level contours above are placed at 1dB increments from 35dB(A) up to 45dB(A). As set out in Section 8, these levels are inclusive of an additional factor that accounts for measurement uncertainty.

269

270

Appendix 4 – Cultural Heritage

271

272

Appendix 4.1 – Cultural Heritage – Delf Hill Archaeological Desk Based Assessment

Included as a separate report.

273

274

Appendix 4.2 – Cultural Heritage – Catalogue of Sites, Features and Monuments

Included as electronic figure only

275

276

Appendix 4.3 – Cultural Heritage – Archaeological Glossary

Heritage Assets Those parts of the historic environment that have significance and are worthy of consideration in planning matters are, in line with NPPF, referred to as ‘heritage assets’. This can include standing, buried or submerged remains, buildings, parks and gardens and areas, sites and landscapes - whether designated or not and whether or not capable of designation. World Heritage Sites, Scheduled Monuments, Listed Buildings, protected wreck sites, Registered Parks and Gardens, Registered Battlefields and Conservation Areas are all heritage assets.

Monument A monument is a heritage asset visible at ground level that by its survival holds the potential to inform us and future generations about persons, actions, periods, or events in the past18.

Site A site is a heritage asset not now visible at ground surface19 made, caused or installed by human activity, which by its survival holds the potential to inform us and future generations about persons, actions, periods, or events.

A conceptual site is one for which the physical link between some important cultural or historical event and the surviving landscape is not represented by any material remains. This may be because there never were any physical deposits or structures associated with the event or because these have subsequently been lost. Many battlefield sites are conceptual sites. The absence of physical remains does not reduce the cultural value of conceptual sites because the collective, if imprecise, memories of a people establish their values. Conceptual sites are commonly often, perhaps usually, Cultural Landscapes.

Setting The X’ian Declaration on the Conservation of the Setting of Heritage Structures, Sites and Areas adopted by the 15th General Assembly of ICOMOS in October 2005 (ICOMOS 2005) states that:

‘The setting of a heritage structure, site or area is defined as the immediate and extended environment that is part of, or contributes to, its significance and distinctive character’

With regards to the settings of heritage assets the NPPF states

18 A monument can also be located within a site, for instance a field of buried debris associated with the construction, use and destruction or abandonment of the monument, or further remains originally associated with it which are now buried. However sites are not monuments, in terms of the definitions used here.

19 Sites may be revealed by the use of special techniques like aerial photography or geophysical survey

277

“The surroundings in which a heritage asset is experienced. Its extent is not fixed and may change as the asset and its surroundings evolve. Elements of a setting may make a positive or negative contribution to the significance of an asset, may affect the ability to appreciate that significance or may be neutral.” (CLG 2012)

In October 2011 English Heritage published The Setting of Heritage Assets: English Heritage Guidance (English Heritage 2011) in order to further clarify the definition of setting in relation to heritage assets. This guidance was based on Planning Policy Statement 5 and in it English Heritage noted that following publication of NPPF in 2012 they would review and revise their guidance. Until English Heritage has undertaken this review the following Key Principles for understanding setting, originally derived from The Historic Environment Planning Practice Guide supporting PPS 5 remain useful:

‘Setting is the surroundings in which an asset is experienced. All heritage assets have a setting, irrespective of the form in which they survive and whether they are designated or not. Elements of a setting may make a positive or negative contribution to the significance of an asset, may affect the ability to appreciate that significance, or may be neutral’.

‘The extent and importance of setting is often expressed by reference to visual considerations. Although views of or from an asset will play an important part, the way in which we experience an asset in its setting is also influenced by other environmental factors such as noise, dust and vibration; by spatial associations; and by our understanding of the historic relationship between places.’

‘For example, buildings that are in close proximity but not visible from each other may have a historic or aesthetic connection that amplifies the experience of the significance of each. They would be considered to be within one another’s setting’.

‘Setting will, therefore, generally be more extensive than curtilage, and its perceived extent may change as an asset and its surroundings evolve or as understanding of the asset improves’.

