volume four: non-technical summary - iema · pdf filevolume four: non-technical summary...

Airvolution Energy

Environmental Statement Volume Four: Non-Technical Summary

DECEMBER 2012

Scottow Estate wind turbines

1

Airvolution Energy Scottow Estate wind turbines

Environmental Statement Non-Technical Summary

ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT: NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 A planning application has been submitted by Airvolution Energy Limited to North Norfolk District Council (NNDC) for the proposed development of two wind turbines on land at the Scottow Estate, near Coltishall, Norfolk. The location of the site is shown on Figure 1 below and the application area on drawing AEL006 at the back of this document.

Figure 1 Site location (not to scale) © Crown copyright licence number 100034829

2



1.2 The description of development included in the planning application is:

‘The development of two turbines up to a maximum blade tip height of 126.5 metres, together with a substation and control building, internal access tracks, associated hardstandings and other infrastructure, and access off Potspoon Hole.’

1.3 This wind turbine proposal responds to international, European and national policy related to the aim of reducing CO2 emissions, by contributing to the attainment of renewable energy targets, including those identified by the Kyoto Protocol (UNFCC 1997), European Directive 2009/28/EC on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable resources, National Policy Statement EN1: Overarching National Policy Statement for Energy 2011, and by NNDC Core Strategy Policy EN7.

2 THE APPLICANT

2.1 Airvolution Energy was created in March 2010 by ESB Novus Modus, the green investment fund of ESB, as a venture to develop, construct and operate small onshore wind projects in the UK through a multi-million pound investment. Airvolution Energy intends to be an important part of the UK renewable energy sector, and aims to form strong partnerships with landlords, businesses and local communities as part of its operations.

2.2 The primary focus of Airvolution Energy is on projects below 10 megawatts (MW) – typically involving three turbines or fewer – as well as sites with embedded generation possibilities which would provide opportunities to ‘lock in’ the cost of electricity over the long term. Airvolution Energy has an arrangement with Savills, whose role includes identifying sites and managing the planning work on the projects.

2.3 A multi-disciplinary team of consultants led by Savills Planning has worked with Airvolution Energy to formulate the proposals submitted with the planning application and undertake the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA).

3 PLANNING POLICY CONTEXT

3.1 At international, European and national levels, the recognition of the need to bring forward new renewable energy generation capacity is clear. Wind energy is acknowledged to be one of the most technically mature, viable and deliverable forms of renewable generation capacity. National policy thus supports renewable energy development in the form of onshore wind farms and clusters of turbines, provided that the local environmental, economic and social effects can be addressed satisfactorily.

National Policy Statement for Energy, EN-1

3.2 The National Policy Statement for Energy EN-1 was approved by Parliament in July 2011. Paragraph 1.2.1 states that ‘in England and Wales this NPS is likely to be a material consideration in decision making on applications that fall under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended)’.

3.3 Section 3.4 of EN-1 concerns ‘The role of renewable electricity generation’. It confirms that:

3



‘The UK has committed to sourcing 15% of its total energy (across the sectors of transport, electricity and heat) from renewable sources by 2020 and new projects need to continue to come forward urgently to ensure that we meet this target’ (para. 3.4.1).

‘Large scale deployment of renewables will help the UK to tackle climate change, reducing the UK’s emissions of carbon dioxide by over 750 million tonnes by 2030. It will also deliver up to half a million jobs by 2020 in the renewables sector’ (para. 3.4.2).

‘Onshore wind is the most well-established and currently the most economically viable source of renewable electricity available for future large-scale deployment in the UK’ (para. 3.4.3, first bullet-point).

3.4 EN-1 paragraph 3.4.1 sets out the UK commitments to sourcing 15% of energy from renewable sources by 2020. To hit this target, and to largely decarbonise the power sector by 2030, it is necessary to bring forward new renewable electricity generating projects as soon as possible. The need for new projects such as those proposed at the Scottow Estate is therefore urgent.

National Planning Policy Framework

3.5 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) sets out the Government's planning policies for England and how these are expected to be applied. The Ministerial foreword on page (i) opens with the statement that ‘The purpose of planning is to help achieve sustainable development. Sustainable means ensuring that better lives for ourselves don’t mean worse lives for future generations’. The proposed development is for the generation of electricity from a renewable source, namely wind, which is an inherently sustainable form of development.

3.6 The implications of the new policy framework for development control decisions are set out in the second part of NPPF paragraph 14. This states:

‘At the heart of the National Planning Policy Framework is a presumption in favour of sustainable development, which should be seen as a golden thread running through both plan-making and decision-taking. For decision-taking this means:

approving development proposals that accord with the development plan without delay; and

where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out-of-date, granting permission unless:

any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in this Framework taken as a whole; or

specific policies in this Framework indicate development should be restricted’

3.7 Alongside this, NPPF paragraph 12 confirms that the ‘National Planning Policy Framework does not change the statutory status of the development plan as the starting point for decision making’.

4



North Norfolk Planning Policy

3.8 For the application site, the statutory development plan is the North Norfolk Core Strategy (adopted September 2008). Following its abolition from 3 January 2013, the East of England Plan may only comprise a material consideration of limited weight.

