Allerdale Borough Council
2/2013/0144
2/2013/0144 Received: 01 February 2013 Proposed Installation of a single wind turbine to be mounted on a 37m tower Development: with maximum tip height of 48.5m Location: Bromfield Farm Bromfield Wigton Appli cant: Mr Harold Armstrong
Drawing Numbers: BROM/0001 Rev A - Site Location Plan 1012907 Revision E - Proposed Turbine Details
Constraints: British Coal Area
Policies: National Planning Policy Framework
Building a strong, competitive economy Meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and coastal change Conserving and enhancing the natural environment Conserving and enhancing the historic environment Supporting a prosperous rural economy Requiring good design
Ministerial statement
A ministerial statement was issued by The Rt Hon Eric Pickles MP on 6/6/2013.
The statement regards planning reforms to make the planning process more accessible to communities giving local people the opportunity to influence decisions that affect their lives.
The statement makes specific and direct reference to on shore turbine development and the view that decisions are not always reflecting the locally-led planning system.
It is stated that action is required to deliver the balance expected within the NPPF and to ensure that protecting the local environment is properly considered alongside the broader issues of protecting the global environment.
In that respect new planning guidance is proposed that will set out clearly that ..
1. The need for renewable energy does not automatically override environmental protections and the planning concerns of local communities. 2. Decisions should take into account the cumulative impact of wind turbines and properly reflect the increasing impact upon a) the landscape b) local amenity as the number of turbines in the area increases 3. Local topography should be a factor in assessing whether wind turbines have a damaging impact upon the landscape (i.e. recognise that the impact on predominantly flat landscapes can be as great or greater than on hilly or mountainous ones) 4. Great care should be taken to ensure heritage assets are conserved in a manner to appropriate to their significance, including the impact of proposals on views important to their setting
This ministerial statement is a material planning consideration to be taken into account in the determination of this application.
Allerdale Local Plan, Adopted 1999 (Saved)
Policy EN10 - Restoration, after uses cease Policy EN19 - Landscape Protection Policy EN25 - Protecting the open countryside Policy EN32 - Protecting wildlife protected by law Policy EN5 - Pollution Control Policy EN6 - Location of potentially polluting development
Relevant Planning SCR/2012/0073 Screening Opinion – EIA Development. History: 2/2012/0807 Installation of a single wind turbine, 37m tower with a maximum tip height of 48.5m – Withdrawn to relocate turbine.
Representations: Bromfield Parish Council – Object. The application fails to signify the huge impact the development would have on landscape, local heritage and the community. The collective negative impact significantly overshadows any of its benefits. The turbine will be visible from many viewpoints and have a high level of cumulative impact.
The Council would support an application for a single much smaller turbine sized to provide consumption for the farm only, this development is neither essential at this location or for the applicants need.
Holme Abbey Parish Council – No reply to date.
Westnewton Parish Council – Object. It is our view that we have more than our fair share of turbines. The cumulative impact of these is already considerable, and to add another would be to further hideously disfigure a previously pristine environment.
Aspatria Town Council – Objection. The area is now at saturation point with the number of turbines in place.
Allhallows Parish Council – Object on the following grounds: • Cumulative effect with existing and approved turbines in the locality. • Visual amenity – Not only is the proposal for a medium size turbine which not for sole use of the farm but also an access track in the open countryside. Both of these will affect the visual amenity of the residents of the parish and the surrounding area. • Survey – The Council has conducted a survey of every house within the parish in 2010 and the overall conclusions was that the overwhelming majority of households are against the proliferation of land based wind turbines because of the adverse effect it has on their amenity. • Necessity – The turbine is not for sole use of the farm and the contribution that it will make to green energy targets is minimal particularly when most of the North Sea has been let for the siting or large wind farms that will meet government targets.
Bolton Parish Council – Object. Fully support Bromfield Parish Councils objection to this planning application.
Waverton Parish Council – Object on the following grounds: • The visual impact to the surrounding area and the cumulative effect. There are already too many turbines and clusters of wind turbines in the area; these are degrading the whole beauty of the County of Cumbria. • The erection of one turbine would lead to the possible building of others and the setting of unwanted president in the area.
Dundraw Parish Council – No objections.
Cumbria Highways – No objections subject to conditions.
RSPB – No reply to date.
Ministry of Defence – No objections.
Environment Agency – We have no comments to make.
Environmental Health – No objections subject to conditions.
County Archaeologist – I consider it very unlikely that the proposed development will have an impact on below ground archaeological remains. In terms of any impact on the settings of the nearby designated heritage assets, I note English Heritage have been consulted and I defer to any forthcoming comments they may make. I therefore have no objections (13/03/13 and 24/05/13).
English Heritage – The proposed turbine will have a limited impact upon the settings of the Grade II listed church of St Mungo and of the scheduled St Mungo’s Castle, and this will not cause the ‘substantial harm’ which, in line with paragraph 132 of the NPPF, would be sufficient justification for the with holding of planning permission on heritage grounds alone. Additionally it will not harm the Hadrian’s Wall World Heritage Site. English Heritage therefore do not wish to object to grant of planning permission.
Natural England – No objections (26/03/13, 31/05/13 and 18/06/13).
Civil Aviation Authority – No site specific comments.
Fire Officer – No reply to date.
Cumbria Wildlife Trust – No reply to date.
County Planning – Do not consider the proposal to be Category 1. Therefore the County Council will not be responding from a strategic planning perspective.
Arqiva - No objections.
Carlisle Airport – No objections.
NATS – No safeguard objection (21/05/13 and 24/05/13).
Ministry of Defence – No objections.