‘The setting of a heritage asset can enhance its significance whether or not it was designed to do so. The formal parkland around a country house and the fortuitously developed multi- period townscape around a medieval church may both contribute to the significance’.

‘The contribution that setting makes to the significance does not depend on there being public rights or an ability to access or experience that setting. This will vary over time and according to circumstance. Nevertheless, proper evaluation of the effect of change within

278

the setting of a heritage asset will usually need to consider the implications, if any, for public appreciation of its significance’.

In The Setting of Heritage Assets: English Heritage Guidance, English Heritage define the extent of setting in the broadest possible terms, stating that:

‘Setting embraces all of the surroundings (land, sea, structures, features and skyline) from which the heritage asset can be experienced or that can be experienced from or with the asset. Setting does not have a fixed boundary and cannot be definitively and permanently described as a spatially bounded area or as lying within a set distance of a heritage asset. Views on what comprises a heritage asset’s setting may change as the asset and its surroundings evolve, or as the asset becomes better understood. Construction of a distant but high building; development generating noise, odour, vibration or dust over a wide area; or new understanding of the relationship between neighbouring heritage assets may all extend what might previously have been understood to comprise setting. Reference is sometimes made to the ‘immediate’ and ‘extended’ setting of a heritage asset, but the terms should not be regarded as having any particular formal meaning. While many day-today cases will be concerned with the immediate setting of an asset, development within the extended setting may also affect significance, particularly where it is large-scale, prominent or intrusive’ (English Heritage 2011, 4).

English Heritage recognise that landscapes are evolving dynamics which change through time, stating that:

‘Most of the settings within which people experience heritage assets today have changed over time. Understanding this history of change will help to determine how further development within the asset’s setting will contribute to its significance.’

‘The setting of some heritage assets may have remained relatively unaltered over a long period and closely resemble the setting in which the asset was constructed or first used. The likelihood of this original setting surviving unchanged tends to decline with age and, where this is the case, it is likely to make an important contribution to the heritage asset’s significance.’ (English Heritage 2011, 7)

Cultural value/significance & importance Cultural significance is defined as the cultural worth of a heritage asset and all heritage assets are significant to some degree. The importance of the asset is determined by establishing its capacity to inform present or future generations about the past. The definition of cultural significance is readily accepted by heritage professionals both in Britain and internationally. This definition was first fully outlined in the Burra Charter (ICOMOS 1999) which states in Article 1 that ‘cultural significance’ or ‘cultural heritage value’ means

279

aesthetic, historic, scientific, social or spiritual value for past, present or future generations (Article 1.2). The NPPF defines the significance of a heritage asset as, ‘The value of a heritage asset to this and future generations because of its heritage interest. That interest may be archaeological, architectural, artistic or historic. Significance derives not only from a heritage asset’s physical presence, but also from its setting’ (CLG 2012, 56). English Heritage note in their Conservation Principles Policies and Guidance that heritage value is established by understanding a particular asset’s evidential, historical, aesthetic and communal value (2008, 28-31). Scheduling criteria, used to establish whether or not an asset is of national importance, is based upon the asset’s ‘potential to contribute to our information, understanding and appreciation20’ In the case of many heritage assets their importance has already been established through the scheduling and listing processes applied by English Heritage.

The methodology used regards all heritage assets as being significant to some degree and is also guided by local, regional, national and international heritage policy (e.g. various charters including the Burra Charter (ICOMOS, 1999)), which defines assets as potentially comprising a very wide variety of heritage remains. In some cases an asset which does not have a protective designation assigned to it could nonetheless still be rated as having the same importance as another one which is protected. This is because the selection of items for listing and scheduling is an ongoing national activity. The criteria for judging heritage significance are gradually evolving, with an increasing trend towards including more recent types of assets. In some cases, important assets may have been overlooked during the designation process, or could now be judged worthy, whereas they were not previously.