3.9 Core Strategy Policy EN1 seeks to prevent development that would be significantly detrimental to the special qualities of The Broads and its setting. Policy SS2 relates to development in the countryside, and states that development will be limited to that which needs a rural location, which includes, inter alia, 'renewable energy projects'. Policy SS2 is supplemented by Policy SS4 and states that 'renewable energy proposals will be supported where impacts on amenity, landscape and wildlife are acceptable'.

3.10 Policy EN7 (Renewable Energy) sets out the priorities in the Core Strategy for renewable energy. Consistent with Government policy, the CS contains a policy that encourages renewable energy development taking account of the various benefits, and provided certain impacts are avoided. Paragraph 3.3.35 refers to the unsuitability of the Norfolk Coast AONB for large scale renewable energy development, and the need to refer to the Landscape Character Assessment in assessing the impacts of proposals outside the AONB. The key elements of Policy EN7 relevant to the Scottow Estate proposal are set out below:

‘Renewable energy proposals will therefore be supported…taking account of the wider environmental, social and economic benefits of renewable energy gain and their contribution to overcoming energy supply problems in parts of the District.’

3.11 Proposals for renewable energy technology, associated infrastructure and integration of renewable technology on existing and proposed structures will be permitted where individually, or cumulatively, there are no significant adverse effects on:

the surrounding landscape, townscape and historical features / areas;

residential amenity (noise, fumes; odour, shadow flicker, traffic, broadcast interference); and

specific highway safety, designated nature conservation or biodiversity considerations.

3.12 There are two specific policies that aim to protect and enhance local landscape and settlement character and the historic environment. Policy EN2 (Protection and Enhancement of Landscape and Settlement Character) seeks to protect and enhance landscape and settlement character by ensuring that proposals are sympathetic to the distinctive character areas identified in the LCA and relevant settlement character studies. It goes on to state that proposals should demonstrate that their location, scale, design and materials will protect, conserve and, where possible, enhance the attributes and qualities of the landscape and settlement settings, including Conservation Areas and Historic Parks and Gardens.

3.13 Policy EN8 (Protecting and Enhancing the Historic Environment) seeks to protect and enhance the historic environment, and in particular the settings of

5



designated assets and other important historic buildings, structures, monuments and landscapes.

3.14 Policy EN9 (Biodiversity & Geology) requires that development proposals should protect the biodiversity of land and buildings and realise opportunities for enhancing and benefiting biodiversity.

3.15 Policy EN13 (Pollution and Hazard Prevention and Minimisation) seeks to ensure that development proposals minimise and where possible reduce pollution from noise and not cause any unacceptable impacts on general amenity and the health and safety of the public.

4 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

4.1 Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is a process through which the likely significant environmental effects of a development proposal can be identified and where possible, adverse effects avoided or mitigated. This process is then reported in the Environmental Statement (ES) which is submitted with a planning application. This Non-Technical Summary (NTS) of the ES is provided to allow a wider public understanding of the environmental effects of a project.

4.2 EIA is an iterative process which follows a number of stages:

'Screening' is the first stage when the local authority decides if EIA is required.

If EIA is required, scoping is undertaken to define what should be assessed as part of the EIA.

Information on the environmental baseline conditions is collected. This is used to understand the potential environmental effects and inform the design of the proposed development.

Any significant adverse impacts that are identified during the formal assessment process are then reviewed against the design to consider whether alterations could be made to minimise the impact.

Where significant adverse impacts cannot be avoided through alterations to the design itself, reduction or mitigation measures are explored.

Once the EIA is completed, the ES is submitted to the local planning authority for consideration with the planning application.

4.3 The proposal is the culmination of a study by Airvolution Energy and its consultants, during which time the site’s suitability in terms of its environmental characteristics and constraints have been assessed. This process has influenced the design of the scheme as part of an iterative process.

5 SITE SELECTION (ALTERNATIVES)

5.1 The need to develop renewable energy resources is well established. There is also a need to respond to planning policy that seeks to protect the wide and varied aspects of the environment, such as ecology, landscape, residential amenity and cultural heritage.

6



5.2 Airvolution undertakes a detailed approach to the selection of potential locations across the UK for developing wind turbines utilising a strategy-led search for sites. A phased site selection process starts with testing against predefined criteria such as suitable wind speed, locations outwith statutory designations and with sufficient area to ensure that the turbines can be located at a suitable distance from residential dwellings.

5.3 Sites then progress to a pre-feasibility stage which considers a range of issues, including planning, access, footpaths, landscape, aviation, telecommunications, protected species, noise and consideration of potential local grid connection. The final stage of the site selection process is the full feasibility stage, where these issues are examined in more detail. Refinement to the potential siting of the turbines is undertaken at this point, guided by the environmental studies for the particular proposal.

5.4 Airvolution Energy has undertaken over 200 stage one, 115 pre-feasibility and 50 full feasibility appraisals of potential wind turbine sites in the United Kingdom: more than 900 sites have failed the initial check process prior to stage one.

