lvia report for a proposed wind turbine development of a ......lvia report for a proposed wind...

LVIA Report for a proposed wind turbine development of a single wind turbine 24.6m to hub, 49m to blade tip, 24m Rotor Diameter on land adjoining Benthouse Farm, Tosside, nr Settle, North Yorkshire BD23 4SU

September 2014

DISCLAIMER

a. Except where otherwise stated in this report, any information provided by third parties (and which is identified as such) has not been independently verified by us. We publish this content as supplied to us and we are not responsible for its accuracy or completeness. You must take appropriate steps to verify this information before acting or relying upon it.

b. This report has been prepared by us with reasonable skill and care in accordance with our terms of business. No other warranty, express or implied is made in relation to the accuracy or completeness of this report, or any use of the information, apparatus or products or processes disclosed in this report. We shall have no liability in respect of any errors or omissions in the report, except as set out in our terms of business. Any recommendations, opinions or findings stated in this report are based on the circumstances and facts as they existed at the time we prepared this report and any such information is subject to change without notice. The content of this report is solely for your use and you agree not to disclose the report or any part of it, to any third party without our prior written consent (such consent will not be reasonably withheld). Any such third party must interpret or rely on this report at their own risk.

DC21 Ltd 01484 607808Dene House www.dc21group.comNorth RoadKirkburton, HuddersfieldHD8 0RW

www.dc21group.com

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

ASA-DC21-LVIA-DC/13/89 2

CONTENTS

1. SCOPE AND AIMS

2. - PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

3. LANDSCAPE IMPACT ASSESSMENT

4. VISUAL IMPACT & CUMULATIVE IMPACT

5. VIEWPOINT ASSESSMENT

6. - CONCLUSION

APPENDICES

Appendix 1 6km ZTV MapAppendix 2 5km Cumulative ZTVAppendix 3 Viewpoint 1, Existing, Photomontage & WireframeAppendix 4 Viewpoint 2, Existing, Photomontage & Wireframe Appendix 5 Viewpoint 3, Existing, Photomontage & WireframeAppendix 6 Viewpoint 4, Existing, Photomontage & WireframeAppendix 7 Viewpoint 5, Existing, Photomontage & WireframeAppendix 8 Viewpoint 6, Existing, Photomontage & WireframeAppendix 9 Viewpoint 7, Existing, Photomontage & wireframeAppendix 10 Viewpoint 8, Existing, Photomontage & Wireframe.



1. SCOPE AND AIMS

Local planning authorities are encouraged, in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), to have a positive strategy to promote energy from renewable and low carbon sources, with policies that “maximise renewable and low carbon energy development while ensuring that adverse impacts are addressed satisfactorily, including cumulative landscape and visual impacts *

*Department of Communities and Local Government (2012) National Planning Policy Framework, para97.https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/6077/2116950.pdf

This Landscape and Visual Impact Appraisal (LVIA) is intended to support the planning application for a wind turbine on land at Benthouse Farm, Tosside, nr Settle. The full grid reference for the turbine location is 377194, 457470 and this position is illustrated in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Turbine Location

The aim of this report is to assess the significance of effect of the proposed development upon landscape character and visual amenity. This assessment has been made via a process of systematic classification based on a series of criteria which are detailed within Section 3 of this document and with regard to extant good practice guidance on the preparation of landscape and visual impact assessments, landscape character assessments and the visual representation of wind energy developments.

In summary this report will:

Identify and describe the character and sensitivity of the receiving landscape Identify and describe a series of visual amenity receptors within the landscape Describe the magnitude of impact and significance of effect on landscape character and the selected visual

amenity receptors. Provide conclusions on the overall landscape and visual effects of the proposed development.