The application has been advertised on site and in the local paper. Adjoining owners have been notified.
A letter of objection has been received from FORCE who recommend the application is refused. Their concerns are:
• Understating of visual impacts on high sensitivity receptors – for example, St Mungo’s Church, St Mungo’s Castle and also Gill House a Grade II Listed building 660m to the south of the application site. These impacts cannot be mitigated and are in breach of Policy E38 Cumbria and Lake District Joint Structure Plan and Policy CO18 of the Allerdale Local Plan. • Unacceptable change to visual amenity and landscape character. • The scheme, if it were to go ahead, would have an unacceptable cumulative impact from single viewpoints and also sequentially with other wind energy developments in the area. • Unacceptable impact on wildlife. • Lack of benefits of the scheme. • Incompatibility with local and national planning policy. • Inappropriate size and scale of the proposed development. • Insufficient information to prove compliance with aviation safety regulations.
An objection letter has been received from Westnewton Action Group. Their concerns are:
• The developer has referred to the turbine as relatively small. The turbine does not constitute a small scale turbine under the DECC definition. • The turbine will not be supplying on-site demand but will be feeding directly into the national grid. • Allerdale has already contributed – pro rata- more onshore wind energy supply than probably anywhere else in the UK. • This turbine would add to a 6km direct line of turbines beginning with the Westnewton array, Crossrigg and then Lanrigg, resulting in an unacceptable level of cumulative impact. • The environmental, visual and cumulative impact a commercial wind turbine such as this would have on the local area, and on the amenity of local residents and visitors is unacceptable. • The adverse impact on, and harm to the character and appearance of the area surrounding this site is potentially so significant that, even when taking account of potential benefits of, or from the projected wind turbine, the negative impacts clearly outweigh any of these. • Given the size of the proposed turbine, with its potential visual impact on the area, particularly due to the cumulative effects created with other local wind turbines and also the possible damaging effects a machine of this size may have on the local wildlife, we believe that this application should not be permitted to proceed any further.
27 further letters of objection have been received. The concerns are: • The turbine is of industrial size. • The proximity to dwelling houses will be in breach of Allerdale proposed Local Plan. • The landscape all around Allerdale is tarnished with these ugly things, it was reported in the local press that 62% of all turbines in Cumbria are allocated in Allerdale. • There are homes located on the very edge of the current permitted noise levels. Concern is raised that there could be discernible noise problems. • There would be adverse impact on the amenity for walkers in the lanes and footpaths around the turbine from its noise generated. • The turbine will generate shadow flicker. • Will have an adverse impact on the Grade I Listed Church and Ancient Monument. • The height and siting of the turbine would be eye-catching and distracting to road users. • Will impact significantly on a variety of wildlife species. • The turbine will have a deleterious effect upon adjacent woodland. • The turbine would reduce the market value of adjacent properties. • The turbine will dramatically alter the landscape and character of the area both in the immediate locality and in the surrounding area. • The primary approach to the village of Bromfield is from the A596 to the south through Scales along Storth Brow and from this direction it will become the most prominent feature, dominating the landscape. • Such a tall structure is inappropriate so close to residential area with the attendant concerns regarding noise and light pollution. • The turbine would add cumulatively to existing turbines in the area. • Turbines are known to affect the quality of television pictures and the use of mobile phones. • Hope the principle of localism will be given priority when consideration is given to the objections from the community.
3 letters of support have been received. They support the scheme for the following reasons:
• The applicant is showing a very astute understanding of today’s trade off between energy and the environment not to mention the economic problems that everybody is now facing. • The turbine will have no more impact on the landscape than a telegraph pole, or anything else of that nature, and would demonstrate a good contrast between old and new. • St Mungos Church will not be impacted by the turbine nor do I feel put off going there.
Small scale proposals are essential for rural businesses to survive in this financial climate not to mention environmental benefits.
Report The Proposal
The proposal relates to a planning application for the erection of a single wind turbine with three blades. The wind turbine would have a hub height of 37m and a maximum ground to tip height of approximately 48.5m. The proposal includes:
• Base work to secure the turbines to the site • Underground wires to connect to the national grid
The turbine model to be erected is a Northern Power N60 – 60kw. The turbine will be connected to a transformer within an existing farm building located at Bromfield Farm via an underground gable. The turbine will generate electricity for the farm with any additional wind generated fed back into the national grid.
A temporary access track will be required to transport the turbine to the exact installation location. Access into the site will be via an existing access point to a field off Stroth Brow to the south east of the proposed turbine location.
Site and Surroundings
The application site comprises a large field or irregular shape and is located 550m to the south of the main built form of Bromfield Farm. The closest road is a minor road (Stroth Brow) off the A596, located approximately 180m to the east. The general character of the areas around the site is rural in nature with further farms and residential properties dotted across the landscape. The site lies at an altitude of approximately 21m AOD.
The village of Bromfield lies approximately 550m to the north of the site. The town of Wigton lies approximately 6.8km to the north east and Aspatria town 4.15km south west. The larger settlement of Abbeytown lies 3.91km to the north with Langrigg 1.14km to the south west, Blencogo 2.2km to the north east and Westnewton 4.55km to the south west.
Within the vicinity of the site, existing man made vertical structures of pylons and buildings stand. The surrounding area is generally fields, interspersed by traditional field hedging and isolated dwellings/farm buildings.
Need for and Environmental Impact Assessment
The Local Planning Authority issued a screening opinion (SCR/2012/0073) concluding that the proposed development does constitute EIA development. An Environmental Statement has been provided and in officers’ opinion, it is considered that sufficient documentation has been provided to assess the proposal.
