volume 1 - e.on · the isles wind farm environmental statement volume 1 non-technical summary 1-1...

Volume 1

Non – Technical Summary

April 2014

Prepared by: .......................................................... Checked by: .....................................................................Charlotte Bragg James SmithPrincipal Environmental Scientist Director

Approved by: ..........................................................James SmithDirector

5th Floor, 2 City Walk, Leeds, LS11 9ARTelephone: 0113 391 6800 Website: http://www.aecom.com

Job No 60276501 Reference April 2014

This document has been prepared by AECOM Limited for the sole use of our client (the “Client”) and in accordance with generally accepted consultancy principles, the budget for fees and the terms of reference agreed betweenAECOM Limited and the Client. Any information provided by third parties and referred to herein has not been checked or verified by AECOM Limited, unless otherwise expressly stated in the document. No third party may rely uponthis document without the prior and express written agreement of AECOM Limited.

The Isles Wind Farm Environmental Statement Volume 1 Non-Technical Summary 1-1

1.1 Introduction1.1.1 This Non-Technical Summary has been prepared to accompany an application by E.ON Climate and

Renewables (E.ON) to Durham County Council (DCC) for permission to develop the Isles Wind Farm,known hereinafter as the 'proposed Development'. A description of the proposed Development isincluded in Section 1.4.

1.1.2 The proposed Development is the subject of an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) under the Townand Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England) Regulations 2011. The results ofthis assessment, which inform and accompany the planning application, are presented in anEnvironmental Statement (ES).

1.1.3 EIA is an assessment process applied to developments that potentially have significant effects on theenvironment. A helpful introduction is provided by the institute of Environmental Management andAssessment (IEMA): "the EIA process ensures that potential effects on the environment are considered,including natural resources such as water, air and soil; conservation of species and habitats; andcommunity issues such as visual effects and impacts on the population. EIA provides a mechanism bywhich the interaction of environmental effects resulting from development can be predicted, allowingthem to be avoided or reduced through the development of mitigation measures. As such, it is a criticalpart of the decision-making process”.

1.1.4 The purpose of the ES is to help the local authority to make decisions about the proposed Developmentbased on a full understanding of any impacts, positive or negative, that it may have on the environment.

1.1.5 The ES comprises of the following volumes, which are referenced throughout this document:

Volume 1. Non-Technical Summary (this document);

Volume 2. Environmental Statement: main report and figures; and

Volume 3. Appendices to the main report.

1.1.6 A separate Planning Statement, Design and Access Statement, and Statement of CommunityEngagement have also been prepared, which are not part of this assessment.

1.1.7 The application and supporting information will be available for inspection during normal working hours(Monday – Thursday, 08.30-17.00, and Friday, 08.30-16.30) at:

Durham County Council

County Hall

Durham

DH1 5UQ

1.1.8 In addition, the application and supporting information will be available for view online on the Council’swebsite www.durham.gov.uk. Consultation responses should be provided to DCC planning department.

1.1.9 Electronic copies of all documents can be made available at a fee of £15 per DVD. Paper copies of theEnvironmental Statement can be made available at a fee of £150.Cheques should be made payable toAECOM Ltd, with your name and address on the back. Please contact the following:

E.ON

c/o AECOM, 2 City Walk, Leeds, LS11 9AR

Contact: Charlotte Bragg 0113 391 6234

1.2 Site Context1.2.1 The proposed Development is located about 1.5 km to the east of Newton Aycliffe in County Durham.

The site boundary for the wind farm extends approximately from Mordon in the east to the outskirts ofNewton Aycliffe in the west and from Bradbury in the north to Preston-le-Skerne in the south.

1.2.2 The site is characterised by low-lying agricultural land, known as the Carrs, used for arable and pasturefarming. It is generally an open landscape with isolated small areas of woodland. Elevations rise slightlyto the south and west.

1.2.3 The application site boundary is shown by the red line on Figures 1 and 2. This area is approximately11.9 km2 (1190 hectares) and is bounded to the north by the A689, to the east by Elstob Lane, to thesouth by Lodge Lane and to the west by the A167. It incorporates land on both sides of the A1(M)motorway and the ECML railway. However, the actual land area required for the development footprintcomprises 0.14 km2 (13.6 ha).

1.2.4 There are several watercourses across the site including Rushyford Beck and Woodham Burn which jointhe River Skerne. The is a network of drainage ditches across many parts of the site including one knownas Railway Stell which adjoins the western side ECML which is designated as a Site of Special ScientificInterest (SSSI) for its rare fenland species. Furthermore there are a number of tracks, footpaths andbridleways which cross the site.

1.3 Background to the Proposed Development1.3.1 Investigations into the proposed wind farm at this site have been ongoing for a number of years. The site

includes land that was previously proposed for a 10 turbine wind farm near Great Stainton, known as theA1 Wind Farm. A planning application was prepared by E.ON and submitted to DCC in May 2009 for theA1 Wind Farm. These ten turbines were located within the southern half of the current Isles Wind Farmsite boundary.

1.3.2 Further technical and environmental studies, and consideration of size of the land associated with theproposed Development, showed that, taking into account the local environment, technical and socialconstraints, there was potential for the site to accommodate a much larger generation capacity (> 50MW)and E.ON therefore re-evaluated their proposal to show how the use of this larger site could producemore low carbon electricity than the A1 Wind Farm site alone. The planning application for the A1 Wind

1 NON TECHNICAL SUMMARY


Farm was therefore withdrawn and The Isles Wind Farm proposal was taken forward as a NationallySignificant Infrastructure Project (NSIP).

1.3.3 Following feedback from consultation undertaken for the proposed Development, E.ON took the decisionto reduce the potential installed capacity to less than 50 MW and withdraw the application from the NSIPprocess and decided to progress the site through the local planning system.

1.3.4 An ES has been completed that reports the results of an EIA for the proposed Development. Thepurpose of the EIA is to identify and assess the likely effects on the environment from the construction,operation and decommissioning of the proposed Development. Measures to reduce and minimise theeffects on the environment are also detailed in the ES.

1.4 Description of the Proposed Development1.4.1 The proposed Development comprises the construction, operation and decommissioning of wind farm

comprising up to 24, 3-bladed, wind turbines, as shown on Figure 2. The turbine model selected will havea generating capacity of up to 2.0 MW, giving a total capacity for the proposed Development of up to 48MW. The turbines will range from up to 101 m and 126.5 m high above ground level and will be locatedin two clusters as follows:

A northern cluster of 7 turbines (up to 126.5 m height to tip) to the north west of the A1(M) and northof Great Isle Farm; and

A southern cluster of 17 turbines (13 turbines up to 101 m height to tip and 4 turbines up to 115 mheight to tip) in the area between Mordon and Preston-le-Skerne.

1.4.2 The turbines in the south are shorter in order to comply with the requirements of Durham Tees ValleyAirport. Existing land use (primarily agriculture) will continue across the remainder of the developmentsite.