The existing condition of landscape character and of the visual amenity receptors assessed has been established through a process of desk top and site surveys. Reference has been made to a range of material including:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/6077/2116950.pdf



Ordnance Survey map data A Landscape Strategy for Lancashire Natural England: National Character Assessment Forest of Bowland AONB

2. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

The proposed development would consist of a single 3 bladed wind turbine; 24.6m to hub height, 49m to blade tip and with a 24m rotor diameter. This turbine is considered by wind industry experts and landscape planning professionals to be small-medium in scale.

The wind turbine would be white in colour. The coatings of the turbine blades, hub, nacelle and tower have been carried out to industry standards in order to minimise reflected light. A small cabinet would be installed at the base of the turbine tower to house the turbine control system; this cabinet would be green in colour.

All cables linking the proposed turbine to the National Grid would be buried. Temporary tracks would be created to support traffic access over the brief construction phase. These would then be removed with no resultant loss of land or land use. The proposal would have a lifespan of 30 years after which the turbine could be removed, the foundations grubbed up and the land returned to its former use.

The precise siting of the proposed turbine has been carefully selected, balancing considerations such visual impact, optimum exploitation of the wind resource, ease of grid connection and ease of access.

3. LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

3.1 Landscape Character and Sensitivity Assessment

3.1.1 Methodology

This section of the report sets out the predicted significance of effect of the proposal on landscape character.

Landscape character is an amalgamation of natural, aesthetic, perceptual and cultural factors all of which combine to create a common ‘sense of place’ which can be used to categorise the landscape into definable units at the local, regional and national level. At the local level these units could be generic LCT’s or geographically specific LCA’s. Due to the small scale of the proposed turbine, the scope of the landscape character and sensitivity assessment will be limited to this LCT.

The sensitivity of a landscape varies according to its key characteristics and the values placed on these. Table A sets out the proposed approach to determining sensitivity within the landscape unit identified. This table provides a summary of the key landscape characteristics that can indicate higher or lower sensitivity to wind energy development of the scale proposed at Benthouse Farm. The assessment of each characteristic may produce conflicting results therefore a degree of professional judgement has been used to determine the overall sensitivity of landscape character as being Very High, High, Medium or Low.



3.2 Study Area

The extent of the study area for this landscape assessment has been set at a 6km radius from the turbine blade tip; this reflects the limit of potential visual significance for this specific single turbine proposal. Visual impacts beyond 6km are not considered to be significant given the small scale of the proposed turbine and the constraints of landform and vegetation cover.A ZTV drawing has been prepared for the 6km study area and this is presented in Appendix 1. The 6km study area is divided into three zones of visibility marked by concentric circles:

• ZONE 1: Visibility within 1000m radius of the proposed turbine (Near Distance Views)• ZONE 2: Visibility between 1000m and 2500m of the proposed turbine (Middle Distance Views)• ZONE 3: Visibility between >= 2500m of the proposed turbine (Far Distance Views)

The theoretical visibility of the proposal within the three zones is represented by areas of green or red shading. This theoretical visibility takes the screening effect of topography into account but not that provided by structures or land cover; it therefore offers a worst case scenario assessment.

KeyCharacteristic

Attributes likely to indicate higher sensitivity to wind energy development

Attributes likely to indicate lower sensitivity to wind energy development

Landform and Scale Complex, dramatic or rugged landform.Small-scale landform/ landcover/built development

Simple, smooth and convex or flat and uniform landform.Large-scale landform/land cover/built development

Landcover Complex or irregular land cover patterns/smaller field sizes

Simple, regular patterns with sweeping lines and extensive areas of consistent ground cover

Skylines Prominent, undeveloped or distinctive skylines with important landmark features.

Landscape with no prominent or low skylines with no distinctive backdrop or context

Human Influence Perceived ‘wild’ landscapes absence of man-made elements, buildings or structures, traditional or historic settlements

Frequency of man-made elements (e.g. utility infrastructure or industrial elements), brownfield or industrial landscapes, landscapes already affected by built and contemporary structures (e.g. pylons, masts, cranes, silos) provided there are no visual conflicts where the structures are seen in close proximity to one another

Perceptual Qualities (Remoteness/Tranquillity)

Physically or perceptually remote, peaceful or tranquil, little or no evident movement

Close to visible audible signs of human activity, prominent movement

Visibility and views Extensive close and mid-range views from scenic routes, well-known tourist viewpoints.