Visual sensitivity An asset’s visual sensitivity refers to its capacity to retain its ability to inform this and future generations in the face of changes to its setting. For example, assets with high visual sensitivity will be vulnerable to changes which effect their setting and even slight changes may reduce their information content. Less visually sensitive assets will be able to accommodate fairly drastic changes which effect their setting without losing their ability to inform.

Aesthetics The formal and rational recording of the physical parameters of the monument and its surrounding landform, including the observer’s emotional response to it, sets out the framework from within which an aesthetic appreciation can be developed. This approach is well established in critical artistic and architectural aesthetics and is formalised in ‘Hegel’s wheel’ (Fernie 1995). The philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770-1831), in his consideration of a philosophy of art, and in an attempt to avoid the biases of contemporary

20 (http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/server/show/nav.00100200400d004).

280

zeitgeist recommended a contextualisation of works of art taking cognisance of criteria like such as the social, economic, political, historical and technological backgrounds from which the work of art originated.

Contemporary Appreciation Contemporary appreciation refers to an acquired cultural value. This value may bear no relation to the intended or authentic significance of an asset or indeed its ability to inform this and future generations about the past. Such an appreciation may result from a perceived zeitgeist, with the asset having gained value due to its accordance with popular modern sentiment or visual appreciation.

Contemporary appreciation can mean that an asset has gained some intangible cultural heritage value, being thus identified by persons or groups of persons as being part of their cultural heritage whether or not this meaning in any way reflects the original or authentic meaning of the monument. Intangible cultural heritage is defined by UNESCO ‘as practices, representations, expressions, knowledge, skills – as well as the instruments, objects, artefacts and cultural spaces associated therewith – that communities, groups and, in some cases, individuals recognise as part of their cultural heritage’ (UNESCO 2003, 4 Article 2.1). Contemporary appreciation may also cause the over or under valuation of a monument by placing more or less value on the monument. This concept is similar to that of associative cultural landscapes ‘where powerful religious, artistic or cultural associations [are placed upon] the natural element [of the landscape] rather than material cultural evidence, which may be insignificant or even absent’ (World Heritage Organisation 2009, 8).

While contemporary appreciation should be considered a factor when assessing impacts upon an asset’s setting; it should be considered second to the impact upon the asset’s significance. Furthermore, contemporary appreciation should not necessarily be a determining factor in deciding whether or not impacts upon setting are of such a high significance as to be deemed unacceptable.

Factors which define a monument’s Setting, Cultural Value, Visual Sensitivity, Aesthetics and Contemporary Appreciation are made clear in Table A4.3.1 below. These factors will have been considered when assessing potential impacts upon the setting of designated assets and identifiable non-statutory assets of national importance.

281

282

Appendix 4.4 – Cultural Heritage – Guide for Contextualised Aesthetic Appreciation of monuments

Heritage Asset Details 1) Site No./Name Site No./Name for monument 2) Site type According to NMRS/HER criteria

4) Site visit conditions Conditions on day of survey with particular reference to visibility 5) Orientation of Direction in which Wind Farm lies measured from the monument proposed wind farm site 6) Distance from proposed wind Distance to nearest turbines measured from the closest part of farm the monument. 7) Horizon angles Angle of horizon as measured from monument out to edges of proposed wind farm Scientific Detail 8) Monument form Description of the monument form. 9)Current monument condition Is the monument well preserved? Are there modern intrusions or features that prevent the understanding of the monument? 10) Relationship and intervisibility This includes key viewpoints to and from the monument. with other key sites. Depending on the monument in question these could include: entrances, specific points on approaches, routeways, other related buildings, monuments or natural features. Some sites and monuments exist, where modern scholars argue that intervisibility with other monuments in a given landscape was/is an integral part of the function of the monument. For example, the intervisibility of a number of cairns on the skyline of a monument may be understood as a key function of these ritual sites linking the separate sites across the landscape. The impact of the proposed development within a landscape may be considered to be higher if the intervisibility between such sites is interrupted by the placing of a modern turbine and as such the key relationships between monuments is of relevance to this assessment.