Planning Policy
Renewable energy developments are supported by the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) which outlines that there should be a presumption in favour of sustainable development under paragraph 14. Under Chapter 10 of the NPPF it outlines there is a presumption to approve applications for renewable energy proposals unless material considerations indicate otherwise (paragraph 98).
The NPPF states that the delivery of low carbon energy and associated infrastructure is central to the economic social and environmental dimensions of sustainable development. In determining planning applications, LPA’s should:
• not require applicants for energy development to demonstrate the overall need for renewable or low carbon energy and also recognise that even small-scale projects provide a valuable contribution to cutting greenhouse gas emissions; and • approve the application if its impacts are (or can be made) acceptable
As the property is not located within any special landscape designations (including local) the proposal would be in compliance with Policy EN25 of the Local Plan when read in conjunction with the NPPF chapters 109, 110 and 115.
The objectives of Policy EN6 of the Allerdale Local Plan seek to safeguard sensitive development from pollution generating proposals which would concur with the objectives of the NPPF.
Overall (as reflected in the policies) in consider the merits of the proposed development it is necessary to balance the economic, social and environmental benefits of the proposed renewable energy development against any adverse environmental impact of the proposed turbine taking into account recent ministerial guidance..
Assessment
Needs/Benefits
The needs and benefits of the proposal are important elements in the overall planning balance. The NPPF continues to give support to all forms of renewable energy development. Paragraph 98 of the NPPF states that applicants are not required to demonstrate overall need as small scale projects contribute significantly to cutting greenhouse gas emissions.
The increased development of renewable energy resources is vital to facilitating the delivery of the Government’s commitments on both climate change and renewable energy. Positive planning which facilitates renewable energy developments can contribute to the Government’s overall strategy on sustainability and renewable energy development, as emphasized in the Energy White Paper (2007), The UK Renewable Energy Strategy (2009) the UK Energy Road Map (2011) and a significant number of other policies and commitments. The NPPF continues to give support to all forms of renewable energy development.
The North West Regional Spatial Strategy although recently abolished and is no longer part of the Development Plan, remains an evidence base and therefore a material policy consideration (excluding targets).
Despite the RSS being abolished there remains the binding legal targets relating to carbon and greenhouse gas emissions within the Climate Change Act.
The Cumbria Renewable Energy and Deployment Study (August 2011) confirmed that the capacity of operational or consented renewable energy schemes within Cumbria totalled 285.36MW. This figure is not directly comparable to the RSS targets because the RSS specified electricity generation only; whilst the Cumbria Renewable Energy and Deployment Study considered renewable energy schemes for both power and heat. The UK Renewable Energy Strategy recognises the importance of both electricity and heat from renewable sources and seeks around 35% of electricity and heat to come from renewable and low carbon (non nuclear) sources by 2020. Of the overall figure deployed or consented within Cumbria, 70% is located within the district of Allerdale.
As such, the consented/installed capacity for power and heat from renewable energy development is considered to be substantial and to make a positive contribution to addressing climate change.
Regardless of these figures, the imperative for further renewable energy within national policy and strategy is clear. Therefore, the weight to be attached to the deployment of renewable energy is not considered to have diminished.
Whilst this scheme would make only a small contribution towards regional and national targets for the production of energy from renewable sources, it remains valuable, thus contributing to meeting the objectives of the Climate Change Act. Whilst the local economic benefits cannot be precisely quantified there would be some in terms of the economic benefits to this local farming business. Achieving the binding national targets for the proportion of energy from renewable sources and the reductions sought in greenhouse gases can only be done by an accumulation of local projects of varying scale. Thus, based solely on national performance, a need for developments of this type exists. These are material considerations that weigh significantly in the planning balance.
However the recent ministerial statement emphasises that national need does not automatically override any environmental harm
Site Selection
The applicant has selected the site by means of the analysis of technical and environmental constraints using a map based Geographical Information System (GIS) balanced against the essential requirements of access, wind speed and electrical connection. Further desk studies and surveys of local constraints and conditions have concluded the site selection.
Landscape and Visual Impact
The applicant submitted an Environmental Statement with the application including photomontages.
However, upon consideration of the report officers considered the report had not sufficiently taken into account cumulative impact and requested further information be provided on this along with a further assessment of the impact on nearby properties be carried out.
The applicant has carried out these works and provided an extended Cumulative Landscape and Visual Impact and additional 8 viewpoints.
The viewpoint analysis is illustrated with reference illustrative material, comprising photographs and photomontages, both of which have been undertaken in line with guidance provided in the SNH document ‘Visual Representation of Windfarms’, which recommends a “minimum viewing distance of 300mm and the use of a 50mm equivalent camera lens”. Photography was undertaken by Myriad, taken as part of the viewpoint refinement process was taken with a digital SLR camera with an ‘APS-C’ 22.2mm x 14.8mm sensor and a 30mm focal length lens. The combination is equivalent to using a 50mm lens on a ‘full-frame’ 35mm digital camera.
The site is located within the land holding of Bromfield Farm which is located to the north west of the village. The site forms part of the Solway Basin, sited between the main towns of Aspatria (located approximately 4.15km to the south west) and Wigton (located approximately 6.8km to the north east) and the city of Carlisle is situated approximately 24.5km to the north east.
The general character of the application site and surrounding landscape is rural in nature with other individual farms, residential properties, a pub, post office and the Church of Saint Mungo located within the vicinity of the site. The proposed turbine is located approximately 670m south of the main built form of Bromfield Farm.
The Environmental Statement (ES) landscape assessment analyses the impact of the proposal on its surroundings,
Natural England’s National Character Area Assessment identifies the application site falls within an area known as the ‘Solway Basin NCA (6)’.