Landscapes visually contained by topography, buildings, trees or woodlands with limited inward and outward views

Scenic Quality Landscapes of distinctive character valued for their high scenic quality. Nationally designated landscape.

Landscape of low-medium scenic quality unlikely to have a scenic quality designation

Table A: Criteria for Assessing Landscape Sensitivity to Wind Energy Development



The magnitude of predicted landscape change within the landscape unit identified is based on the criteria set out in Table B.

Magnitude DescriptionVery Large The development would form a dominant landscape element or would result in a total loss or major

change to key landscape characteristics.Large The development would form a prominent landscape element, or would result in a substantial

alteration to key landscape characteristics.Medium The development would form a conspicuous landscape element or would result in a partial loss of or

alteration to key landscape characteristics.Small The development would form an apparent, small landscape element or would result in a minor

alteration to key landscape characteristics.Very Small The development would form an inconspicuous minor landscape element, or would result in a very

minor alteration to key landscape characteristics.Negligible The development would be a barely perceptible landscape element, or would not change the key

landscape characteristics.Table B: Definition of Magnitude of Change (Landscape)

The significance of landscape effect has been determined by assessing landscape sensitivity against magnitude of change (as set out in Tables A and B above). The outcomes of this assessment are set out in Table C. Table C is given as a guide only and the final assessment of significance of landscape effect may take into account any modifying factors based on professional judgement.

Magnitude of Change SensitivityVery High High Medium Low

Very Large Major Major Major Major/ModerateLarge Major Major Major/Moderate ModerateMedium Major Major/Moderate Moderate Moderate/MinorSmall Major/Moderate Moderate Moderate/Minor MinorVery Small Moderate Minor Minor/Negligible NegligibleNegligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible

Table C: Significance of Landscape and Visual Effects



The proposal lies within NCA profile 33. Bowland Fringe and Pendle Hill. The key characteristics for this NCA are:

This is an undulating, rolling landscape, with local variation created by numerous river valleys and by the moorland outliers of Beacon Fell, Longridge Fell and Pendle Hill.The Bowland Fells provide a dramatic backdrop to the north, with extensive views across the river valleys and Lancashire plain belowOn the northern edge of the area, drumlins are characteristic, while on the south, strong mounded outcrops or ‘reef knolls’ of limestone form distinct landscape features in the Ribble and Hodder valleys.Semi-natural woodland, much of which is ancient, occurs in the main valley bottoms, side valleys and ridges, and is dominated by oak, ash and alderSmall- to medium-sized fields are defined by hedgerows with mature hedgerow trees. Drystone walls are also common in some areas. Metal railings around estate boundaries and highway corners and junctions are characteristic of the southern and western edges of the NCA.Land use is mainly permanent, improved pasture for livestock and dairy farming.To the west, this NCA includes part of the Bowland Fells Special Protection Area (SPA), designated for its important populations of hen harrier, merlin and lesser black-backed gull.There are species-rich hay meadows, including several that are nationally and internationally designated.Rough grazing, rushy pasture and traditionally managed meadows at higher elevations are of national importance for breeding waders such as redshank, lapwing, curlew and snipe. These are also important habitats for breeding skylark.There are numerous rivers of importance for many protected species, including bullheads, salmon, trout, eels, otters, kingfishers and dippers. There are also many brooks and small reservoirs.There are many archaeological sites, particularly on the moorland fringes and in valleys where agriculture has

been less intensive.A network of winding, hedge-lined lanes connect small, often linear, villages, hamlets and scattered farmsteads, mostly in local stone. Traditional stone barns are commonplace on higher ground, and are of stone with slate or stone flag roofsIsolated country houses set in formal parkland are typical of the area, and may be enclosed by belts of woodland and estate fencing.The relatively urban areas of Clitheroe, Bentham and Longridge provide a contrast to the rural feel of the area.