5.5 After detailed appraisal, the Scottow Estate site was progressed to the EIA and project design stage - for the following reasons:

The site does not lie within or in close proximity to a landscape designation;

The site does not lie within an ecological designation;

The distances from the nearest residential properties are such that potential noise and amenity effects can be acceptable;

There is road access to the site;

There are existing electricity lines near the site that can be used to make a grid connection;

The average wind speed at the site is adequate;

The existing land use is compatible with the development of a wind energy scheme.

6 THE APPLICATION SITE AND SURROUNDING CONTEXT

6.1 The planning application site can be seen on application drawing AEL006 included at the back of this document. It is situated on agricultural land located to the north of the village of Coltishall and west of the B1150 road. The field within which the turbines would be located is in arable use and is on generally level ground with a slight fall from north to south.

6.2 Access to the site is available via an existing farm track which leads north from Potspoon Hole (off the North Walsham Road junction with the B1150). The track forms the western boundary of the field and leads to an existing field access point. Blocks of trees adjoin the north and southern boundaries of the field and a hedgerow forms the eastern boundary.

6.3 To the west of the site is the former RAF Coltishall airfield. Following its closure as an RAF base in 2006, it has been subject of a limited amount of commercial development, including HMP Bure, a prison located at the north west of the airfield. On

7



the western side of the airfield there is an area of residential housing known as Badersfield.

6.4 Situated to the east of the proposed turbines, Sco Ruston, a hamlet of dwellings dominated by Sco Ruston farm sits alongside the B1150. The village of Scottow, also situated on the B1150, is some 1km to the north of the proposed turbines.

6.5 Colk's farm lies to the west, near the boundary of the former airfield, and Malthouse Farm is situated to the north of the site, further along the farm track. The residential dwellings within these farm complexes have intervening farm structures between their aspects and the proposed turbine locations.

6.6 The nearest settlement of any size is Coltishall to the south, where the nearest dwellings at Ling Common, are located approximately 1.5km to the south of the proposed turbines.

6.7 Otherwise, in the wider area, the local landscape is dominated by working agricultural land, with mainly gentle undulating landform that falls towards the River Bure Valley to the south west. Fields are medium to large in size and often enclosed by low grass banks and hedges. Small villages and isolated farmsteads are scattered over the landscape and accessible by a network of minor roads.

SENSITIVE RECEPTORS IDENTIFIED

Residential receptors

6.8 The principal residential receptors are located within 2km of the proposal which includes the village of Scottow, Sco Ruston, the western side of Tunstead, north Coltishall and Great Hautbois. Baseline study for the landscape and visual assessment found that the two closest residential receptors, Sco Ruston Hall and Colk’s Farm, both have considerable foreground screening in the form of outbuildings and the view towards the turbine location from Colk’s Farm is also screened by mature trees. Consequently they are not predicted to receive significant visual effects.

Landscape

6.9 To the south of Coltishall, the western extent of the Norfolk Broads, a wetland with the protected status of a national park, follows the course of the River Bure to the south of the site. In one area to the north, the Norfolk Coast Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty falls within the 15km of the proposed turbines.

6.10 The 15km detailed study area around the proposed turbines is made up of 30 Landscape Character Areas, Landscape Character Types or Landscape Types as defined by the Landscape Character Assessments of the five authorities in the area: Broads Authority; Broadland District Council; Great Yarmouth Borough; North Norfolk District Council and South Norfolk Council.

Ecology - national/international designations

6.11 The site lies approximately 4.8km south of Westwick Lakes Site of Special

8



Scientific Interest (SSSI); 5.1km north-east of the Crostwick Marsh SSSI, and 5.8km north-west of the Bure Broads & Marshes SSSI. These sites are also component parts of The Broads Special Area of Conservation and Broadland Special Protection Area and Ramsar.

Ecology - species

6.12 Extensive ecological surveys for the proposal have focused particularly on wildlife habitats, bats, and collision-vulnerable bird species. At least eight species of bat were confirmed to be active within a 500m buffer area around the proposed turbines, and badgers are present in the vicinity of the site. Ornithological surveys have identified five valued ornithological receptors of local/parish value or greater; buzzard, kestrel, golden plover, lapwing and five species of Red or Amber-listed breeding birds (British Trust for Ornithology Birds of Conservation Concern).

Heritage

6.13 The nearest Grade II listed buildings are at Colk's Farm, St Michael's Church at Sco Ruston, and buildings at Scottow. All Saint's, a Grade I listed church is located to the north of RAF Coltishall, which itself is a Conservation Area, within which a single World War II fighter pen and eight pairs of blast walls are designated as a Scheduled Monument. The blast walls lie to the south east of the runway and include the hardstandings and the track that links them, see Figure 2.

Figure 2 RAF Coltishall Conservation Area Designation and Scheduled Monument

Aviation

6.14 The site is 10km to the north east of Norwich International Airport (NIA) which provides an Air Traffic Service (ATS). A number of air traffic movements at NIA are

9



helicopter flights in support of the North Sea oil/gas industry. The Scottow Estate turbines are between two Helicopter Main Routes designated HMR1 and HMR3 and are sufficiently separated from both of them.