This landscape is identified as varying from sea level around the Solway Coast to a high point of 210m with the highest parts of the NCA generally being located along the fringe with the Cumbria High Fells to the south and Border Moss and Forest to north west. Field patterns vary around the NCA though the usual form is of large rectilinear pastoral and arable fields and around many settlements, strips of narrow fields are separated by hedge banks. There are large areas of salt marsh and to a lesser extent raised bog which survive in an enclosed form.
Overall the landscape sensitivity is considered to be medium and the proposed wind turbine would contribute to a moderate/slight magnitude of change and the overall level of landscape effect on the Solway Coasts would be Moderate/Minor and not significant.
Within the Cumbria County Council landscape classification, the site lies within Landscape Character Area: 5b Low Farmland and is also within close proximity to a linear stretch of character type 2c Coastal Plain. No national landscape designations apply.
Lowland Farmland (5b) is a traditional working farmed landscape, interspersed with large scale industrial developments in the countryside. It is generally large scale and open. Views can be wide and long distance to the Fells and sea and have an expansive feeling of exposure and connections with the windswept coastline. The rolling topography is dissected by small and larger meandering river valleys, with the later being found through the lower plain around Carlisle. The land is low lying, usually below 100m AOD.
Much of the landscape character type is intensively farmed agricultural land. The predominant land cover is pasture. This is interspersed with arable land. Fields tend to be fairly large and bounded by hedges with hedgerow trees, or replacement fences. The hedges form an interlocking matrix across the undulating land.
The settlement pattern is varied, with large and small nucleated traditional settlements intermixed with many discrete farms dispersed across the landscape. Buildings are often rendered with rich red sandstone buildings dominant along the west coast, and lighter sandstone buildings around Carlisle. Straight roads are common. Pylons and telegraph poles are generally subtle elements, but pylons can sometimes dominate, especially where there is more than one line of them.
The flat coastal plan (2c) is largely based on fluvial drift, marine alluvium and undulating boulder clay on Triassic mudstones and sandstones. The land is up to 15m AOD. This coastal landscape is subject to coastal erosion and flood improved pastures predominates in this agricultural landscape. In flatter areas the coastal plain is divided into large square fields surrounded by a linear matrix of drainage ditches. In undulating areas fields are often long and narrow and around historic settlements are derived from the pattern of medieval common field farming in strips. In drier area, particularly on boulder clay, arable crops are grown producing a patchwork of colour and texture. Rougher and marshy pasture with bushes or gorse scrub occur around the moss, salt marsh fringes and along watercourses.
Further inland small corpses or shelterbelts, associated with farms or churches are prominent features along with the thicker hedges. Birch woodland occurs on the edges of the mosses providing shelter and enclosure. Around the head of the Solway and Levens estuaries small coniferous and deciduous plantations are found, associated with large estates.
Telecommunication masts and pylons provide prominent and contrasting vertical features in some of the areas.
The aim of the cumulative landscape and visual impact of the applicant is where possible quantify the likely significant effects of the Bromfield Farm proposed turbine installation on the existing landscape and visual amenity within a 5km radius of the development site. A 10km diameter Zone of Theoretical (ZTV) has been chosen because it is considered proportional to the scale of the development proposed. Wireframes and photomontages produced at a 10km distance show that the turbines would be barely visible to a casual observer.
Public views of the proposed turbine would be possible from the surrounding network and in the longer distance from Public Rights Of Way within the vicinity of the site.
Officers concur with the ES assessment conclusions relating to landscape impact. There is no significant clutter of man-made structures within the immediate vicinity of the site. There a number of pylons on land surrounding the site with the proposed turbine being seen from many vantages points in line with these in terms of height. Visual impact is reduced with distance . In the recent appeal decision for wind energy development at Westnewton, the inspector concluded that despite the intensification of turbines between Workington and Carlisle, the landscape remains the dominant feature and would be described as a landscape with windfarms and not a windfarm landscape. The erection of a single turbine at this location is not considered to alter the description and would not create a sense of the landscape being dominated by wind turbines.
Visual Analysis
Settlement
The ES states potential visibility may be experienced by residents of settlements at the following locations:
• Scattered isolated dwellings within 1km of the proposed turbine; • Several villages and towns within 2-4km of the site, including Abbeytown, Bromfield, Blencogo and Langrigg; and • Limited theoretical visibility from settlements within the wider area (4-10Km), including Silloth, Kirkbride, Wigton, Mealsgate, Aspatria and Allonby, given the screening effects and intervening topography.
Road Users
There are few major roads in the vicinity of the proposed turbine location and therefore a limited number of road users would be able to view the turbine. The majority of views would be available along the minor routes, used mainly by local traffic travelling in and out of the surrounding villages. In a wider context, views may be possible from parts of the A596 to the south of the site (approx 1.5 Km away), and the B5302 to the north (approx 4.4km away).
The views from these routes would be experienced transiently by road users and the sensitivity of all these receptors is considered low. All visibility from roads would be subject to screening levels along routes and within intervening farmland and the magnitude of change is considered moderate, giving an overall effect of these receptors of low, and not significant.
Recreation Receptors
The ES advises there is a footpath located approx 500m to the southeast (217009) and approx 610m to the south (217008) of the proposed turbine location. The views will be intermittent due to screening from buildings, vegetation and undulating topography. Due to these factors and the separation distance it is considered the visual impact of users of the footpaths will not be significant.