The site area is also close to National Character Areas 34 Bowland Fells and The forest of Bowland A.O.N.B.

3.2.2 Landscape Assessment

3.2.3 Landscape Character

Wind turbines are by scale and nature discordant features to place in any landscape, however the accepted need for renewable energy from wind power is making their presence in rural and other landscape more visually acceptable.

The Forest of Bowland AONB Joint Advisory Committee considers that micro and small scale renewable energy development may be appropriate within the designated area. The Forest of Bowland AONB, JAC class a small to medium turbine as being up to 60m to blade tip. This proposal falls within the designation of small to medium scale as it is 24.6m to hub with a 24m rotor diameter, 39m to blade tip, 21m lower than the maximum allowed height by the Forest of Bowland JAC. The proposal is NOT sited on the skyline or close to any prominent features.

The Forest of Bowland AONB LCA defines the area of the site as 14. Rolling Upland Farm land, it is then further defined as L or M Rolling Upland Farmland with Woodland and reservoir. The landscape is gently undulating with the grassland being one of rough grazing and heathland. The ridgelines to the east are dominated by the



Gisburn Forest. Settlement is light, consisting mainly of farms. MARIO (Maps & Related Information Online)classes the site area as having a LOW Landscape sensitivity to Wind Energy Development. It should be noted that there are already other operational turbines of the same manufacture and scale nearby. In this context the overall effect of introducing this small-medium scale turbine into a generally agricultural Landscape with few distinctive features would be classed as moderate LOW. The landscape character will continue to be one of a landscape accommodating wind turbines’. The document ‘A Landscape Strategy for Lancashire’ classes this LCT as 14 Rolling Upland Farmland, whose full description can be found between pages 79 and 80

Baseline Description

3.2.4 Immediate Site

The site of the proposed development is situated 1.46km to the north of the settlement of Tosside along Longtons Lane; a narrow single track road with passing places. The proposal stands at approximately 272m AOD. The topography of the proposed site is an area of fields, bounded by dry-stone walls and is crossed by dry stream beds. Settlement is light. There are a number of other operational turbines nearby including one of the type, manufacture & of a similar scale to the proposal discussed in this document.

British Geological Survey data informs that the geology of the immediate area is: Pendle Grit Member -Sandstone. Superficial (Surface) Deposits: Till - Devensian - Diamicton. No evidence of Peat.

3.2.5 Wider Area

The site of the proposed development is situated 7km to the south-west of Settle, 4km south-west from the centre of Rathmell. Gisburn Forest is 677m to the north-west at its nearest point. The site is outside of the Forest of Bowland AONB.

3.2.6 Major Roads and Public Rights of Way

Nearby public highways are the B6478 which is 1.4km to the south There are a number of footpaths which cross the area. The Ribble Way passes in an approximately north-south direction 3.8km to the east.

3.2.7 National/International quality effects

The Baseline assessment reveals that the proposed site is near to the Forest of Bowland A.O.N.B. The Yorkshire Dales National Park is some 5km to the north-east and this proposal will have no effect on the National Park; visual impact will be negligible



3.2.8 Regional quality effects.

No significant effects on the regional quality of the wider features, characteristics or qualities are expected to arise from this proposal. There will be a moderate increase in visual impact to the surrounding area.