6.15 The Ministry of Defence operates an air defence radar facility to the north at Trimingham, near Cromer. There are radar equipped military airfields at RAF Marham 56 km to the west, RAF Honington 60km south, and RAF Lakenheath 67km to the south west.

7 CONSULTATION AND ITERATION OF THE TURBINE LAYOUT

7.1 Early in 2012, when Airvolution requested the scoping opinion of NNDC, Airvolution was considering two potential turbine layouts, as shown in Figure 3. The two-turbine layout shown by Figure 3 was displayed at the public engagement event in July 2012. At this event the owners of Colk's Farm expressed concern about the visual appearance of the turbines in relation to their property, and therefore Airvolution sought alternative locations where the turbines would be better screened from their residence.

Figure 3 Two and three turbine layout options

7.2 Various two and three turbine options were explored, taking account of the buffer zones around nearby residential receptors, ecology and landscape features (as illustrated by the shaded areas on Figure 3). It was found that mitigating the visual appearance at Colk’s Farm could best be achieved by using two turbines in the northern field (Figure 4), which also increased the distance between the turbines and areas where more frequent bat activity had been recorded.

Figure 4

10



7.3 More detailed turbine siting ensured a suitable distance from the eastern field boundary hedge that might be used by foraging bats and culminated in the layout shown on Application drawing AEL007. The location of the turbines provides a buffer distance between the blades and the nearest linear features in compliance with Natural England Technical Information Note TIN051: Bats and onshore wind turbines.

8 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

8.1 The application scheme comprises the following principal components:

two wind turbines, each a maximum height to blade tip of 126.5m, and potentially, external transformers;

a steel reinforced concrete foundation for each turbine;

an electricity substation and control building;

improved and new access track from Potspoon Hole to the turbines;

underground cabling;

hard-standings at the base of each turbine to facilitate installation using a crane; and

a temporary construction compound.

8.2 The overall layout of the proposed development is shown on drawing AEL007 Proposed Layout Plan, and the turbine elevation on drawing PLTUB126.5-93.

The turbines assessed

8.3 Wind turbine technology is constantly evolving, consequently, it is not appropriate to specify within a planning application that any particular type of machine would be installed. However, it is necessary to set out the turbine parameters on which the assessment has been based. Two suitable candidate turbines currently available are the Vestas V90 and the Repower MM92. For the purpose of assessing the Scottow Estate proposal, the maximum parameters of the turbines have been set as a maximum height to the tip of the blade in the vertical position of 126.5 metres, with a maximum rotor diameter of up to 93 metres.

8.4 The red line on Application drawing AEL007 that indicates the extent of the planning application boundary has a diameter of 200m drawn around the turbine locations: this is wider than the actual diameter of the turbine blades proposed (max 93m). Application drawing PLTUB126.5-93 Wind turbine elevations and detail shows the elevation of a turbine with these dimensions. The finished colour of the turbines’ tower and blades will be off-white low reflectivity paint.

8.5 The turbines would be assembled from a number of sections, each of which would be delivered by road. The blades, tower and nacelle sections are considered as abnormal loads due to their size. Other components such as the foundation “can”, nosecone and tool boxes are transported using standard HGV vehicles. A typical turbine of this scale can be delivered in up to 14 deliveries.

8.6 The standard foundation arrangement for the turbines would be a steel

11



reinforced concrete base with a diameter of approximately 25m and an overall depth of approximately 2.5m. In normal practice the excavation will be designed to be gravity draining, but if this is not possible, it will be dewatered by pumping. Any discharges would be passed through a settling pond or a buffer strip prior to release. A method statement would be agreed with the Environment Agency and NNDC in respect of this.

8.7 The cranes that would be used to install the turbines require an area of hard standing on which to operate next to the turbine base. Following the removal and separate storage nearby of topsoil and subsoil, crushed rock would be laid to the appropriate depth and compacted. This will also be used to accommodate the equipment manoeuvring and component storage during turbine installation.

8.8 Following turbine erection, the hard standing areas would be retained in situ and re-covered with an appropriate depth of soil, including the top layers, to enable successful re-instatement. A detailed re-instatement plan would be drawn up and agreed with the local authority for the hard standing.

8.9 A route survey from the nearest suitable Port of Entry at Great Yarmouth has identified an average one-way journey by road approximately 29 miles in length and on predominantly “A” and “B” class roads. A number of horizontal and vertical constraints are present so route tracking has been undertaken to ensure that the requirements of Norfolk County Council can be met.

8.10 The site would be accessed from Potspoon Hole. Along this road the surface would need to be widened to 5.0m along its length within the existing extent of highway land. To allow abnormal loads to gain access to Potspoon Hole from the B1150, a new slip will be created that temporarily re-opens a stopped up section of North Walsham Road. Following the construction period, the slip would be removed and the grass verge reinstated.

8.11 A 5.0m-wide access track would also be constructed to complete the link between the public highway and the location of the turbines and control building.