1.4.3 The proposed Development also includes the following:

Upgrade of existing tracks;

Construction of new access tracks linking the on-site infrastructure;

Installation of an on-site underground cable between the northern and southern clusters, and thesubstation;

Construction on a new on-site control building and substation;

Upgraded watercourse crossings;

New watercourse crossings;

Construction of hard ground next to each turbine to position cranes to assist with installation;

One permanent meteorological monitoring mast of up to 80 m; and

Four temporary construction compounds.

1.4.4 An allowance is included in the application for movement of the turbines and meteorological monitoringmast of up to 50 m, and the access tracks by up to 5 m; this is called a micrositing allowance. Micrositingis required as it is possible that as the project progresses to a detailed design and construction stage,additional issues that may affect the layout may become apparent. For example, unforeseen groundconditions may be encountered following consent during detailed site investigation works.

1.4.5 The proposed location of the turbines, access tracks and other site infrastructure are shown on Figure 1.

1.4.6 The proposed Development will be connected to the electricity distribution network via a new electricalconnection. Electricity from the proposed development will be exported from the new on-site substationto the National Grid. The responsibility for the grid connection, including the design and type(underground or overground) lies with the local Distribution Network Operator (DNO). Although twosubstation options are shown on Figure 2, one in the north of the site and one in the south, only one willbe constructed.

1.4.7 The design team has followed good practice EIA guidance and employed an iterative approach to thedesign of the proposed Development. The design evolved throughout the EIA process as differentconstraints and positive and negative effects were identified and evaluated. This approach is consideredbest practice as, throughout the EIA process, mitigation measures were integrated into the design toreduce or remove negative effects. Measures were also incorporated into the design to enhance positiveeffects.

©Crown copyright. All rights reserved. License Number 100027856

This document has been prepared by AECOM for the sole use of our Client (the "Client") and in accordance with generally accepted consultancy principles, the budget for fees and terms of reference agreed between

Drawn:

Date:

Checked:Approved:Scale at A3:

Drawing Number:

AECOM and the Client. Any information provided by third parties and referred to herein has not been checked or verified by AECOM, unless otherwise expressly stated in the document. No third party may rely upon this document without the prior and express written agreement of AECOM.

One Trinity GardensQuaysideNewcastle, NE1 2HF

Tel +44 (0) 191 224 6500Fax +44 (0) 191 224 6599

www.aecom.com

Ü

Verified:

A3Project:

Title:

0 5,000 Metres

THE ISLES WIND FARMENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

FIGURE 1DEVELOPMENT LOCATION PLAN APRIL 2014 1:150,000

Client:

KEYThe Isles Site Boundary

LK LKCB JS

I_140410_NTS1_v1

_̂

_̂_̂

_̂

_̂

_̂_̂_̂

_̂_̂

_̂_̂

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

8

9

65

1 2

4

7

3

131211

10

16

1514

2423

2122

20

1918

17

©Crown copyright. All rights reserved. License Number 100027856

This document has been prepared by AECOM for the sole use of our Client (the "Client") and in accordance with generally accepted consultancy principles, the budget for fees and terms of reference agreed between

Drawn:

Date:

Checked:Approved:Scale at A3:

Drawing Number:

AECOM and the Client. Any information provided by third parties and referred to herein has not been checked or verified by AECOM, unless otherwise expressly stated in the document. No third party may rely upon this document without the prior and express written agreement of AECOM.

One Trinity GardensQuaysideNewcastle, NE1 2HF

Tel +44 (0) 191 224 6500Fax +44 (0) 191 224 6599

www.aecom.com

Ü

Verified:

A3Project:

Title:

0 1,000 Metres

THE ISLES WIND FARMENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

FIGURE 2PROPOSED TURBINE LAYOUT PLAN APRIL 2014 1:20,000

Client:

KEYThe Isles Site Boundary

! Proposed Turbine Location! Temporary Met Mast - As Built! Permanent Met Mast_̂ Proposed Watercourse Crossing

Proposed Cable RouteProposed Upgrade to Existing TrackProposed Raised TrackProposed New TrackProposed Substation and Control BuildingConstruction CompoundProposed Turbine Foundation and Hardstanding

AA LKCB JS

I_140411_NTS2_v2


1.5 Construction1.5.1 The construction of the proposed Development is planned to be undertaken over a period of

approximately 12 months, subject to award of construction contract and influences such as weatherconditions. Once consent is awarded, further detailed site investigations are undertaken prior toconstruction. Regulatory authorities will also be consulted and any necessary consents for constructionwill be obtained (e.g., pipeline crossings, land drainage modifications).

1.5.2 The construction process will consist of the following principal activities:

Establish site access;

Construction of temporary construction compounds;

Upgrade and construction of on-site access tracks;

Construction of one control building and substation;

Excavation and construction of turbine foundations;

Construction of hard ground for crane pads;

Erection of permanent meteorological monitoring mast;

Excavation of trenches and cable laying adjacent to site tracks;

Connection of on-site distribution and communication cables;

Delivery and installation of turbines;

Commissioning of site equipment; and

Site restoration.

1.5.3 Construction activities are predicted to take place between 07:00 and 19:00 hours Monday to Friday andbetween 07:00 and 13:00 on Saturdays. No works will be undertaken on Sundays or Bank Holidays.Work outside these hours may be necessary; however the need for it will be agreed with the localauthority prior to the commencement of any construction activities.

1.5.4 During the construction period there will be a number of temporary construction facilities including:

Site offices, including offices and meeting rooms;

Staff welfare facilities, including toilets, kitchen and a mess room;

An area that has been cleaned for the temporary storage of equipment and supplies – a ‘laydownarea’;

Areas for the storage of oils and other fuels, which will have appropriate protection in the case of aspill or leak;

An area to recycle aggregate during construction and also to mix concrete on site; and

Four temporary construction compounds, approximately 40 x 50 metres.

Access

1.5.5 In terms of accessing the site during construction, the site has been split into three main areas as a resultof the A1(M) motorway and ECML railway; the northern area, eastern are and southern area.

1.5.6 For the northern area of the site (i.e., land to the north and west of the A1(M)), construction traffic will useJunction 60 of the A1(M), travel westbound on the A689 before turning south at Rushyford to travel onthe A167 and then turn off the A167 at Lowfield Farm.

1.5.7 For the eastern area of the site (the land to the east of the A1(M) but to the west of the ECML),construction traffic will leave the A1(M) at Junction 60 and travel east on the A690 for approximately 200m before turning to travel south and passing through the village of Bradbury and turning west into the siteaccess.

1.5.8 For the southern area of the site (land to the south and east of the ECML), construction traffic has twoprinciple routes available. Heavy goods vehicles (HGVs) would likely travel via the A1(M), A66(M) andnorth on the A6 before turning to travel west on the A1150 for a short distance before turning north atGreat Burdon onto Bishopton Lane / Elstob lane and the site access. Alternatively, vehicles may routevia junction 59 of the A1(M) and travel south on the A67 and then east on the A1150 towards GreatBurdon and onto Bishopton Lane/ Elstob Lane.