3.3 Local & Site Level effects

3.3.1 Landform

The small footprint of the proposed turbine base along with associated infrastructure, crane platform and being able to fully make right the disruption caused by the temporary works involved in the construction of the site indicates that long term physical effects arising through landform change is considered to be Negligible

3.3.2 Land Use

The small footprint of the proposed turbine base and other associated infrastructure will allow the continuous, almost uninterrupted use of the surrounding land. Land use impact is Negligible

3.3.3 Land Cover

The small footprint of the turbine platform and infrastructure will not have an impact on the Land Cover it is therefore considered to be Negligible

3.3.4 Landscape Features

Grassland/Pasture The proposal sits on grassland that is used for grazing. There will a small loss of this land to the construction of the turbine base and associated infrastructure. This loss is reversible. Negligible

Woodland The eastern edge of the Gisburn Forest is approximately 1km distant. The construction of this proposal will not lead to any physical impact on the Forest. There will be limited impact on the visual amenity to the footpath near Heath Farm. Slight

Hedgerows Negligible. The siting of the proposal and other associated infrastructure will avoid impact on existing hedgerows. Site is bounded by dry-stone walls.

Wetland/Marsh There are un-named watercourses approximately 96m to the northeast and 79m to the south-west. The stream beds have eroded into the land and are well below the level of the site. The proposal will have no effect on these water courses. Negligible



3.3.6 Landscape Quality (Short Term)

The proposal and its infrastructure will not result in any loss or alteration to any of the key elements, features, characteristics of the baseline existing landscape and view. A newly built turbine would be relatively prominent, but certainly not a unique element in the landscape or in the wider region. Given the LOWsensitivity of the receiving landscape the overall effect will be LOW

3.3.7 Landscape Quality (Long Term)

In the long term, the implications of the proposal, which will present few opportunities to mitigate against indicates that the longer term effect would continue to be Medium/Low although their may be an increase in the number of similar structures over a wider area of the landscape. The structures would become more accepted visual into the landscape e.g. as in the case of say Pylons and would become a mature feature eventually being removed after a period of approximately 25 - 30 years.

3.4 Landscape Character and Sensitivity Conclusions

The wind energy capacity studies that have been carried out has assessed the area in which the proposal lies as being suitable for small scale wind turbine development as the studies show that the proposal lies in an area where wind energy development will have low effect on the landscape. The proposal falls within the acceptable limits of the Forest of Bowland AONB JAC for a small turbine as informed by their document ‘Forest of Bowland AONB Renewable Energy Position Statement, April 2011’. The proposal will not be sited on the skyline, it is close to the farm and will be seen as an integral part of the built form complex. There is no none reversible impact on Land Cover, Wetlands or Streams, there will be no none reversible damage to walls or hedgerows. Apart from a small increase in visual impact to the nearby area, the proposal will not be detrimental to the Gisburn Forest. This turbine product is routinely specified for farm-based and small commercial on-site generation projects. This is not a utility scale turbine and should not be considered as such.

4. Visual Impact Assessment

4.1 Methodology

This section of the report considers the sensitivity of change of selected viewpoints in the landscape surrounding the proposal. Due to the small scale of the proposed wind turbine, a study area extending to a 5km radius has been adopted for the visual impact assessment.

The potential visibility of the proposal has been established with a ZTV drawing for the 6km study area (see Appendix 1).

Four viewpoints encompassing these visual receptors have been selected. These viewpoints where also chosen to provide illustrative Middle (1000m-2500m) and Far (2500-5000m) distance views of the proposal. The location of the 8 viewpoints are set out below and marked in Figure 2.

1. Keasden Rd2. Higher Rd3. Longtons Lane4. Longtons Lane5. B64786. B6478



7. Jack Lane8. B6480 ( Settle )

Figure 2: Photomontages Viewpoint Locations

For each viewpoint a wire frame drawing and corresponding photomontage visualisation has been prepared. This has been done using Resoft Ltd’s WindFarm software. This software uses a 3D DTM model of the existing landscape derived from OS Landform Panorama data based on a 50m grid and 10m contour intervals. The software is used to create a 3D model of the proposed wind turbine using turbine grid coordinates and specified turbine geometry. Specified viewpoint coordinates direction of view and horizontal field of view data were used to generate wireframe views of the proposed turbine within the existing landform.