Construction compound

8.12 As shown on Application drawing AEL007 Proposed layout plan, a temporary construction compound would be located alongside the access track. Within the compound there would be a temporary building to accommodate the site office and a storage area for construction equipment and materials.

Substation and control building

8.13 A substation and control building will be constructed on site to house necessary electrical switchgear and associated metering equipment. As shown by the Layout plan, this would be located near to turbine 2. The building would contain a switchgear room, a transformer room with control equipment and welfare provision. It would not be more than one storey in height and can be finished with an exterior sympathetic to its locality.

12



Connection to the local distribution network

8.14 A connection to the local distribution network could be achieved using underground cables to connect with existing overhead conductors. There is an existing 33kV overhead circuit some 1.3km to the east of the proposed site, and existing 11kV network 0.7km to the west. It is feasible to lay a new 33kV cable from site to the 33kV overhead line situated to the east, using land within the Scottow Estate and in the public highway.

8.15 The connection of the turbines from the substation to the local electricity distribution network would be the subject of a separate application by the electricity distributor but has been considered in the ecology assessment.

Reinstatement

8.16 Reinstatement will occur in a phased manner as the track and turbines are constructed. When construction is completed, all materials and other temporary infrastructure will be removed off-site. All waste will be removed off-site for safe recycling or disposal at a suitable facility.

Construction

8.17 The construction programme is estimated to be about nine months, assuming that there are no unforeseen external factors affecting the activities. Construction working hours are likely to be between 8am – 6pm, depending on light conditions.

8.18 Construction will commence outside the main bird breeding months, or be undertaken during these months following advice from an accredited ornithologist who has confirmed that the works will not affect any breeding birds in that area.

8.19 A Construction Environment Management Plan (CEMP) would be prepared to control activities on site. This will indentify how the works will be constructed and implemented whilst ensuring the protection of the aquatic environment in terms of water quantity and quality. The details of the CEMP will be developed as part of detailed design in consultation with the planning authority.

Operation

8.20 The wind turbines would operate automatically and performance would be monitored remotely. Once fully commissioned and operational, the turbines would be subject to planned maintenance visits to ensure effective and safe performance.

8.21 In addition to the operational activity associated with the turbines, there would be regular maintenance work on the internal tracks, drainage ditches, culverts and silt traps.

8.22 Based on two turbines, each with a generation capacity of approximately 2.0MW, it is estimated that enough electricity could be generated to supply the equivalent of approximately 2,500 households, based on wind speed data and annual

13



average consumption1. This could potentially displace the equivalent of up to approximately 4,694 tonnes of CO2 emissions per year from conventional forms of electricity generation2.

Decommissioning

8.23 It is anticipated that the turbines would be operational for a period of 25 years. Before the end of this period, a decision will be made by the operator as to whether the wind turbines should be decommissioned, or the turbines replaced or refitted. Any proposed extension of the wind turbine operation will be subject to a new application for planning permission.

8.24 If it is decided that the wind turbines should be decommissioned, at least 6 months before this is due to commence, a decommissioning method statement would be prepared and agreed with the local authority.

9 THE ASSESSMENT

9.1 The following sections provide a non-technical summary of the environmental assessments undertaken for landscape and visual amenity; ecology; ornithology; noise; aviation, communications, shadow flicker, safety; transport and access; heritage and archaeology.

10 LANDSCAPE CHARACTER AND VISUAL AMENITY

10.1 The overall study area for the landscape character and visual impact assessments extends for 35km from the application site. Following an initial site appraisal, it was considered that any potentially significant impacts on landscape designations and landscape character would only be likely to occur within 15km of the proposals. For this reason the detailed assessment of landscape impacts concentrated on this area.

10.2 Within the overall 35km study area a series of twenty one viewpoints were selected and agreed with North Norfolk District Council, The Broads Authority, Broadland District Council and Natural England. These viewpoints form the basis of the visual assessment.

10.3 In addition, where the potential for significant impacts was identified for residential properties within 2km of the proposed development, a Residential Amenity Study was undertaken. The two closest residential receptors, Sco Ruston Hall and Colk’s Farm, have considerable foreground screening in the form of outbuildings (both) and mature trees (Colk’s Farm). Consequently the potential impacts were considered to be slight and not significant and it is for this reason that neither was considered further in detail.

1 Based on wind speed data from GL Garrad Hassan and average domestic electricity consumption in Great Britain of 4,370 kWh/pa (DECC 2010). 2 Derived using a carbon dioxide offset ratio of 430g carbon dioxide per kWh of wind generation. Note that future changes in the power generating mix over the operating life of the wind turbines means that this figure may alter.

14



10.4 As all mitigation for landscape and visual effects relates to turbine location and selection, no additional mitigation measures related to landscape and visual are proposed and the effects outlined in the assessment are considered to represent residual effects.

Residual impacts

Landscape character

10.5 The assessment evaluated the predicted magnitude of change that would be experienced by designated sites and landscape character types as a result of the construction and operation of the proposed development and assessed the potential significance of the effect.