1.5.9 Appropriate signs will be put in place at the entrance to the site during the construction phase and publicaccess on-site would be restricted for health and safety reasons. Users of Public Rights of Way (PRoW)and bridleways will be informed of any temporary diversions or closures which may be necessarythrough appropriate signage and information boards. Details of any temporary diversions and closureswill be discussed and agreed in advance with DCC. This is discussed in more detail in Section 1.10.

1.6 Operation1.6.1 Planning permission is sought for 25 years, at the end of which the proposed Development will be

decommissioned. While the wind farm is operational, on-site activities will be limited to routinemaintenance and servicing of the wind turbines, access tracks, and other infrastructure. This includesboth planned maintenance and emergency repairs. The existing agricultural land uses will continueacross the remainder of the site.

1.6.2 Every unit (kWh) of electricity produced through wind power will displace electricity, which mightotherwise have been produced by a power station burning fossil fuel. A calculation of the number ofhouses that could be supplied by the proposed Development is illustrated in Table 1, for 24 (up to 2 MW)wind turbines.

Table 1 Isles Wind Farm Domestic Equivalent CalculationTurbine power Up to 2 MWNumber of turbines 24Wind Farm Power Output Up to 48 MWWind Farm Annual EnergyOutput Up to 117,734 kWh

Average House AnnualElectricity Consumption 4,222 kWh

Number of Houses Suppliedby Wind Farm Up to 27,000

1.6.3 The wind turbines will be able to withstand extreme weather conditions such as extreme wind speeds,flooding, lightning strike and ice throw. All of the wind turbines will be fitted with sensors which willautomatically shut down the turbines should very high wind speeds occur which exceed safe operatinglimits. This will prevent excessive wear and damage to the gear box. In the event that a wind turbine is


struck by lightning the turbine will effectively and safely conduct the lightning strike into the earth. Thewind turbines will be fitted with vibration sensors which detect any imbalance which might be caused byicing allowing the affected turbine(s) to be shut down.

1.7 Decommissioning1.7.1 A plan for decommissioning will be agreed with DCC nearer the time. Current best practice includes the

removal of all above ground structures; the removal of all underground structures to at least one metrebelow ground level with structures beneath this level to remain in the ground. This approach isconsidered less environmentally damaging than the complete removal of all above and below groundstructures from the site.

1.8 Combating Climate Change1.8.1 Change in global and regional temperatures and precipitation patterns is a natural phenomenon and

there have been a number of cooling and warming periods recorded over the last millennium. However inthe late 1980s a growing concern emerged that climate change was being influenced by anthropogenicactivity beyond the normal fluctuations. The main contributing activities include emissions of greenhousegases (in particular carbon dioxide (CO2), sulphur dioxide (SO2) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx) into theatmosphere and other effects such as land use changes which reduce the ability of the naturalenvironment to recycle these gases. A significant proportion (56%) of the increased greenhouse gasemissions arise from the burning of traditional fossil fuels such as coal, oil and gas for energy generation,heat generation and transportation. Reducing the extent to which electricity is produced by burning fossilfuels will reduce the amount of harmful greenhouse gases released into the atmosphere.

1.8.2 One of the principal contributors to the build-up of greenhouse gasses is the use of fossil fuels inelectricity generation. In the UK, 66% of CO2 emissions are attributable to electricity and heat production(BERR, 2007). Reducing the extent to which electricity is produced by burning fossil fuels will reduce theamount of harmful greenhouse gases released into the atmosphere.

1.8.3 Power from the wind has been harnessed for centuries through the use of windmills. The use of windturbines to generate electricity has expanded rapidly since the energy crises in the 1970s when it firstbecame evident that reliance on fossil fuels was unsustainable. Wind turbines are the most establishedform of renewable energy technology, with other technologies (such as tidal, wave and solar) laggingbehind in generating potential and commercial terms.

1.8.4 Wind farms offer other important advantages. Firstly, they contribute to a reduction in our dependence onthe finite reserves of fossil fuels, which are being rapidly depleted and the costs of which are rapidlyescalating. Secondly, they reduce our dependence on oil and gas imports and increase our self-sufficiency in energy production. Wind farm developments are also reversible. This key feature allows asite to be decommissioned to the extent that no visible trace of the wind farm is apparent, thus allowing asite to retain its environmental legacy. Existing land uses, such as livestock grazing, can also generallycontinue alongside an operational wind farm.

1.8.5 The UK is the windiest country in Europe, with over 40% of the available resource. Advances andimprovements in technology have resulted in the financial cost of wind power falling close to those of

conventional sources of electricity. In addition, the life cycle carbon cost of wind power is significantlysmaller than that of other forms of conventional and renewable energy production (BWEA, 2008).

1.8.6 It is clear from international, European and UK policy, strategy and plans that there is a need to promoteenergy production from renewable sources and to cut CO2 emissions. The Climate Change Act 2008creates legally binding targets of a reduction of at least 80% of greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, witha reduction in CO2 by at least 26% by 2020 against a 1990 baseline.

1.8.7 In July 2009 UK Renewable Energy Strategy was published which sets out the means by which the UKwill meet its legally-binding targets under the EU Renewable Energy Directive. The UK’s contribution tothe EU target is to increase the share of renewables in the energy mix to 15% by 2020, which representsa seven-fold increase in UK renewable energy production. The UK Low Carbon Transition Plan was alsopublished in July 2009 and sets out how the UK will cut emissions, maintain secure energy supplies,maximise economic opportunities and protect the most vulnerable.

1.8.8 The Planning Statement, submitted with the planning application, outlines the guidance and policiesdirectly related to the Isles Wind Farm.

1.9 The Local Challenge1.9.1 Onshore wind farms above 50 MW output are considered to be nationally significant and are considered

in accordance with National Policy Statements (NPS). Whilst the Isles Wind Farm is smaller in scale,these NPSs are still a material consideration in decision making.

1.9.2 The NPS for Energy sets out Governmental policy on climate change, and how the energy sector candeliver new low carbon energy infrastructure. Potential benefits (e.g., job creation, contribution to energyinfrastructure needs) should be considered alongside potential adverse impacts, whilst also consideringlong-term, cumulative impacts, and measures to avoid/reduce/compensate for such adverse effects. TheNPS’s for Energy note that “wind is the most well established and currently the most economically viablesource of renewable energy available in the UK.”

1.9.3 At the end of March 2012, the National Planning Policy Framework (‘NPPF’) was published by theGovernment (Department for Communities and Local Government). The NPPF took effect on publicationand replaced most Planning Policy Guidance notes (‘PPGs’) and Planning Policy Statements (‘PPSs’)that were previously pertinent as material considerations in relation to planning decisions in England. Inthis context, it is noted that the NPPF maintains the national policy support, as previously set out inrelevant preceding PPS’s, for the transition to a low carbon economy and encourages the use ofrenewable resources for instance by the development of renewable energy.