To create the photomontage visualisations single images1 on a flat plane projection are imported into the software and aligned to the corresponding wire frame drawing. To aid alignment, geographic features in the image are matched with the corresponding coordinates of those features on the base map.

Viewpoint photographs were taken in September 2014 using a tripod mounted Nikon D700 camera with a 50mm equivalent lens. Conditions on the day were clear. Viewpoint coordinates and view direction were fixed using a camera integrated GPS system.

For all photomontages there is an element of judgement, the finished image is only intended as a representation of the likely appearance of the proposed development. The completed photomontages material is presented in Appendix 3 to 10 along with the wire frame diagrams.

The assessment of the sensitivity, magnitude of change and significance of effect for the selected viewpoints has been conducted using the criteria set out in Tables D, E and F. Table F is given as a guide only and the final

1 Multiple images stitched together to create a panoramic view have not been used.



assessment of significance of visual effect may take into account any modifying factors based on professional judgement. The conclusions of the visual assessment are set out below.

Typical Visual Receptors SensitivityLocations defined by special interest in the available view: Promoted viewpoints. Special tourist or visitor locations. Recreational hilltops and peaks.

Very High

Visual receptors with a particular interest in their surroundings or prolonged viewing opportunities. Residential locations within 1km of the proposal. Special visitor or recreational sites. Nationally or locally recognised footpaths and cycleways. Recognised scenic drives or promoted tourist routes.

High

Visual receptors with a general interest in their surroundings or with transient viewing opportunities. General footpaths. Residential locations over 1km from the proposal. Residential and local roads. Public spaces.

Medium

Visual receptors with limited or passing interest in their surroundings. Views from places of work. Indoor facilities. Users of A-roads and trains.

Low

Table D: Visual Receptor Sensitivity Criteria

Magnitude DescriptionVery Large The development would form a dominant element of the view dramatically altering its overall quality

and character. Dominating and controlling the view.Large The development would form a prominent element within the view resulting in a prominent change to

its overall quality and character. Standing out, striking.Medium The development would form a conspicuous element within the view resulting in conspicuous change.

Distinct, noticeable.Small The development would form an apparent small element within the view without affecting the overall

quality or character of the view. Evident.Very Small The development would form an inconspicuous minor element within the view, without affecting the

overall quality or character of the view. Not obvious, lacking definition.Negligible The development would result in a barely perceptible change in the view, or would cause a ‘no change’

situation to the existing view. Weak, not legible.

Table E: Definition of Magnitude of Change (Visual)

Magnitude of Change

SensitivityVery High High Medium Low

Very Large Major Major Major Major/ModerateLarge Major Major Major/Moderate ModerateMedium Major Major/Moderate Moderate Moderate/MinorSmall Major/Moderate Moderate Moderate/Minor MinorVery Small Moderate Minor Minor/Negligible NegligibleNegligible Negligible Negligible Negligible NegligibleTable F: Significance of Visual Effects



4.2 Cumulative Impact Assessment.

Cumulative impacts should be considered: in strategic planning ( as part of the preparation of a strategic framework for wind farms in development management, in the context of a site specific assessment. Cumulative impacts in development management should be assessed where a proposed development

involves: a new development in combination with one or more existing or approved but unbuilt development an extension to an existing or approved but unbuilt development more than one development proposed at the same time within the area OR any combination of the above What to include in the assessment An assessment of cumulative impacts associated with a specific development proposal should

encompass the effects of the proposal in combination with: existing development, either built or under construction approved development, awaiting implementation; and proposals awaiting determination within the planning process with design information in the public

domain. Proposals and design information may be deemed to be in the public domain once an application has been lodged, and the decision-making authority has formally registered the application.

The cumulative impact of a Windfarm/single turbine development on landscape and visual amenity is a product of:

the distance between individual turbines the distance over which they are visible the overall character of the landscape and its sensitivity to wind turbines the siting and design of the wind turbines themselves, and the way in which the landscape is experienced Cumulative landscape effects Cumulative landscape effects on the physical fabric of the landscape arise when two or more

developments affect landscape components such as woodland, dykes, rural roads or hedgerows. Although this may not significantly affect the landscape character, the cumulative effect on these components may be significant.