Residential Receptors
The farmhouse lies approximately 684m to the north of the site, with the nearest residential property not to have an interest in the development being Bankhouse, which lies approx 510m to the northwest of the site . There are a number of individual properties spread out along the road links beyond this distance, with the village of Bromfield lying approx 550m to the north. The applicant has provided photomontages from 12 viewpoints, with several of these in close proximity to surrounding residential properties . Views of the turbine from these properties are visible in most cases, however due to the orientation of the dwellings, the turbine located on lower ground in the immediate topography of the field and existing hedgerows the views are obstructed with only the upper portion of the turbine evident. Officers consider the turbine would not appear visually dominant to residents of the localities .
As such officers concur with the submitted LVIA insofar as the likely visual effects of the proposed turbine are not considered to be significant to warrant refusal.
Cumulative Impact
Officers considered that the applicant had not fully considered the cumulative impact within the submitted Environmental Assessment. The applicants have submitted an Extended Cumulative Landscape and Visual Impact. The applicants cumulative assessment takes account of all turbines within a 5km radius (pending, approved or refused but at appeal) and all turbines over 20 m to hub height within a 5-10km radius. Turbines with a hub height of less than 20m have been excluded from consideration at distances over 5km because it is widely accepted that at 5km the impact of small scale turbine is not intrusive and they are generally seen as indistinct landscape features. Officers are satisfied with the parameters the cumulative assessment has been considered.
Applicants Cumulative Wireframes Analysis/Viewpoint Analysis
The wireframe analysis shows that the effect on the landscape character and the effect on visual amenity are all moderate with one being minor/moderate. The applicants ES findings from each Cumulative viewpoint are shown below:
Cumulative Viewpoint 1 – in proximity of A596 1 st Location
Medium range, taken at approximately 4900m from the base of the proposed turbine location. The topography of the landscape is that only the nacelle and blade tips of the majority of the turbine present in this view are theoretically visible. A considerable proportion of the A596 benefits from the road side screening, as such cumulative impact is considered to be slight in landscape terms and moderate in visual amenity terms. The Bromfield turbine is not considered to have a negative cumulative impact, in fact as the wireframe view represents a worst case scenario it is clear that the turbine can be accommodated without significant impact.
Cumulative Viewpoint 2 – In proximity of B5307
Medium range view, taken approximately 3500m from the base of the proposed turbine location near the boundary of the AONB. This location has a high landscape sensitivity. A significant number of turbine developments are theoretically visible from this position, however the topography of the landscape is such that there is considerable back clothing opportunities available, as such the visual impact of the development is slight and there is scope for additional turbine development to be comfortably accommodated in this view. The Bromfield turbine will be totally back clothed by the rising land behind the turbine and will not represent a dominant feature nor add significantly to the overall cumulative impact.
Cumulative Viewpoint 3 – In proximity of A596 2 nd Location
Medium range view, taken approximately 3400m from the base of the proposed turbine location. From this location three distinct clusters of wind development can be seen with two isolated turbines also present. These isolated turbines are very small scale and are likely to be indistinguishable on anything other than wireframe images. The Bromfield turbine sits within the central cluster of turbines which are of a similar scale. Its position relative to these turbines is acceptable and does not unduly add to landscape clutter. From this viewpoint the eye is drawn towards the west with turbine application references 2/2012/0603 and 2/2010/0722 appearing as the most prominent turbines in this view.
NB: 2/2012/0603 for a 67m turbine at Prospect House has been refused and is currently being considered at appeal.
Cumulative Viewpoint 4 – In proximity to Blencogo Village
Medium range view, taken approximately 2486m from the base of the proposed turbine location. From this elevated position long range views across a wide vista are possible. Within this view 5 other turbine proposal are theoretically visible based on a worst case wireframe scenario these are 2/2008/0997, 3 large scale turbines with a tip height of over 100m, 2/2011/0589 a scheme of 4 turbines with a tip height of approximately 27m, 2/2012/0424 a single turbine with a tip height of approximately 34m, 2/2010/0992 a single turbine with a tip height of approximately 20m and 2/2010/0988 a single turbine with a tip height of approximately 20m.
In reality due to the presence of intervening hedgerow screening it is highly unlikely that turbine 2/2008/0997 and 2/2012/0424 would feature in the view unless weather conditions were exceptionally clear. From appraising the wire frame it appears that the Bromfield turbine is partially back clothed by the topography of the land behind the turbine which reduces its overall impact. It is evident that the turbine can be accommodated within the view without causing an unacceptable level of cumulative impact.
The wireframes show a worst case scenario and do not account for intervening screening and development which will likely further block the views of the turbine from this location. From these distances, the turbine blades are likely to blend in with the sky behind it which will decrease visibility further.