1.9.4 The Planning Practice Guidance for Renewable and Low Carbon Energy (2013) provides advice on theplanning issues associated with the development of renewable energy. It will be kept under review andshould be read alongside other planning practice guidance and the NPPF. The guidance states thatplanning for renewable and low carbon energy is important as increasing the amount of energy fromrenewable and low carbon technologies will help to make sure the UK has a secure energy supply,reduce greenhouse gas emissions to slow down climate change and stimulate investment in new jobsand businesses.


1.9.5 The Sedgefield Borough Local Plan (2007) (saved policies) has no specific policies on wind farms orrenewable energy but proposals regarding renewable energy are to be assessed against how theycomply with any other relevant policies in the plan.

1.10 Environmental Impacts1.10.1 An assessment was carried out by technical specialists of the potential environmental impacts of the

proposed Development, which are summarised in the following sections.

Landscape and Visual Assessment

1.10.2 The purpose of the landscape and visual assessment is to identify the effects that the proposedDevelopment may have on the landscape and visual resource of the study area (which is focused withina 20 km radius of the proposed Development), and assess which of these effects are likely to besignificant. The assessment covers four categories of potential effects; physical effects, which coverslandscape elements on the site; effects on landscape character, which includes landscape charactertypes and designated areas; effects on views, which includes 23 representative viewpoints around thestudy area (including viewpoints in settlements, on roads and on public rights of way) and a series ofprincipal visual receptors such as settlements and routes; and cumulative effects, which covers thepotential cumulative effects on landscape character receptors and views.

1.10.3 The final layout of the proposed Development has been designed to take account of technical, economicand environmental constraints, and has achieved a turbine layout which relates to the scale and landformof the site and its surroundings.

1.10.4 The assessment has found that the proposed Development will have localised significant effects onlandscape character and views in the vicinity of the site. All of the significant landscape and visual effectsare considered to be long-term through the lifetime of the proposed Development but are temporary asthey are reversible upon decommissioning.

1.10.5 The majority of the identified significant effects are contained within approximately 5 km of the nearestturbine in the proposed Development, and all are within a maximum of 7 km of the nearest turbine.Significant effects include the following:

The landscape character of the lowland carrs landscape type; lowland plain landscape type up toapproximately 4 km from the proposed Development; and limestone escarpment landscape type inthe areas around Chilton and Bishop Middleham, and south of Kirk Merrington and Ferryhill;

The landscape character of very limited parts of Hardwick Park RPG (as seen in Viewpoint 15, Figure7.27 of the ES) and limited parts of Windlestone Hall RPG;

Views from footpaths within approximately 2 km of the proposed Development where there arephysical effects or clear and open visibility of the proposed Development (as seen in Viewpoints 1, 2,3, 4 and 9);

Views from the A1(M) – approximately 6.8 km northbound and 8.5 km southbound; the A167 -approximately 4.4 km northbound and 5.1 km southbound (as seen in Viewpoint 10); and the A689 -approximately 3.2 km eastbound (and very intermittently on a further 1.7 km stretch) and 5.5 kmwestbound;

Views from a 6 km stretch of the East Coast Main Line, travelling either northbound or southbound;

Views from some very limited locations in Aycliffe Village, Bishop Middleham (as seen in Viewpoint14), Brafferton, Coundon, Fishburn and Great Stainton, where there is clear and open visibility of theproposed Development;

Views from some locations in Bradbury (as seen in Viewpoint 3), Chilton (as seen in Viewpoint 12),Ferryhill (as seen in Viewpoint 13), Kirk Merrington, Mordon (as seen in Viewpoint 4), NewtonAycliffe, and Sedgefield, where there is clear and open visibility of the proposed Development; and

Views from minor roads and footpaths to the south, east and south-east of the site (as seen inViewpoints 5, 6, 7, 8, and 16).

1.10.6 The addition of the proposed Development is also predicted to give rise to some localised significantcumulative effects, which will arise either as a result of the addition of the proposed Development to thebaseline cumulative situation of operational and consented wind farms or from the interaction betweenthe two turbine groups in the proposed Development, and are as follows:

The landscape character of the lowland carrs landscape type; lowland plain landscape type in thearea to the east of the proposed Development; and the limestone escarpment landscape type in theareas around Trimdon and Fishburn;

The landscape character of very limited eastern parts of Hardwick Park RPG and very limited parts ofWindlestone Hall RPG;

Views from footpaths within approximately 2 km of the proposed Development where there is clearand open visibility of the proposed Development as two clusters or where Moorhouse is also clearlyvisible (as seen in Viewpoints 1, 2, 3 and 4);

Views from the A1(M) – approximately 6.8 km northbound and 8.5 km southbound; 2.9 km of theA167 northbound and southbound (as seen in Viewpoint 10); and the A689 - approximately 3.2 kmeastbound (and very intermittently on a further 1.7 km stretch) and 5.5 km westbound;

Views from a 6 km stretch of the East Coast Main Line railway, travelling either northbound orsouthbound;

Views from some very limited locations in Brafferton, Fishburn, Great Stainton and Newton Aycliffewhere there is clear and open visibility of the proposed Development;

Views from some limited locations in Bradbury (as seen in Viewpoint 3), Mordon and Sedgefieldwhere there is clear and open visibility of the proposed Development; and

Views from minor roads and footpaths to the south and east of the site (as seen in Viewpoints 6, 7and 16).

1.10.7 When application stage wind farms are also considered, there is potential for an additional significantcumulative effect to arise. This will affect some very limited parts of Trimdon, and will arise when theapplication-stage wind farm site at Harap Road is also considered as well as baseline cumulative windfarms.

1.10.8 The effects on all other landscape receptors, viewpoints and principal visual receptors in the study areawill be not significant, including Durham Cathedral and Durham Castle World Heritage Site; the DurhamCoast Heritage Coast; 16 Registered Parks and Gardens; a number of areas that are locally designatedfor their scenic value, including SLAs and AHLVs; major roads such as the A19, A66, A68, and A177;national cycle routes; and a number of settlements around the study area, including Durham, Darlington,Bishop Auckland, and Hartlepool. Effects on the physical elements of the site that will be impacted by theproposed Development – arable agricultural ground cover and hedgerows - will also be not significant.


Noise

1.10.9 The noise impact assessment identified and assessed the potential noise effects that the proposedDevelopment may have on noise sensitive receptors in the surrounding communities. Operational noisefrom the wind farm was considered as well as cumulative noise impacts associated with wind farm inconjunction with other nearby wind farms. A full assessment of noise and vibration during constructionand decommissioning of the wind farm was not included as these are deemed to be short term and canbe controlled through the adoption of good, standard practice.

1.10.10 Good construction practices to minimise the nuisance from noise during construction include:

Using construction vehicles which are fitted with effective exhaust silencers and properly maintainedin good working order;

Use of electrical equipment and machines where possible, rather than diesel machines, especially insensitive locations;

Restricting the idling of machines when they are not in use;

Installing construction hoarding if necessary, such as around generators or pumps; and

Restricting construction hours on site to normal working hours, with no night-time work.