Cumulative effects on landscape character arise when two or more developments introduce new features into the landscape. In this way, they can change the landscape character to such an extent that they create a different landscape character type. This change may not be adverse; some derelict or degraded landscapes may be enhanced as a result of such a change in landscape character.



Scottish Natural Heritage defines cumulative impact as:

Table 1: Cumulative Impact Definition

Cumulative Impact

In respect of visual impacts, there are (at least) four types of cumulative effects in this context:

a) in combination

where two or more features are seen together at the same

time from the same place, in the same (arc of) view where their visual effects are combined

b) in succession where two or more features are present in views from the

same place (viewpoint) but cannot be seen at the same time, together because they are not in the same arc of view - the observer has to turn to see new sectors of view whereupon the other features unfold in succession

c) in sequence ( See additional notes )*

where two or more features are not present in views from the

same place (viewpoint) and cannot, therefore, ever be seen at the same time, even if the observer moved round the arc of view, the observer has to move to another viewpoint to see the second or more of them, so they will then appear in sequence. The frequency of occurrence in the sequence may be highly variable, ranging from frequently sequential when the features keep appearing regularly and with short time lapses between (clearly speed of travel influences this as well as distance between the viewpoints) down to

occasionally sequential where there may be long time lapses between appearances, because the observer is moving very slowly and / or the there are large distances between the viewpoints (even if not between the features)

d) perceived

where two or more features are present but one or more is never

seen by the observer, for example, because they are screened, or the

Observer is unable or unwilling to attend a viewpoint from where they would be seen. However, the observer is aware that others are there because, for example, they may have read or heard about them or seen signs to them; this is an apprehended or perceived effect but can be strongly felt; it could also, nevertheless, be mistaken because the observer's information or interpretation of it is wrong.



Table 2: Duration of Effect and Impact

Distance Between Viewpoints

Duration of View

<2km 2 – 4km 4 – 6km >6km

>4min Major Major/Moderate Moderate Moderate/Minor

2 – 4min Major/Moderate Moderate Moderate/Minor Minor

1 – 2min Moderate Moderate/Minor Minor Minor/None

<1min Moderate/Minor Minor Minor/None None

4.3 Cumulative Impact Assessment

The cumulative Impact study area was set a 5km.

With reference to this application there are 8 other turbines in the area to be considered.

Table 4. Other turbines within a 5km area of the proposal. See appendix 2 cumulative impact map which shows the positions of the other turbines.

Application Number Name East/North

36/2014/14934 In App

West Thornber, Wigglesworth. Turbine Type WTN 250kw 380089, 454437

3/2011/0364 Throstles Nest, Tosside. 15kw, 20m mast. Approved 378114, 454733

31/2009/10242 Higher Wham, Wham Lane, Giggleswick. Approved 377510, 462356

72/2012/12616 Hard Head Farm, Rathmell. Xzeres 442SR. Approved 379428, 458634

72/2013/13648 Laddy Green, Wigglesworth. 11kw Gaia. Approved 378992, 457350

72/2010/10951 Pikebar Farm, Wigglesworth. 20kw Westwind Apporved 380175, 456131

72/2012/12349 Hammerton Hall Farm, Wigglesworth. 2 x 11kw Gaia Approved

T1: 380902, 456392, T2: 380796, 456332

72/2012/13199 Boostagill Farm, Wigglesworth. Endurance 24.8m Approved

378649, 458882



Cumulative impact for this proposal is affected by a number of factors:

Height of proposed turbinePerspective

Distance

Scale

Changes in terrain

The proposed turbine is classed as Small with a height to blade tip of between 20 to 50m.

Sequential Effects.