There is an approved scheme for the erection of 3 turbines, 107m high at Warwick Hall Farm, Westnewton that will lie approximately 5.2km south west of the proposed site . Existing wind farms erected around the site are Park Head, Silloth wind farm which comprises of 4 turbines (approximately 121m to tip) 6.6km northwest of the site, High Pow, Bolton Low Houses wind farm comprising of 3 turbines (approximately 95m to tip) 7.71km south east of the site , Wharrels Hill, Bothel wind farm comprising of 8 turbines (approximately 81m to tip) 8.19km south of the site and Tallentire wind farm comprising of 6 turbines (approximately 100m to tip) 11.75km south west. Other sporadic turbine development and wind farms extend across the borough with many single turbines pending and approved in the vicinity, some of which have already been constructed. These are:
• 2/2012/0603 Prospect House, High Scales 1 turbine tip height of 67m approximately 1.63km south east of proposal – refused. Appeal pending. • 2/2010/0722 Prospect House, High Scales 1 turbine tip height of 20.3m approximately 1.21km south east of proposal – approved. • 2/2012/0315 Goose Green Farm, Crookdake 1 turbine tip height of 67m approximately 2.12km south of proposed. Refused, Appeal pending. • 2/2010/0370 Brayton Park, Brayton 1 turbine tip height of 62m approximately 3.12km south of proposal – approved. • 2/2013/0372 Croft House, Bromfield 1 turbine tip height of 18m approximately 0.9km north west of proposal – pending. • 2/2011/0589 Langrigg Hall, Langrigg 4 turbines tip height of 27.13m approximately 1.26km west of proposal – approved. • 2/2010/0988 Crossrigg Farm, Westnewton 1 turbine tip height of 20.4m approximately 3.04m south west of proposal – approved. • 2/2010/0992 Stubbsgill Farm, Yearngill 1 turbine tip height of 20.4m approximately 3.37km south west of proposal – approved. • 2/2009/0335 Stepping Stones Farm, Abbeytown 1 turbine tip height of 17.7m approximately 2.52km north west of proposal – approved. • 2/2012/0753 Firs farm, Crookdake 1 turbine tip height of 45m approximately 3.7km south east of proposal – refused. Appeal pending • 2/2012/0026 Land at High Aketon Farm, Wigton 1 turbine tip height of 27.13m approximately 3.66km south east of proposal – approved.
The applications or appeals which are pending are not material considerations on cumulative impact (This is particularly relevant in this case as some of the nearest turbines are the subject of appeals. There will need to be a further review in the eventuality of any of these appeals being determined prior to the panel meeting) Numerous screening opinions have been received throughout Allerdale, however these have not been considered in the cumulative assessment as they are not considered proposed development sites at this stage.
The number of existing or approved turbines of all scales within the locality is increasing. With reference to the recent Pennygilll Flimby and Gt Orton Flatts appeals for single turbine which were dismissed on the grounds of cumulative impact, this proposal would be seen as a separate entity and not part of a wider group.
However, in considering the scale of the current proposal and the separation distances involved to other turbine developments, the magnitude of potential landscape and visual impacts cumulatively of this and other turbines, are not considered significant cumulative effects in terms of either landscape character or visual amenity sufficient to warrant refusal.
Officers consider the proposed turbine from some view points will be visible along with the existing erected turbines and approved turbines in the area when erected as shown on the submitted photomontages. However as the proposal is only for a single turbine and taking into account the existing landscape and man- made features any visual interaction would be limited. As such, the proposal is not considered to give rise to significant cumulative effects in terms of either landscape character or visual amenity.
Designations
The site is in excess of 8.5km of the Lake District National Park and the Solway Coast AONB lies 4.53km north. The proposed turbine would be too far away from and too inconspicuous to result in any harm to the special qualities of these designations.
Biodiversity
The site falls within the bird sensitivity area defined by the RSPB for species functionally linked to the Upper Solway Flats and Marshes SPA/Ramsar sites. An Ecological Assessment has been submitted with the application that considers the impact on these species. This information has been considered by Natural England. Natural England advises that the proposal, if undertaken in strict accordance with the details submitted, is not likely to have a significant effect on the interest features for which the Upper Solway Flats and Marshes SPA and Ramsar has been classified, specifically pink footed geese.
The supporting information confirms that the proposed turbine has been sited in excess of 50m from field hedges/coppices in accordance with Natural England advice for bats.
Based on the above and advice from consultees, it is considered unlikely that the proposal will have any significant impact on wildlife species or protected habitats. (as verified by Natural England’s response)
Noise
ETSU–R–97 – ‘The assessment and rating of noise from wind turbines’, is the standard guidance document relating to wind turbines. This indicates that noise from wind turbines should be limited to:
5dB(A) above background noise level for both day and night time. • In low noise environments, daytime noise levels should be limited to an absolute level within the range of 35-40dB (A). • The fixed limit for night-time is 43 dB (A). • Day and night-time levels of 45 dB (A) for any related property. • For single turbines or large separation distances, simplified limit of 35 dB (A) up to wind speeds of 10 m/s should not require background noise measurements.
The application includes a noise assessment which has been assessed by officers within Environmental Protection. No objections are raised subject to conditions that noise from the wind turbine be limited to reflect the ETSU standards. A further condition is also recommended to resolve any complaints received in relation to the turbine. Based on this advice from Environmental Protection, the proposal is considered to be acceptable with regard to noise levels generated.
Shadow Flicker
Research suggests that shadow flicker effects have been proven to occur only within 10 rotor diameters of a turbine. With a rotor diameter of 23.2m, there is the potential for shadow flicker to occur within 232m of the proposed turbine. No residential dwellings or their associated curtilage areas lie within 232m of the turbine. Should complaints arise regarding shadow flicker, there is the potential for this to be investigated as a nuisance by Environmental Protection.
Electromagnetic Interference (EMI), Aviation and RADAR
The CAA, MoD, NATS and Carlisle Airport have been consulted on the proposal. They all raise no objections to the proposal. The standard response from the CAA for turbines indicates that the CAA has no responsibility for safeguarding sites other than within its own property. The scheme is considered acceptable in terms of aviation safety and radar.
Highways/Traffic Impact
The Highways Authority generally suggest a separation distance between turbines and roads or railways of the height of the turbine plus 10%, to reduce any risks from toppling or icing, (the instances of such occurrences are noted as rare). The separation distance proposed to the highway, is well in excess of this, as such, it is considered that the proposal would not adversely affect the highway in an unacceptable manner in terms of safety.