10.6 The assessment found that the proposal would result in no significant impacts upon designated landscapes within the study area despite their generally high sensitivity to change of the type proposed i.e., wind turbines. A combination of distance and/or foreground screening by woodland, tree groups, hedgerows and housing, often combined with local topography to reduce the magnitude of change and the level of impact to well below any significant level.

10.7 In terms of landscape character, similar mitigating features also serve to reduce the potential magnitude of change. The proposed turbines would result in locally significant direct and indirect landscape impacts close to the development. However, there would be limited significant influence on the character of the wider landscape beyond the immediate vicinity of the proposal. The assessment therefore concludes that although there would be localised significant landscape impacts, the effect upon the landscape resource of the study area when taken as a whole is not considered to be significant.

Cumulative effects on landscape character

10.8 The assessment found that all of the Landscape Character Types within the 15km study area would not receive significant cumulative impacts as a result of the proposed development. This is due to the intervening distance (the closest turbine development is over 10km away) and the nature of the landscape screening effects of woodland, mature hedgerow trees and housing which would effectively prevent the simultaneous or successive experience of more than one wind farm.

Visual Amenity

10.9 The assessment found that of the 21 viewpoints and 12 residential amenity receptors identified for inclusion in the assessment, impacts on 2 viewpoints and 5 residential amenity receptors would be substantial adverse, effects on 2 residential amenity receptors moderate/substantial adverse, and 4 viewpoints and 5 residential amenity receptors identified as moderate adverse. Overall, the visual effects are predicted to be slight adverse or negligible for route receptors. Within the detailed study area, none of the above are predicted to experience a significant cumulative effect.

Conclusion

10.10 The assessment has identified that there would be no significant effects on designated landscapes although there would be a small number of locally significant

15



landscape and visual impacts upon two landscape character types and visual receptors (or groups) within 6km of the turbines. No significant effects were identified beyond this distance. For visual receptors within 2km of the development, none are predicted to receive “overbearing” effects in terms of residential visual amenity. No significant cumulative landscape or visual effects were identified.

10.11 It is concluded that the development would result in localised significant landscape and visual impacts, but the overall effect on the landscape and visual resource of the study area as a whole is considered to be not significant.

11 ECOLOGY

11.1 Extensive ecological surveys were undertaken at the site of the proposed wind turbines. These surveys were formulated, scoped, and designed on the basis of the results of the desk based assessment and consultations, and as a result, focused on wildlife habitats, bats, and collision-vulnerable bird species.

11.2 A number of risk-related species were confirmed to be active within a 500m buffer area around the proposed turbines, most notably at least eight species of bat and badger. The impact risks to these protected species were assessed for the proposals, including the localised widening of Potspoon Hole and the likely route of the underground cable connection to the local electricity network.

11.3 All potential impacts to ecological receptors have been assessed as not significant, prior to the additional mitigation proposed.

Mitigation

11.4 Whilst providing a 50m buffer distance between the turbine blades and the nearest linear hedge feature would mitigate the potential for significant effects to bats, to ensure that stand-off distance is maintained for the operational life of the turbines, the hedge to the south east of turbine 2 would be cut regularly to maintain it at a height of no more than 5m.

11.5 Additional avoidance measures would be applied as follows:

Pre-construction checks for new evidence of badger activity along the access track layout will be undertaken by a suitably qualified ecologist;

Possible foraging disturbance to protected species during construction will be minimised by control of night time working;

Excavations will be covered or fitted with egress boards to prevent animals from getting trapped.

Any hedgerow removal and tree trimming should take place outside of the breeding bird season (March - August inclusive) unless prior inspection is carried out by a suitably qualified ecologist;

Any removal of spoil from track creation and road widening should be properly re-used or disposed;

The ground beneath the turbine is to be managed as cropland up to a practicable distance from the base, and not reverted to grassland.

16



11.6 Restocking the hedges alongside the green lanes to the north and the south of the turbine locations would provide an element of enhancement.

Residual impacts

11.7 Given the design of the Scottow Estates wind turbine development and the implementation of mitigation measures, the construction and operation of the proposed development is deemed unlikely to result in negative ecological impacts beyond a minor magnitude for some species at the parish/local geographic scale. This can be controlled by means of a planning condition.

11.8 In the unlikely event that a section of hedgerow has to be removed and replanted, the worst case would be a minor negative impact to habitats. Potential impacts to protected species will be avoided if best practice avoidance measures are followed.

11.9 The magnitudes and probabilities of these potential impacts are not sufficient to expect that the proposed development poses a significant risk to the conservation status of any of the faunal species or habitats recorded within the focus area of this assessment.

11.10 Overall, the development of the Scottow Estates wind turbines is predicted to have no significant impacts on valued ecological elements.

12 ORNITHOLOGY

12.1 Ornithological surveys were formulated, scoped and designed on the basis of the results of a feasibility assessment and associated consultations and included a year and three months of vantage point monitoring and a site breeding bird census.