1.10.11 The noise assessment was carried out in accordance with UK Government endorsed guidelines, knownas ETSU-R-97 – The Assessment and Rating of Wind Turbine Noise. This guidance specifies that noiselimits should be set relative to existing background noise levels at the nearest dwellings to the wind farm,and that these limits should reflect the variation in background noise with wind speed. Separate noiselimits apply for the day and night time periods. The daytime noise limits are chosen to protect the outsideenjoyment of the property and the night time limits are set to prevent sleep disturbance indoors,assuming the windows are slightly open.

1.10.12 In order to assess measure the background noise levels around the site, noise monitoring locations wereagreed through consultation with the Local Authority’s Environmental Health Officer and noise monitoringwas undertaken at the following 11 dwellings:

Chapel View, Bradbury, TS21 7ET;

Sonnyhurst, 1 The Copse, Mordon, TS21 2JU;

Mordon Lodge, Mordon, TS21 2HD;

Howe Hills, Mordon TS21 2HG;

Elstob Hall, TS21 1NH;

Lea Hall, Stillington, Stockton-on-Tees TS21 1NG;

Preston East Farm, Strudwick, DL5 6JH;

2 Carrside Lane, Rushyford, DL17 0LH;

Woodside, Nunstation Grange, Rushford DL17 0LH;

Swan Carr Farm, Farm, Ferryhill DL17 0LQ; and

Great Isle Farm, Farm, Ferryhill DL17 0LQ.

1.10.13 Noise monitoring was undertaken at these locations between 1 July 2013 and 24 July 2014. Wind speedand wind direction was also measured at the site during this time. Figure 3 is an example of the noisemonitoring equipment used at the Chapel View site in Bradbury, looking south. The ES contains aphotograph of each of the monitoring locations.

1.10.14 The model used for the noise assessment used candidate turbines that are representative of the likelyturbine that will be installed at the site.

1.10.15 The assessment established that all but one of the site locations met the derived day time limits. At HoweHills there is an exceedance of the lower day time limit; however the higher daytime noise limits was notexceeded and therefore the noise effect at Howe Hills is considered not significant.

1.10.16 A Community Liaison Group will also be established to ensure that local residents are kept informed ofconstruction activities and progress. If any effects to noise receptors do arise during construction they willbe short term in nature and not significant assuming the appropriate mitigation is undertaken.

1.10.17 Cumulative effects have been assessed for other wind farms that are either in the scoping, application,consented, or operation stages of the planning process. It is predicted that wind farm cumulative impactswill be neutral.

1.10.18 Overall, the assessment established there will be no significant effect on noise receptors associated withthe proposed Development.

Figure 3: Chapel View Monitoring Location (Looking South)

Ecology

1.10.19 The ecology impact assessment identified and assessed the potential effects that the proposedDevelopment may have on plants, animals and habitats. The results of data searches and a range offield surveys were used to record the existing environment within the Development boundary.

1.10.20 Field surveys were undertaken between 2008 and 2013 to identify key ecological features with theDevelopment boundary. Surveys were undertaken for great crested newt, badger, bats, water vole andotter, in addition to a walkover survey. These surveys have provided the environmental baselineconditions in order for the overall significance of effect to be assessed.


1.10.21 There is one nationally designated site within the proposed Development boundary; Railway Stell WestSSSI. This is a site that is an important fenland habitat and water quality/flow in the ditch is important tothe species that grow there. The design of the wind farm has ensured that no turbines are within 110 mof the SSSI and the construction of access tracks and the cable works will be done in such a way as toprevent any negative effects on the SSSI. A minimum of a 10 m exclusion zone will be enforced aroundthe SSSI during construction and the cable will be laid using horizontal directional drilling.

1.10.22 The habitats that will be lost to the development include arable, improved grassland, semi-improvedgrassland and localised sections of riparian habitat and hedgerows and mature trees. The main habitatsthat will be affected are arable and improved grassland which are both common and widespreadhabitats, and equate to 85% of the total area within the proposed Development boundary. With mitigationthe overall effects on habitats during construction and decommissioning are considered to be notsignificant. For example, access tracks will be kept to a minimum and temporary working areas will be re-instated on completion of the works. Compensation habitat will be created between field boundaries andnew access tracks and two arable fields will be converted into semi-improved grassland.

1.10.23 The wind farm has been designed so that no areas of woodland are lost, and turbines will be locatedmore than 100 m from woodland. Access tracks will be routed to avoid the need to remove individualtrees. The removal of sections of hedgerows for access tracks will be kept to a minimum and gaps inhedgerows will be planted where possible to improve this habitat within the development area.

1.10.24 The faunal species that are expected to be affected by the development are badger, bats, otter andwater vole. During construction and operation any effect on faunal species are expected not besignificant taking account of mitigation measures. For example, turbines have been located away frompotential sett building habitat and pre-construction surveys will be undertaken in order to protect anybadger setts within the vicinity of any construction work. Similar surveys will also be undertaken toassess the presence of water vole and/or otter.

1.10.25 Wind farm design has ensured that trees which have been identified as having potential to support a batroost are retained. The proposed mitigation will benefit all species that will be affected by the wind farm.New sections of hedgerows for bats will benefit badger and birds, especially if they are planted with berrybearing species. The creation of additional habitats for wading birds will also be of benefit for bats as itwill provide good quality foraging habitat away from turbines.

1.10.26 Overall the effect of the proposed Development on ecological receptors is not expected to be significant.

Ornithology

1.10.27 The ornithology assessment identifies and assesses the potential effects that the proposed Developmentmay have on ornithology features. The baseline established by the surveys was used to assess thepotential ornithological impacts of the proposed Development. The assessment focuses on the widelyrecognised potential impact on birds associated with wind farm development and operation. Theseinclude the potential loss of breeding, roosting and feeding habitat, displacement and disruption ofbreeding birds, effects on the use of the site by wintering birds, and the potential mortality of certainspecies vulnerable to mid-air collisions with rotating turbine blades.

1.10.28 Breeding bird surveys and non-breeding bird surveys were undertaken in 2011 and 2012. Flights oftarget species (such as Schedule 1 and Annex 1 birds of prey and owls, all waders, geese and other

waterfowl) using vantage point observations. Vantage point locations were selected that providedadequate views over the wind farm, including the proposed wind turbine locations and the airspacesurrounding them. The results of these walkover surveys and bird counts was then analysed andassessed, while the database of flights recorded was used in a collision risk model.

1.10.29 Due to irregular flooding, bird numbers fluctuate at this site. Consequently the bird interest of the site isinconsistent and populations recorded there can fluctuate markedly. The non-breeding bird walkoversurveys reflected this, with large numbers of lapwing and golden plover in particular present duringperiods when Preston Carrs and other isolated areas of farmland were flooded and during mildconditions during October and November 2011.

1.10.30 The breeding walkover surveys found good breeding populations of red list farmland birds includingskylark, yellowhammer, yellow wagtail, grey partridge and corn bunting. Most were quite widespread withthe exception of tree sparrow, which was predominantly associated with isolated colonies. A smallnumber of lapwing and curlew also bred near Preston Carrs.