11) Economic Function What evidence is there for the economic function of the monument in the past and how does the site now function economically. 12) Human Social Evolution What evidence remains for evolution of the monument through time? 13) Palaeoenvironment potential What is the likely palaeoenvironmental potential of the monument? Is it likely to preserve significant evidence for past environments Historic Detail 14) Chronology of monument What evidence exists in the monument for time depth and use through history and prehistory? What main periods are represented by the monument and why are they significant?

15) Chronology of landscape What evidence exists in the landscape for time depth and use

283

Heritage Asset Details through history and prehistory? What main periods are represented by the landscape and why are they significant?

16)Landform Evolution How has the surrounding physical landform evolved and how does it relate to the monument? Does the landform dictate visibility of the monument across the landscape? How does the monument within the landscape relate to the landform? i.e does monument appear to be sited on hill top, by water courses etc 17) Archaeological/historic study Has the monument been the subject of previous study? Is it possible to understand the historical/archaeological processes that have produced the monument? What is the potential for future archaeological study; in particular, what is the potential for significant new information from further detailed historic study? Social Detail 18) Nature of original and authentic Local character, local distinctiveness and local perception of the uses monument. This includes an exploration of what local or regional issues make a monument different or distinct and of particular value to the local population, or special to visitors to the locality. The extent to which this can be defined without conducting survey of local opinion is limited but a sense of the importance of a monument can be gleaned from local literature, art and publications about the area. 19)Inferred importance of setting The importance of the setting refers, as above, to our conception of the importance of the monument’s setting both now and at a specific period in the past when key features of the monument were created. Some scholars argue that monuments interacted as part of a system with other contemporary elements (man-made or natural) in the landscape. In some cases, landscape setting was thus a significant element in the positioning of specific features within a landscape. The importance of this original setting thus partially reflects how sensitive a monument is to changes to that setting. 20) Inferred importance of view The importance of views from the monument particularly towards towards proposed wind farm site the proposed development area either in the past or present is a key factor in understanding how changes in these views will affect the overall appropriateness of setting. For example, in an open, relatively simple landscape, the monument will be more sensitive to the development than in a complex developed landscape with restricted views towards the development. 21) Geographical remoteness How accessible is the monument. Are public rights of way/roads present? Are there any associated amenities, such as signage or visitor centre?

284

Appendix 4.5 – Cultural Heritage – Designated Heritage Assets within 5 km of the proposed wind cluster at Delf Hill

285

286

Appendix 4.6 – Cultural Heritage – Onsite recorded Heritage Assets

287

288

Appendix 4.7 – Cultural Heritage – Summary of Impact on Designated Heritage Assets

Relative Visual Distance to AOC Turbines Sensitivity Magnitude Significance Name Status nearest ref. Visible to of Impact of Impact turbine Changes to setting

Nos 11, 13 & 15 1072634 12 Church Square, 3 2.20 km Low Marginal None LB II Worsthorne

Extwistle Hall, 1072655 20 3 1.83 km Medium Low Minor Briercliffe LB II*

Wallstreams and Wallstreams 1072635 22 3 2.17 km Low Low Negligible Cottage, Church LB II Street, Worsthorne

St John's Church, 184044 24 Gorple Road, 3 2.09 km Medium Low Minor LB II Worsthorne

Farmhouse, 1280581 27 Jackson's Farm, 3 2.06 km Medium Low Minor LB II* Worsthorne

Lower Bottin Farmhouse, 1280597 33 3 1.57 km Medium Marginal Negligible Worsthorne with LB II Hurstwood

Higher Bottin Farmhouse, 1072636 36 3 1.50 km Medium Marginal Negligible Extwistle Road, LB II Worsthorne

High Halstead Farmhouse, 1072637 41 3 1.36 km Medium Low Minor Entwhistle Road, LB II Worsthorne

Nogworth Cross, 1362050 56 Todmorden Road, 3 1.22 km Low Marginal None LB II Thursden