Mitigation

12.2 Mitigation measures are proposed for possible effects during the construction and decommissioning periods which, although not predicted to be significant, may affect valued ecological receptors in a way that would be preventable. This can be controlled by means of a planning condition. Avoidance measures to prevent nest destruction and/or disturbance of listed breeding birds will be applied as follows:

Earthworks and other ground disturbance involved in construction of new access tracks and turbine bases (including tracking of vehicles off prepared surfaces and vegetation clearance not normally associated with farming), will be commenced outside of the window from 1st March – 1st August or else overseen on-site by a suitably qualified ecologist.

Pre-construction survey checks will be undertaken periodically to identify nest sites as these may change. Where nests are identified, buffer zones will be established.

12.3 Also, to lower the risk of collision to hovering kestrels, the ground cover under the swept areas of the rotors should be kept as free as possible of grassland

17



favourable to small mammals and be managed as cropland up to a practicable distance from the base of the turbine.

Residual impacts

12.4 The surveys identified five valued ornithological receptors of local/parish value or greater; buzzard, kestrel, golden plover, lapwing and five species of British Trust for Ornithology Birds of Conservation Concern Red and Amber-listed breeding birds. Assessment has predicted that the operational effect of the turbines on these receptors is not significant.

12.5 With regard to Special Protection Areas, the distance of the proposed development from SPAs precludes the potential for any direct negative effects on the SPA habitats. The potential for indirect negative effects on the SPAs via effects to their designating features (i.e. breeding and wintering bird species) is limited to marsh harrier as this was the only SPA qualifying species observed during site monitoring.

12.6 As only one flight event for marsh harrier was recorded, and this bird was recorded flying below the collision risk window, a neutral impact on this species is near certain. Therefore a neutral effect on the Broadland SPA from the proposed wind farm is judged to be near-certain. A neutral effect on Great Yarmouth North Denes SPA is certain, as little terns are never likely to occur at the proposal site.

12.7 A neutral effect on Westwick Lakes SSSI is certain, as large flocks of the cited species of wildfowl including goldeneye and goosander are never likely to occur at the proposal site.

12.8 In summary, no significant impacts from the proposed Scottow Estate wind turbines on valued ornithological receptors are expected.

13 NOISE

13.1 The noise assessment has been carried out according to the Energy Technology Support Unit (ETSU) report ETSU-R-973. The ETSU guidance advises on noise limits for wind farms which are thought to "offer a reasonable degree of protection to wind farm neighbours, without placing unreasonable restrictions on wind farm development".

13.2 ETSU-R-97 states that where noise levels are below 35 dB LA90, (for wind speeds up to 10 m/s) “then this condition alone would offer sufficient protection of amenity”. Noise levels are below 35 dB LA90 at all locations except for Malthouse Farm and marginally Apple Cottage, and a few properties on the B1150 road as shown in Figure 8.1 including Sco Ruston Hall and the adjacent property "The Lodge".

13.3 Consequently, for the closest properties to the north, east and west of the scheme, a more detailed assessment was undertaken, comparing the predicted noise level with the background noise and derived limits at varying wind speeds.

3 ETSU-R-97 The Assessment and Rating of Noise from Wind Farms. ETSU for the Department of Trade and Industry

(1996). Available online from: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file20433.pdf

18



Mitigation

13.4 Mitigation has already been considered in the design of the turbine layout which has gone through several iterations to ensure that noise levels are generally low and within the ETSU limits.

Residual impacts

13.5 Turbine noise will be audible at the closest properties under certain wind conditions and the turbines will cause an increase in the background noise at the nearest properties under certain wind conditions. However, noise levels are low in absolute terms and the turbines can meet noise limits designed to protect residential amenity and sleep disturbance.

14 AVIATION AND COMMUNICATIONS LINKS

Mitigation

Civil aviation

14.1 Detailed discussions have taken place with Norwich International Airport to explore options for radar mitigation. NIA has undertaken an Operational Impact Assessment and a suitable technical solution has been identified that is capable of removing the potential effects of the Scottow Estate wind turbines on the radar. This can be controlled by means of a planning condition.

14.2 Alongside this there is a civil aviation requirement in the UK for all structures over 300 feet (100m) high to be charted on civil aviation maps. International aviation regulation also requires that the rotor blades, nacelle and upper 2/3rds of the supporting mast of wind turbines that are deemed to be an aviation obstruction should be painted white, unless otherwise indicated by an aeronautical study.

MOD aviation/radar

14.3 Whilst not in a position to re-confirm the MOD response of no objection issued in 2010, the MOD will be consulted by NNDC on the planning application. MOD accredited aviation lighting may be required at the highest practicable point on wind turbines, suitable mitigation could be to illuminate with 25 candela red lights, and possibly infra-red lights. This can be controlled by means of a planning condition.

Television and communications links

14.4 In the event that there is considered to be a risk of television interference at nearby properties, this will be investigated and monitored both pre and post-turbine installation. If reception is degraded as a result of the wind turbines, this may be resolved by repositioning of the television aerials or provision of alternatives such as cable or satellite receiving equipment. This can be controlled by means of a planning condition.

14.5 As the wireless link infrastructure is constantly changing, further consultation will be undertaken in connection with potential effects on communication links.

19



Residual impacts

14.6 With mitigation measures in place, the proposals would not result in any significant impacts on communications or aviation infrastructure.