1.10.31 The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) advised that the Durham Carrs are identified as aHabitat Creation and Enhancement Area and has the potential for wetland creation. Mitigation measureswere discussed with RSPB, Natural England and DCC in March 2012, including the creation of theturbine free habitat enhancement zone within the centre of the site, which was looked upon favourably. Ahabitat management area will be created within this turbine free area with the goal of attracting wadingbirds and waterfowl away from the wind turbines in the north and south of the development (seeAppendix 10.9 of the ES). Upon review of interim collision risk model results for 2011-2012, NaturalEngland, RSPB and DCC agreed in June 2012 that the creation of this new improved wet habitat shouldmitigate the collision risk by successfully attracting birds away from the turbines.

1.10.32 The potential negative effects of the proposal include habitat loss and disturbance during theconstruction and decommissioning phases, permanent habitat loss during the operation phase,displacement of birds from an area up to 500 m around the turbines during operation and bird fatalitiesarising from airborne birds colliding with wind turbines.

1.10.33 The successful implementation of mitigation will significantly reduce effects such as collision mortality byattracting birds away from the turbines and will compensate for habitat losses and displacement effectsby creating and maintaining very high quality habitats over a substantial area. The overall impact of theproposed Development is at worst Neutral and for some species (corn bunting and potentially barn owl inparticular; the latter was rarely recorded and there were no records of breeding in the Study Area) slightbeneficial.

Geology and Ground Conditions

1.10.34 An assessment on geology, soils, hydrogeology and potential ground contamination was undertakenbased on the collection and interpretation of a wide range of data, a preliminary ground investigation, andother readily available published materials.

1.10.35 The development site is mainly underlain by historic lake deposits (silt, clay, peat and some sand) andglacial deposits. Soils in part of the development site have been identified as potentially Best and MostVersatile Agricultural Land. The small footprint of the proposed Development will not have a significanteffect on the use of this agricultural land. The cable routes will follow those for the access tracks wherepossible to minimise the area of disturbance.


1.10.36 Mineral Safeguarding sand and gravel deposits have been identified underlying small areas of thedevelopment site. The majority of the deposits will not be permanently sterilised by the proposeddevelopment and can be extracted, if required, after decommissioning.

1.10.37 Slight potential effects resulting from the proposed development during the construction and operationalphase have been identified in hydrogeology/ aquifers on site. Once appropriate mitigation measures areput in place the residual significance of effects would be neutral, and therefore not significant. Forexample, an inventory of all chemicals, fuels and oils will be kept up to date and available on site, andappropriate spillage and containment equipment and materials will be at key locations.

1.10.38 In conclusion, the impact assessment on the geological, soils and hydrogeological environment has notidentified any significant effects on site or its vicinity if appropriate mitigation is undertaken successfully.

Hydrology and Water Quality

1.10.39 This section gives a summary of the hydrology baseline conditions of the proposed Development siteand highlights the potential effects as a result of the proposed Development. As pollutants couldpropagate downstream, the spatial extent provides assessment of the environment downstream inwatercourses that are within the study area.

1.10.40 Within the study area there are six Main Rivers which are managed by the Environment Agency: theRiver Skerne, Rushyford Beck, Woodham Burn, Railway Stell, Mordon Stell System and Tank Stell.There are a number of Ordinary Watercourses that are in this case managed by the Local Lead FloodAuthority (LLFA) DCC. The majority of watercourses drain to the River Skerne which is part of theNorthumbria River Basin.

1.10.41 The proposed Development has the potential to negatively affect the surface water environment duringthe construction stage from spillages, disturbance to banks and bed of watercourses, silt in runoff, anddisposal of waste water generated from the construction site. Silt management measures will be in placeon-site to protect sensitive receptors, such as Railway Stell SSSI, the River Skerne and Woodham Burn.Chemical spills and leaks will be minimised on-site by implementing good management and constructionmethods and techniques. The detailed design of the proposed Development, such as culvertspecifications will be finalised in consultation with relevant authorities and all works will be carried outwith relevant consents and permits in place. Watercourse crossing method statements will be put inplace prior to construction.

1.10.42 During the operation phase negative effects may occur from increased surface runoff from an increasedimpermeable surface area, and an increase flood risk as a result of watercourse crossings. Granularmaterial will be used for the access tracks, which will allow some water to infiltrate, and reduce theamount of runoff from this area. Watercourse crossings and culverts will be designed in accordance withEA guidelines to minimise the potential for blockages.

1.10.43 With the exception of access tracks in the northern sector of the proposed Development site and allwatercourse crossings, the infrastructure will be built at grade level i.e., ground level. The increase inimpermeable surfaces would not change the flood response within the proposed Development site orneighbouring land. The flood mitigation also ensures any temporary land take areas would be fullyreinstated following the construction period to reduce the areas of semi-impermeable surfaces.

Archaeology and Cultural Heritage

1.10.44 The cultural heritage assessment has identified the potential cultural heritage constraints in advance ofthe construction of the proposed Development. This assessment included a review of recordedarchaeological sites and historical information. Additional recorded archaeological sites up to 5 km fromthe proposed Development boundary were considered for effects upon their setting. For the preparationof the assessment, data was collected from the Durham Historic Environment Record, the EnglishHeritage Archive Service, the County Durham Records Office and Library, Clayport Library, a review ofaerial photographs and the results of geophysical survey. A walkover survey and setting assessmentwas also undertaken.

1.10.45 Within the 2 km study area there are 163 previously recorded heritage assets. These range from theprehistoric to modern period but mostly relate to the medieval and post-medieval agriculturaldevelopment of the study area. There is the potential for the discovery of previously unrecordedarchaeological remains although this is considered to be higher for the prehistoric periods, especially onthe higher ground within the proposed Development.

1.10.46 Although most of the assets identified within the site boundary will be avoided by the proposedDevelopment, there is the potential for physical effects on a number of sites identified as part of thiswork, and for previously unrecorded archaeology to survive. For instance there is predicted to be a smallto medium negative effect on 11 of the archaeological sites identified in the baseline.

1.10.47 The proposed Development will also have a negative effect upon the setting of some heritage assets.There is expected to be a significant effect upon the setting of one heritage asset - Hardwick Parklocated approximately 2.5 km north east of the site, near Sedgefield which comprises listed buildings, aGrade II* registered park and garden and conservation area. The assessment concluded the proposedDevelopment will not significantly adverse affect any other heritage assets.

1.10.48 With appropriate mitigation undertaken during the construction phase, namely a watching brief, directimpact on heritage assets is considered acceptable. Whilst there is no mitigation available that will reducethe effects on setting during the operation phase of the proposed Development, the overall effect onarchaeology and cultural heritage is considered to be not significant.

Socio-Economics and Tourism

1.10.49 The socio economics assessment identified the potential effects that the proposed Development mayhave on the socio-economic and tourism resource of the study area. In addition to a desk basedassessment and site visit, consultation was undertaken with the British Horse Society (BHS), theRamblers Society and the DCC Access and Rights of Way Officer.