289

Relative Visual Distance to AOC Turbines Sensitivity Magnitude Significance Name Status nearest ref. Visible to of Impact of Impact turbine Changes to setting

Farmhouse and aisled barn, Ingham 1072661 58 3 1.68 km Medium Low Minor House, Halifax LB II Road, Thursden

Ring cairn, Slipper 1009112 64 Hill, Worsthorne 3 1.21 km Low Medium Minor SM Moor

Barn, north of 1072657 65 3 0.98 km Low Low Negligible Holden Farmhouse LB II

Holden Farmhouse, 1072656 67 3 0.95 km Medium Low Minor Briercliffe LB II

Ring Stones Camp, 1009488 Minor- 73 Worsthorne with 3 0.85 km Medium Medium SM Moderate Hurstwood

Burwains, off 1072659 77 Halifax Road, 3 2.38 km Medium Low Minor LB II* Briercliffe

Twist Castle, 1009497 Minor- 84 3 0.53 km Medium Medium Burnley SM Moderate

Beadle Hill Camp, 1009487 Minor- 94 3 0.72 km Medium Medium Thursden SM Moderate

1009113 Minor- 96 Twist Hill, Briercliffe 3 0.49 km Medium Medium SM Moderate

Monk Hall, Bonfire 1072666 98 3 0.98 km Medium Marginal Negligible Hill, Briercliffe LB II

Bronze Age Cairn, 1008919 114 Wasnop Edge, 3 0.96 km High Medium Moderate SM Hameldon Pasture

Bowl barrow, 1008918 117 Hameldon Hill, 3 0.93 km High Medium Moderate SM Wasnop Edge

Bowl barrow, 1009115 118 Beadle Hill, 3 0.64 km Low Medium Minor SM Briercliffe

290

Relative Visual Distance to AOC Turbines Sensitivity Magnitude Significance Name Status nearest ref. Visible to of Impact of Impact turbine Changes to setting

Bowl barrow, 1009114 119 Beadle Hill, 3 0.65 km Low Medium Minor SM Briercliffe

Bowl barrow, Pike 1008917 137 3 0.83 km High Medium Moderate Low, Briercliffe SM

Small stone circle 1008916 Minor- 207 3 0.16 km Low High on Delf Hill SM Moderate

Ring cairn 25m east 1009117 212 2 0.57 km High Medium Moderate of Ell Clough SM

Saucer barrow 90m 1009116 219 3 0.57 km High Medium Moderate east of Ell Clough SM

Burwain's Camp, 1013814 223 3 1.65 km High Medium Moderate Thursden SM

Broad Bank House, 1362048 Minor- 241 Halifax Road, 3 1.47 km Medium Medium LB II Moderate Thursden

Ice house at 296 1005089 SM 3 4.92 km Low Low Negligible Towneley Hall

Queen Street Mill 297 1005085 SM 3 2.93 km Low Marginal None engine

Castercliff small Minor- 298 1007404 SM 3 4.98 km High Low multivallate hillfort Moderate

1000954 299 TOWNELEY HALL 3 4.60 km High Medium Moderate RPG II 1001496 300 THOMPSON PARK 3 4.91 km Medium Marginal Negligible RPG II

QUEEN'S PARK, 1001539 301 3 4.48 km Medium Marginal Negligible BURNLEY RPG II

HIGHER 1361713 LB 306 SCHOLEFIELD 2 4.10 km Low Marginal None II COTTAGE

291

Relative Visual Distance to AOC Turbines Sensitivity Magnitude Significance Name Status nearest ref. Visible to of Impact of Impact turbine Changes to setting

CATLOW FOLD 1361731 LB 308 FARM CATLOW 3 3.16 km Low Marginal None II HALL

SOUTHFIELD 1361732 LB 309 3 3.68 km Low Low Negligible COTTAGES II

SOUTHFIELD FOLD 1361733 LB 310 FARMHOUSE AND 3 3.84 km Medium Low Minor II COTTAGE ADJOINING