The proposed wind turbine takes access from Stroth Brow to the south east of the proposed turbine location. The access point is from an existing access track along the field boundary. A temporary track will need to be laid across the rented field to the turbine location during the construction stage of the proposed developed and this will be removed post construction. The access track will consist of geogrid plastic tracking which will be laid down and removed immediately afterwards.
Officers consider that an appropriate transport route can be achieved in order to minimise the impacts on the highway. The applicant has provided details of the proposed site access and strategy including traffic movements, vehicle types and traffic routing. Such matters can be further conditioned.
The County Council Highways Team has raised no objection to the proposal subject to conditions attached requiring a Traffic Management Plan.
Public Rights of Way
There is a footpath located approx 500m to the southeast (217009) and approx a further footpath 610m to the south (217008) of the proposed turbine location. The views will be intermittent due to screening from buildings, vegetation and undulating topography. As such, it is considered that the proposed turbine, once in position, would not adversely affect any public right of way in an unacceptable manner in terms of safety.
Hydrology, Hydrogeology and Geology
It is considered that adequate mitigation measures can be incorporated into any build to ensure no significant pollution to the water environment, in accordance with saved policy EN5 of the Allerdale Local Plan, First Alteration.
Heritage
There are no historic landscape designations within the site. There are Sites of Archaeological Interest lying to the north, north east, south north west of the site, which are all within 2km of the site.
The County Archaeologist considers it is very unlikely that the proposed development will have an impact on below ground archaeological remains and raise no objections on this ground.
This application site lies to the south of the village of Bromfield, approximately 65m from the grade I Listed Church of St Mungo, a building with 12 th century origins, and the nearby St Mungos’s Castle, an earthwork site which is scheduled as an Ancient Monument, which lies on the north side of the village. The setting of the two heritage assets extends chiefly into the low-lying and open farmland to the north and west. Gill House Grade II Listed Building lies 0.72km to the south with other Listed structures lying at a further distance.
An assessment within the applicants ES has been carried out of the impact of the proposed turbine by the applicant as shown in the table below.
The applicants report considers that no impacts of major significance have been identified for any Listed Buildings in the vicinity of the application site. All impacts are indirect since there are no listed buildings located within the immediate vicinity of the application site. The closest Listed structure is that of Gill House, Located 720m to the south of the proposed turbine location. This assessment has shown that overall, due to the limited scale of the proposed development which involves a single medium scale turbine, the proposal will have only a minor effect on the identified Listed Buildings.
With regards to Schedules Ancient Monuments the report states that the turbine is located within 680m of a SAM and therefore all impacts are indirect. The orientation of the SAM and the level of built and natural screening between the turbine and the area combine to ensure that views of the turbine are limited, resulting in a minor impact.
The two heritage assets of St Mungo’s Castle and church of St Mungos are sited to the north side of the village of Bromfield, and their setting extends into low-lying and open farmland to the north and west. Both will be relatively well screened from the site of the proposed turbine by the buildings of the village and by trees. Whilst the proposed turbine may be visible from some parts of the churchyard and from the field containing the scheduled monument, the impact of the proposed turbine upon the setting of the nationally important heritage assets will be limited.
Officers in considering the impact of the proposal on these important heritage assets in accordance with paragraph 131 and 132 of the National Planning Policy Framework it states that great weight should be given to the conservation of heritage assets and their settings, and that the more important the asset, the greater the weight should be; substantial harm to heritage assets of the highest significance, such as grade I or II* listed buildings, should be wholly exceptional. The church of St Mungo and St Mungo’s Castle are designated heritage assets of the highest importance. It is entirely right that serious consideration should be given to the potential impact of the proposed development upon the settings of these designated heritage assets. However, whilst there may be some limited impact, this cannot be construed as the ‘substantial harm’ which would justify the withholding of planning permission. Accordingly, English Heritage does not wish to object to the grant of planning permission.
Hadrian’s Wall World Heritage Site (WHS) lies approximately 6km west of the turbine location. When considering the impact upon WHS we are seeking to protect its significance, or Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) as detailed in Unesco’s documents accepting the Wall as a World Heritage Site. These make clear that the area around the Wall plays a role in its significance by allowing an understanding and appreciation of the Roman military planning and land use which led to the creation of the Roman frontier. The proposed development clearly lies some distance inland from the main Roman installations of the Cumbrian Coast. Although views inland will have been of some importance to the Roman Military, these views are likely to have been of less significance than views along the frontier itself, or northwards across the Solway. Whilst the proposed turbine may be visible at long distance from the Roman frontier, it will not impede the more important views along the coast, nor disrupt known Roman visual lines of communication with inland installations. It is therefore considered that the proposed development will not impact adversely upon the ability to understand Roman military planning and land use, and ill thus not harm the OUV of the WHS.
Officers concur with these findings and therefore the proposal is not considered likely to adversely affect heritage assets to any significant degree. The proposal is therefore considered acceptable in relation to policies CO18 and CO19 of the Local Plan, and the guidance contained within the NPPF.
Local Finance Considerations
Having regard to S70 (2) of the Town and Country Planning Act the proposal does not have any local finance considerations
Conclusion
In balancing the limited adverse effects of the proposal, which are in the main limited to the impact on the landscape/visual amenity and cumulative impact, against the benefits arising from the promotion of renewable energy development, it is considered that, notwithstanding the recent ministerial statement the limited adverse impacts identified does not outweigh the benefits arising from the proposal. The recommendation therefore is for approval subject to conditions.
Recommendation: Approved
Conditions/ 1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before Reasons: the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. Reason: In order to comply with Section 51 of the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.