1.10.50 Overall the Office of National Statistics (ONS) shows that considerable numbers of County Durham haveissues with relatively low income, unemployment, poor health, and education. There is a significantlyhigher proportion of the County Durham populations (45.4%) living in the 30% most deprived areas thancompared nationally (Durham County Council, 2010). Renewable energy can contribute to the economythrough investment and employment in a number of sectors.

1.10.51 In terms of the local economy, minor beneficial effects are expected during the construction anddecommissioning phases with contract staff utilising the local facilities such as accommodation, shops


and cafes/restaurants. The construction of the proposed Development will involve a significantinvestment by E.ON and has the potential to create jobs both directly and indirectly within the local area.In addition, E.ON will provide a Community Benefit Fund of £5,000 per MW of installed capacity per yearfor this proposed Development. Business rate revenues (£338,000 per year) from the proposedDevelopment will also be kept by DCC, and they will be discounted in the calculation of any levy thatmight be applied to growth in business rate revenues.

1.10.52 The proposed Development site has 15 footpaths and seven bridleways. There is also a range of visitorattractions, resources and services which cater for tourists and visitors such as hotels, bed andbreakfasts, self catering accommodation and restaurants within 20 km of the site boundary. Theproposed access tracks which will be used for construction (and also during operation) cross twofootpaths and two bridleways. Users of these rights of way will be informed of any diversions ortemporary closures which are necessary through appropriate signage and information boards.

1.10.53 Turbine 7 is located at a distance of approximately 54 m from a footpath, however it is located at adistance so that, once operational, the blades will not oversail the footpath. All other turbines are locatedover 200 m from the nearest footpath. There are six bridleways located within the site boundary, four ofwhich are within 150 - 200 m of a turbine (Turbines 20, 21, 22 and 23) at their closest point. Theseturbines are proposed to be up to 101 m to tip and are located over 150 m away from the bridleway.Consultation undertaken as part of the earlier studies with the South Durham Bridleways and RuralAccess Group suggested a minimum separation distance of 100 m from bridleways traversing throughand around the proposed site would be acceptable.

1.10.54 Consideration will be given to the safety and free passage of horse riders and other users of the localroad network. Construction workers will be given clear horse safety warning and safe passing places forriders in appropriate areas to minimize disruption to the users of bridleways. At the request of the BHS,consideration will be given to the improvements of the surface of the bridleways following constructionand the improvement to the numerous gates along the bridleways in the Development boundary. TheBHS has also requested that local riders are notified when the turbines at the proposed Development areerected but not operational so that riders can familiarize their horses to the turbines.

1.10.55 Community impacts resulting from traffic generation to and from the site are deemed to be temporary,localised and only occur during the construction and decommissioning phases. During the constructionphase, the communities located alongside the A689, A167, A1(M), A66, A66(M), A1150 and the A67 arelikely to be affected when abnormal loads deliver the turbine components. These settlements are:

Bradbury;

Sedgefield;

Great Stainton;

Rushyford; and

Elstob.

1.10.56 The main traffic effects are associated with the increase in vehicle movements during construction alongthe local roads leading to the proposed Development, such as Bishopton Lane / Elstob Lane and throughBradbury Village. E.ON will liaise closely with the Highways Agency and DCC to prepare a TrafficManagement Plan.

1.10.57 In conclusion, there are not expected to by any significant residual effects on socio economics as a resultof the proposed Development.

Traffic, Transport and Access

1.10.58 Potential traffic, transport and access effects during the construction and operational phases of theproposed Development were considered as part of the assessment; however operational traffic wasconsidered to be negligible and was not considered in detail.

1.10.59 Although the construction traffic movements will only be temporary, an increase in traffic could adverselyaffect the users of those roads and the land uses that front them, including the relevant occupiers andusers. In order to assess the impacts of the proposed Development, the existing baseline conditionswere established. An assessment was then undertaken on the surrounding highway network todetermine its ability to accommodate the expected volume of construction traffic and the increase intraffic compared to the baseline traffic flows along the roads used by construction traffic.

1.10.60 Current proposals are for turbine components to be delivered to South Teesside Port. From SouthTeesside Port, three routes have been identified to enable the loads to reach the site.

Abnormal Load Route

1.10.61 The proposed access route for the abnormal load delivery vehicles accessing the northern area of thesite is to route by travelling westbound on the A66 and turning onto the A1032 and then the A19 at thePortrack Interchange. Vehicles would then travel north on the A19 until its junction with the A689 wherethey turn to travel west, pass over the A1(M) and turn south at Rushyford to travel on the A167 and thenturn off the A167 at Lowfield Farm.

1.10.62 For the eastern area of the site, vehicles will route similar to the northern area, except they will turn offthe A689 approximately 200 m before the A1(M), vehicles will turn to travel south and pass through thevillage of Bradbury and turn west into the site access, to be located prior to the East Coast Mainline(ECML).

1.10.63 For the southern area of the site, abnormal loads travelling from South Teesside Port would travelwestbound on the A66 until the village of Little Burdon and onto the A1150 for a short distance beforeturning north at Great Burdon onto Bishopton Lane / Elstob Lane and then turning west into the siteaccess.

1.10.64 The abnormal loads routes described above provide the most suitable routes to the site as they seek toavoid local communities and utilise large, well maintained roads as much as practically possible.

1.10.65 A route access study has been undertaken and confirms the suitability of these routes and the extent ofany mitigation measures identified to facilitate the transportation of the turbine components.

Construction Traffic Route

1.10.66 For the northern area of the site, construction traffic will route from Junction 60 of the A1(M), travelwestbound on the A689 before turning south at Rushyford to travel on the A167 and then turn off theA167 at Lowfield Farm.

1.10.67 For the eastern area of the site, construction traffic will leave the A1(M) at Junction 60 and travel east onthe A689 for approximately 200 m before turning to travel south and passing through the village ofBradbury and turning west into the site access.


1.10.68 For the southern area of the site, construction traffic has two principle routing options. HGVs would likelytravel via the A1(M), A66(M) and north on the A66 before turning to travel west on the A1150 for a shortdistance before turning north at Great Burdon onto Bishopton Lane / Elstob Lane and the site access.Alternatively, vehicles may route via Junction 59 of the A1(M) and travel south on the A67 and then easton the A1150 towards Great Burdon and onto Bishopton Lane / Elstob Lane.

1.10.69 The main traffic effects resulting from the proposed Development are associated with the increase invehicle movements during construction along the local roads leading to the Development. Theconstruction of the proposed Development is anticipated to take approximately 12 months. Theassociated traffic flows will vary over that time as different elements of the site are developed andconstructed. During the construction phase, the communities located alongside the A689, A167, A1(M),A66, A66(M), A1150 and the A67 are likely to be affected when abnormal loads deliver the turbinecomponents, as detailed above under Socio-Economics.