NICHOL HOUSE FARMHOUSE, 1361764 LB 314 COTTAGE 0-1 5.28 km Low Marginal None II (NUMBER 28) AND BARN

HIGHER HOUSE 1362049 LB 315 WITH ATTACHED 3 3.26 km Low Low Negligible II COTTAGE

TATTERSALL BARN 1362051 LB 316 3 3.15 km Low None None FARMHOUSE AND II ATTACHED BARN

WORKSHOP AND ROSE COTTAGE ON EAST SIDE OF 1362055 LB 318 3 2.88 km Low Low Negligible COURTYARD AT II FOXSTONES FARM

WELL CIRCA 25 METRES SOUTH 1362056 LB 319 3 2.90 km Low Low Negligible OF FOXSTONES II FARMHOUSE

1362057 LB 320 LAW HOUSE 3 4.01 km Low Low Negligible II

292

Relative Visual Distance to AOC Turbines Sensitivity Magnitude Significance Name Status nearest ref. Visible to of Impact of Impact turbine Changes to setting

ROWLEY HALL AT 1362071 LB 321 3 3.22 im Medium Low Minor SD 862330 II

ROWLEY 1270378 LB 346 3 3.20 km Low Low Negligible FARMHOUSE II

WAR MEMORIAL APPROXIMATELY 1247303 LB 348 100 METRES EAST 3 4.69 km Low Low Negligible II OF TOWNELEY HALL

THE OLD STABLES CAFE APPROXIMATELY 1247302 LB 349 3 4.73 km Low Low Negligible 50 METRES II NORTH OF TOWNELEY HALL

FOLDYS CROSS APPROXIMATELY 1247301 LB Minor- 350 300 METRES 3 5.06 km Medium Medium II Moderate SOUTH WEST OF TOWNELEY HALL

CRAFT MUSEUM APPROXIMATELY 1247300 LB 351 40 METRES WEST 3 4.81 km Low Low Negligible II OF TOWNELEY HALL

1247299 LB 352 TOWNELEY HALL 3 4.79 km High Medium Moderate I

TOWNELEY GOLF CLUB 1247298 LB Minor- 353 CLUBHOUSE 3 5.18 km Medium Medium II Moderate SHOP AND COTTAGE

293

Relative Visual Distance to AOC Turbines Sensitivity Magnitude Significance Name Status nearest ref. Visible to of Impact of Impact turbine Changes to setting

BARN APPROXIMATELY 1247297 LB 354 50 METRES WEST 3 4.75 km Low Low Negligible II OF TOWNELEY FARMHOUSE

TOWNELEY FARMHOUSE AND TOWNELEY FARM 1247296 LB 355 3 4.73 km Low Low Negligible COTTAGES II NUMBERS 1 AND 2

FARM OUTBUILDING TO 1245395 LB 365 THE NORTH OF 2 4.12 km Low Marginal None II SCHOLEFIELD HOUSE

HEASANDFORD COTTAGE HEASANDFORD 1245019 LB 367 3 4.24 km Low None None HOUSE II HEASANDFORD LODGE

MACKENZIE 1244999 LB 370 MEMORIAL IN 1 4.84 km Low Marginal None II THOMPSON PARK

COMMEMORATIVE 1244998 LB 371 FOUNTAIN IN 1 4.60 km Low Marginal None II QUEENS PARK

BELL TURRET TO 1243693 LB 387 WEST OF 1-2 5.32 km Low Low Negligible II TRAWDEN HALL

SCHOLEFIELD 1243566 LB 389 2-3 4.11 km Medium Marginal Negligible FARMHOUSE II

COLD WEATHER 1243538 LB 390 3 3.83 km Medium Low Minor HOUSE II

294

Relative Visual Distance to AOC Turbines Sensitivity Magnitude Significance Name Status nearest ref. Visible to of Impact of Impact turbine Changes to setting

RINGSTONE HILL 1243475 LB 391 2 3.13 km Low Medium Minor FARMHOUSE II

WALVERDEN 1243471 LB 392 3 4.20 km Low Marginal None COTTAGE II

1205779 LB 394 HOLLINS HALL 3 2.97 km Medium Low Minor II HURSTWOOD 1205736 LB 396 1 2.53 km Medium Marginal Negligible HALL II*