15 SHADOW FLICKER AND SAFETY

15.1 Airvolution Energy has prepared an analysis of potential shadow flicker effect. Eight potential receptors have been identified which could possibly experience shadow flicker effects, all located at Sco Ruston. The predictions are for west-facing windows and do not take account of any intervening vegetation or the effect of any other screening.

Mitigation

15.2 As mitigation, a shadow flicker protocol can be secured by a planning condition imposed on a planning consent. If shadow flicker is reported from one of these properties when the turbines are in operation, a detailed model would be prepared with specific survey information for each of the relevant windows, using their elevation, orientation and size. In the event that the detailed modelling finds that shadow flicker effect occurs so as to cause significant effects within any residential property (>30hrs/yr), then stopping the turbine responsible from rotating is the most effective mitigation measure.

15.3 This can be achieved by programming the system that controls the operation of the turbine, causing it to shut down when a number of defined operating conditions coincide, such as:

specified times of the year and day that correspond with an identified period when shadow flicker is possible; and

when a turbine-mounted photocell indicates that the sun is bright enough to give rise to an effect; and

when the wind direction corresponds to an orientation of the turbine which could affect an identified receptor with shadow flicker.

Residual impacts

15.4 With the use of such mitigation the potential shadow flicker impacts on properties at Sco Ruston can be controlled to be of negligible significance.

15.5 Appropriate mitigation measures have been applied during the site selection and design stages to minimise safety risks. Adherence to the relevant British and European Standards will ensure that risks can be managed during the construction and operation stages.

20



16 TRANSPORT AND ACCESS

16.1 Access for the delivery of wind turbine components has been investigated and it has established that there is a feasible access route but a number of horizontal and vertical constraints are present. The route review did not identify any weight constraints.

16.2 Where road modifications and road verge treatments are required to facilitate the delivery of turbine components, these are located in land either adopted by the Council or under the control of Airvolution Energy Ltd. This includes drainage ditches and hedges. Prior to delivery, overhanging vegetation on Potspoon Hole will require review to identify any locations at which tree pruning is required.

Mitigation

16.3 Further detailed technical analysis will be undertaken in conjunction with specialist hauliers to finalise the access arrangements and prepare a Traffic Management Plan in consultation with the police and highway authorities.

Residual impacts

16.4 The traffic flows on local roads will be subject to minor increases during the construction period, but this will be a temporary effect, distributed over some 9 months. No additional mitigation measures are considered necessary for the operational period.

17 HERITAGE AND ARCHAEOLOGY

17.1 Potential archaeological impacts are most likely to be on any physical remains of the south-eastern apron, dispersals and associated structures of the former RAF Coltishall. The above ground elements have been removed, but below ground features may remain, which themselves are likely to have disturbed or truncated any remains from earlier times.

Mitigation

17.2 On the basis of the available evidence, it is considered that an archaeological watching brief should be held on the intrusive groundworks associated with the proposed development. As any archaeological remains are likely to be disturbed or truncated and therefore not worthy of preservation in situ, this work can be safely secured through the imposition of a condition imposed on a planning consent.

Residual impacts

17.3 RAF Coltishall Conservation Area and the scheduled blast wall and fighter pen within it are identified as having the potential to experience a significant impact. Their proximity to the turbines will result in a noticeable change to their setting. Because of the nature of RAF Coltishall as a robust 20th century construct, it is less sensitive to the presence of turbines as modern elements in the landscape than other older and

21



intrinsically aesthetic buildings. Nonetheless the turbines will distract from views of the blast walls from the airfield and this will have a detrimental effect on the significance of the scheduled monument and the conservation area.

17.4 For these reasons and taking into account the overall heritage significance of the assets the effect is assessed to be moderate, but of less than substantial harm in the planning policy context of the National Planning Policy Framework.

17.5 The presence of the turbines will change some views from certain listed buildings, as identified within the assessment tables. The significance of the effect of these changes in terms of the historical and architectural merit of the assets and their significance is considered to be minor.

18 OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC CONSULTATION

The Environmental Statement will be available to view during normal office hours at North Norfolk District Council, Council Offices, Holt Road, Cromer; Norfolk, NR27 9EN and online at http://www.northnorfolk.org/planning.asp Comments will be considered as part of the Council’s consultation on the planning application. In accordance with planning procedures, comments should be received by the Council within 3 weeks from the date of publication of the Council’s statutory advertisement. Any requests for additional information about the proposal should be directed to Savills Planning, Wessex House, Wimborne, BH21 1PB, telephone 01202 856 800. Additional copies of the ES can be provided to third parties, subject to printing costs, details of which are available on request. However, to minimise the use of paper, Airvolution Energy requests that where possible, consultees refer to the information in electronic format. CD copies at a cost of £5 can be requested from Savills and the address above. A website is also available - http://www.scottow-wind.co.uk/ where information about the proposals at Scottow Estate is available.

http://www.northnorfolk.org/planning.asp

http://www.scottow-wind.co.uk/

volume four: non-technical summary - iema · pdf filevolume four: non-technical summary...

Documents