2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out solely in accordance with the following plans: BROM/0001 Rev A - Site Location Plan 1012907 Revision E - Proposed Turbine Details Reason: In order to comply with Section 51 and Section 91 of the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.
3. This permission shall remain valid for a period of 25 years from the date that electricity from the development is first produced ('First Export Date'). The date of the first production of electricity shall be notified in writing to the Local Planning Authority within 28 days of the event occurring. Reason: To ensure that this site within open countryside is restored to an appropriate standard, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policies EN25 and EN10 of the Allerdale Local Plan, Adopted 1999 (Saved).
4. Not later than 12 months before the end of this permission, a decommissioning and site restoration scheme shall be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall make provision for the removal of the wind turbine and the associated above ground equipment and foundations to a depth of at least one metre below ground. The approved scheme shall be fully implemented within 6 months of the expiry of this permission. Reason: To ensure that this site within open countryside is restored to an appropriate standard, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policies EN25 and EN10 of the Allerdale Local Plan, Adopted 1999 (Saved).
5. If the turbine hereby approved ceases to be operational for a continuous period of at least 6 months, the turbine shall be removed and the land restored in accordance with a decommissioning and site restoration scheme approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The decommissioning and site restoration scheme shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority within three months of the continuous six month cessation period coming to an end. The land shall be restored in accordance with the approved scheme within 6 months of the scheme's approval by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that this site within open countryside is restored to an appropriate standard, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policies EN25 and EN10 of the Allerdale Local Plan, Adopted 1999 (Saved).
6. Within 6 months of the completion of the construction works, any temporary working areas around the turbine shall be removed. Reason: To ensure that this site within open countryside is restored to an appropriate standard, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policies EN25 and EN10 of the Allerdale Local Plan, Adopted 1999 (Saved).
7. Prior to the erection of the turbine, details of the colour and finish shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out only in accordance with the approved details. No part of the structure shall carry any logo or lettering. Reason: To ensure that this site within open countryside is restored to an appropriate standard, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policies EN25 and EN10 of the Allerdale Local Plan, Adopted 1999 (Saved).
8. Prior to the erection of the wind turbine, the developer shall provide written confirmation to the Local Planning Authority, NATS en-route plc, Civil Avaiation Authority and the Ministry of Defence of the proposed date for commencement; the anticipated date of completion of construction, the height above ground level of the highest structure and the position of each turbine in latitude and longitude. Reason: In the interests of air safety.
9. All cabling between the turbines and between the turbines and the substation shall be laid underground. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.
10. The following background noise levels shall not be exceeded when the wind farm is in operation: a) Night time noise limits (11 p.m. to 7 a.m.) - The LA90 (10 minutes) specific noise level shall not exceed 43dB (A) when assessed and measured 3.5m from the façade of the nearest noise sensitive use, namely “Bank House, Bromfiled, CA7 3NB” (in existence at the date of this permission) or 5dB above the night time LA90 background noise level at wind speeds not exceeding 12m/s, whichever is the greater. b) Day time noise limits (7 a.m. to 11 p.m.) - The LA90 (10 minutes) specific noise level shall not exceed 35dB (A) when assessed and measured 3.5m from the façade of the nearest noise sensitive use, namely “Bank House, Bromfield, CA7 3NB” (in existence at the date of this permission) or 5dB above the quiet day time LA90 background noise level at wind speeds not exceeding 12m/s, whichever is the greater. Reason: In the interests of residential amenity and in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy EN6 of the Allerdale Local Plan Adopted 1999 (Saved).
11. In the event of a complaint being received in writing by the Local Planning Authority alleging noise nuisance at a residential property or properties due to the wind turbine, the wind turbine operator shall, at its expense, employ an independent consultant approved by the Local Planning Authority to measure and assess the level of noise emissions from the wind turbine at the location of the complainants property. The results of the independent consultant's assessment shall be provided in writing to the Local Planning Authority within three months of the date of notification of the complaint. If a breach of the noise levels specified in Condition 10 a and b is confirmed in the assessment the operation of the turbines shall cease until the Local Planning Authority is satisfied that the turbines can operate within the noise limits specified in Condition 10. The operator of the development shall be under no obligation to follow the procedure set out in this condition where the complaint relates to a residential property more than 3 kilometre[s] from the wind turbine generator. Reason: In the interests of residential amenity and in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy EN6 of the Allerdale Local Plan Adopted 1999 (Saved).
12. In the event that a written complaint is received relating to electro-magnetic interference a written scheme shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority setting out a protocol for the assessment of electro-magnetic interference, including remedial measures. Operation of the turbines shall take place in accordance with the agreed protocol unless the Local Planning Authority gives its prior written consent to any variation. Reason: In order to minimise the risk of nuisance.
13. No development shall take place until a Traffic Management Plan (TMP) addressing traffic impact issues during the construction period has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. The TMP shall include agreement on phasing of the construction of any accesses, details of routes to be used by construction traffic, any street furniture that needs to be moved to accommodate construction vehicles and any appropriate on-street waiting restrictions required. Reason: In the interests of highway safety.
14. During the construction phase no vehicle shall leave the site in a condition that would give rise to the deposit of mud, dust or other debris on teh public highway. Reason: In the interest of public safety.
Proactive Statement
The Local Planning Authority has acted positively and proactively in determining this application by identifying planning policies, constraints, stakeholder representations and matters of concern within the application (as originally submitted) and where appropriate negotiating, with the Applicant, acceptable amendments and solutions to the proposal to address those concerns. As a result, the Local Planning Authority has been able to grant planning permission for an acceptable proposal, in accordance with the presumption in favour of sustainable development, as set out within the National Planning Policy Framework.