ICE HOUSE AT NORTH EAST CORNER OF 1205644 LB 397 3 2.75 km Low Low Negligible GROUNDS OF II FORMER ORMEROD HOUSE

SCHOLEFIELD 1073375 LB 398 2 4.11 km Medium Marginal Negligible HOUSE II

COLD WEATHER 1073372 LB 400 HOUSE 3 3.83 km Low Low Negligible II FARMHOUSE

BARN AT 1073340 LB 406 SOUTHFIELD 3 3.71 km Low Marginal None II HOUSE SOUTHFIELD 1073339 LB 407 3 3.66 km Medium Low Minor HOUSE II 1073338 LB 408 CATLOW HOUSE 3 3.27 km Medium Marginal Negligible II

COTTAGE IMMEDIATELY 1073337 LB 409 WEST OF 2 4.12 km Low Marginal None II SCHOLEFIELD HOUSE

1073324 LB 412 HILL TOP 1 5.26 km Medium Low Minor II

DENT HOWE 1073323 LB 413 1 5.29 km Medium Marginal Negligible FARMHOUSE II

HIGHER RED 1072676 LB 419 LEES 3 3.08 km Medium Marginal Negligible II FARMHOUSE

295

Relative Visual Distance to AOC Turbines Sensitivity Magnitude Significance Name Status nearest ref. Visible to of Impact of Impact turbine Changes to setting

FAR SIDE FARMHOUSE 1072675 LB 420 3 3.83 km Low Marginal None WITH INTEGRAL II BARN

MOUNTING BLOCK BESIDE WEST WALL OF WORKSHOP ON 1072673 LB 422 3 2.89 km Marginal Marginal None EAST SIDE OF II COURTYARD AT FOXSTONES FARM

FIR TREES FOXSTONES 1072672 LB 423 COTTAGE 3 2.87 km Low Low Negligible II FOXSTONES FARMHOUSE

1072667 LB 428 CROFT HOUSE 3 2.30 km Low Marginal None II

NETHERWOOD 1072664 LB 430 COTTAGE AND 3 3.15 km Low Low Negligible II FARMHOUSE

LOWER FENNY 1072663 LB 431 3 3.45 km Low Marginal None MOOR FOOT II

1072660 LB 432 HILL END HOUSE 3 2.84 km Medium Marginal Negligible II

CHURCH OF ST 1072658 LB 433 3 3.04 km Medium Marginal Negligible JAMES II

K6 TELEPHONE KIOSK IN 1072643 LB 434 1 2.50 km Low Marginal None HURSTWOOD II VILLAGE

HOLLINS 1072642 LB 435 3 2.94 km Low Low Negligible FARMHOUSE II

296

Relative Visual Distance to AOC Turbines Sensitivity Magnitude Significance Name Status nearest ref. Visible to of Impact of Impact turbine Changes to setting

BARN ON NORTH EAST SIDE OF 1072638 LB 438 ROAD OPPOSITE 1 2.49 km Low Marginal None II* HURSTWOOD HALL

STUMP CROSS ON NORTH SIDE 1072633 LB 439 3 3.83 km Low Marginal None OF ROAD AT SD II 878300

Burnley Wood Conservation 454 3 4.70 km Medium Low Minor Conservation Area Area

Conservation 456 Harle Syke 3 2.86 km Medium Low Minor Area

Conservation 458 Worsthorne 3 1.96 km Medium Low Minor Area

Conservation 459 Hurstwood 0-3 2.38 km Medium Low Minor Area

Conservation 460 Trawden Forest 0-3 2.98 km Medium Low Minor Area

297

298

Appendix 4.8– Cultural Heritage – Wirelines from on-site Scheduled Monuments

299

300

Appendix 5 – Hydrology

301

302

Appendix 6 – Traffic and Transport

303