1.10.70 Whilst the percentage increases are likely to be high on the local roads, this is more as a result of the lowtraffic flow along these roads. At worst, the frequency of vehicle movements is expected to be onemovement every five minutes on the 24 individual days on which the concrete for the turbine foundationswill be delivered. E.ON will liaise closely with the Highways Agency and DCC to prepare a TrafficManagement Plan, which will likely contain details of the access routes, identify any points along theaccess route(s) that require engineering works (e.g., the removal of street furniture), traffic numbers,delivery timings, and signage and escort requirements. A Traffic Management Plan will be developedand agreed with the relevant stakeholders in order to control and mitigate effects associated with vehiclemovements.

1.10.71 Discussions will be held with the PROW Officer to discuss any temporary diversion or closure of anypublic footpath and bridleways during the construction stage of the development. A method statementwill be provided which will include a diversion of the public footpath and bridleways.

1.10.72 As a result of the proposed mitigation, any potential effects relating to traffic, transport and access areconsidered to be not significant.

Infrastructure, Telecommunications and Shadow Flicker

1.10.73 The Infrastructure, Telecommunications and Shadow Flicker assessment considered the potential forimpacts to infrastructure assets and telecommunication links, as well as the potential for impactsresulting from shadow flicker.

1.10.74 Consultation was undertaken with a number of service providers to confirm the location of any potentiallyaffected infrastructure assets and telecommunication links. A number of telecommunication links andinfrastructure assets were identified within the Development boundary, however any potential impactswere avoided during the design process by siting wind turbines away from these assets and therefore nosignificant impact is expected.

1.10.75 Under certain combinations of geographical position, time of day and year, wind speed and winddirection, the sun may pass behind the rotor and cast a shadow over neighbouring buildings’ windows.When the blades rotate, and the shadow passes a window, to a person within that room the shadowappears to flick on and off; this effect is known as shadow flicker.

1.10.76 An assessment of the potential for shadow flicker that may occur at neighbouring dwellings wasundertaken. The shadow flicker analysis found that the maximum occurrence of shadow flicker isapproximately 63 hours per year at the worst affected dwelling with the majority of dwellings experiencingless than 20 hours per year. It is considered that shadow flicker resulting from this scheme will have noadverse health effects. The actual instances of shadow flicker will always be less than that predicted bythe model given the use of the worst case assumptions. The occurrence of shadow flicker is onlypossible during the operation of the wind farm (i.e., when the rotor blades are turning, and when the skyis clear enough to cast shadows). Based on historical Met Office data, the number of sunshine hours inDurham is less than 30% of all daylight hours averaged over a year; as a result the maximum occurrenceof shadow flicker calculated in the assessment would more likely be approximately 18 hours per year.

1.10.77 If shadow flicker is shown to cause an issue, shadow flicker controls can be installed and controlledthrough the use of a suitable planning condition. Therefore there will be no significant effect.

Air Safeguarding

1.10.78 This section presents a summary of the Aviation Impact Assessment that was undertaken to assess theproposed Development for potential effects on aviation interests in the area of the proposed site. Theassessment considered the potential for the proposed Development to have an effect on the aviationinterests of Air Traffic Control Radar, National Air Traffic Services (NATS) and the Ministry of Defence(MOD) either through physical obstruction or impacts to radar / air traffic services

1.10.79 The proposed Development is located within operational range of, and will be detected by, the PrimarySurveillance Radar (PSR) at Durham Tees Valley Airport (DTVA), RAF Leeming and NATS Great DunFell. The effects on the NATS Great Dun Fell PSR are predicted to be not significant as the area isassessed to be of low significance to en-route operations.

1.10.80 There is expected to be a technical impact on the PSR operated at DTVA as all turbines are in line ofsight and will be detected and displayed on the air traffic control display system. Similarly, all turbines arewithin line of sight of the PSR at RAF Leeming and are predicted to be detected and displayed on the AirTraffic Controller’s display. Discussions are ongoing with DTVA to determine the requirement and formatof any mitigation.. Consultation is ongoing with MOD concerning the impact on the RAF Leeming PSR. Itis Osprey’s opinion that the effects of the radar clutter associated with The Isles can be mitigatedoperationally – that is through procedural avoidance of the locality of the wind farm.

1.10.81 E.ON is discussing potential mitigation solutions with DTV which if adopted would address the effects.The significance of the impact on RAF Leeming is not fully understood and discussions are ongoing withMOD.

1.10.82 There are a number of other applications within the 10 km of the site that have objections from MOD forRAF Leeming and from DTVA. Given the layout of the site, with the two distinct groups of turbines, thereis a potential cumulative issue within the site itself. Consultation is ongoing with both MOD and DTVA toascertain the extent of the cumulative impact and the requirement for radar mitigation.

1.10.83 Based on the assumption that the potential effects described above can be addressed through dialogueand/or effectively mitigated, the overall effect on aviation assets is considered to be not significant.


1.11 Conclusion1.11.1 The potential effects of the proposed Development have been assessed in accordance with regulatory

requirements and good practice. The ES incorporates technical assessments of the proposeddevelopment based on the requisite legislation and the relevant planning policy framework. The EIA hasdemonstrated that environmental effects associated with the construction and operation of the proposedDevelopment have been avoided or minimised through the use of the ongoing design process and withthe application of mitigation measures.

1.11.2 The Isles Wind Farm is a well designed, sustainable development that will generate up to 48 MW ofrenewable energy. The proposed Development will provide a number of benefits; the scheme will resultin a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from the electricity generating industry by harnessing windas an alternative to the burning of fossil fuels, in line with the Government’s national energy goals. Ifconstructed, the 24 turbine wind farm at The Isles could meet the average electricity needs ofapproximately 27,000 homes.

1.11.3 E.ON’s continued investment in the north east will create jobs both directly and indirectly within the localarea. In addition to DCC benefiting from the business rates from the proposed Development (£338,000per year), a community benefit fund of £240,000 a year will also be provided by E.ON.

1.11.4 The potential environmental effects from the proposed Development are detailed in the ES and wherepossible, mitigation measures have been proposed to eliminate or reduce these effects. In particular, aniterative design process has allowed the layout to evolve in response to feedback from the communityand consultees, and environmental and technical investigations.

1.11.5 There are some significant effects remaining, particularly in relation to landscape and visual effects,which are not possible to mitigate further. Nonetheless, a key landscape and visual consideration madein the layout iteration process was the removal of turbines that were previously proposed for the centralarea that lies between the northern and southern turbine groups. The removal of these turbines hasbenefits in the reduction of effects on views from the village or Mordon and also in the increased distancebetween the village and the nearest turbine.

1.11.6 Overall the proposed Development is considered to have a few significant adverse environmental effectsand a few beneficial effects on the local economy. In many cases this is reliant on appropriate mitigationbeing undertaken effectively, as outlined in the ES. E.ON is committed to the implementation of all thosemeasures described.

volume 1 - e.on · the isles wind farm environmental statement volume 1 non-technical summary 1-1...

Documents