These views occur when observers have to move to another location in order to view different wind turbine developments. Sequential Views are to Road Users. These views are limited to road users travelling along B6478, Longtons Lane, Higher Rd and Forest Beck Brow.

There are no significant views to the site from:

Wigglesworth, Rathmell

Due to separation the sequential effects are considered to be moderate in nature in the 1 – 2km radius of the site. Out side of 2km the effect is minor; this is due to differences in Landscape and the general environment.

The sensitivity of the Sequential Views to this proposal: Medium

The overall magnitude of impact on Sequential Views: Moderate

The significance of effect on sequential experiences is moderate this is due to the distance and separation of the Photomontage Viewpoints and differences in elevations and masking effects caused by vegetation and trees.

5. Viewpoint Assessment and Cumulative Impact Conclusions

The following conclusions should be read in conjunction with the photomontage and wire frame visualisations presented in Appendix 3 to 10.



Viewpoint 1:Keasden Rd. A far distance view. The proposal is 4.6km distant on a bearing of 117 deg at an AOD of 357mExisting ViewAn elevated long distance 'panoramic' view over the expansive are of the Forest of Gisburn. Predicted View with Operational Wind TurbineOnly the very tips of the proposal will be seen from this position. Type and Sensitivity of Visual ReceptorLow/Indistinct; Visual receptors with limited or passing interest in their surroundings. Views from places of work. Indoor facilities. Users of A-roads and trains.Magnitude of Change to Baseline ViewNegligible; The development would result in a barely perceptible change in the view, or would cause a ‘no change’ situation to the existing view. Weak, not legible.Assessed Significance of Visual impactVery low. Insignificant.

Viewpoint 2:Higher Rd. A near distant view. The site is 260m distant bearing 222 deg at an AOD of 272mExisting ViewA landscape of regular shaped fields, bounded by dry-stone walls, settlement is comparatively light, being mainly farms an isolated residential properties. The single track road is clearly seen set below the surrounding field levels. Isolated trees are seen with the land gradually rising to the more dominant woodland plantation areas of the upper parts of the Forest of Gisburn. Predicted View with Operational Wind TurbineEvident. The proposal dominates this STATIC viewpoint. A number of footpaths are nearby, and this will typify views tothese paths in the near distance range. Type and Sensitivity of Visual ReceptorHigh; Visual receptors with a particular interest in their surroundings or prolonged viewing opportunities. Residential locations within 1km of the proposal. Special visitor or recreational sites. Nationally or locally recognised footpaths and cycleways. Recognised scenic drives or promoted tourist routes.Magnitude of Change to Baseline ViewLarge; The development would form a prominent element within the view resulting in a prominent change to its overall quality and character. Standing out, striking.Assessed Significance of Visual impactSignificant.



Viewpoint 3:Longtons Lane. A near distance view. The proposal is 701m distant, bearing 18 deg at an AOD of 272mExisting ViewLandscape is one of poor grazing land, typical of heathland. Varying sized fields, mainly rectilinear in shape, bounded by dry-stone walls. Few properties.Predicted View with Operational Wind TurbineThe proposal will be seen as a single vertical structure in the landscape. Those properties in the vicinity do not have direct primary views to the site. There is evidence for other built infrastructure in the form of small power lines. The proposal will not have any significant impact on the visual amenity of the Forest of Gisburn.Type and Sensitivity of Visual ReceptorMedium; Visual receptors with a general interest in their surroundings or with transient viewing opportunities. General footpaths. Residential locations over 1km from the proposal. Residential and local roads. Public spacesMagnitude of Change to Baseline ViewMedium; The development would form a conspicuous element within the view resulting in conspicuous change. Distinct, noticeable. This is not an isolated structure. There are other built turbines of the same manufacture and scale nearby.Assessed Significance of Visual impactModerate.

Viewpoint 4:B6478. A middle distance view. The site is 1.38km distant on a bearing of 2 deg, with an AOD of 255mExisting ViewThe view is over a featureless landscape, gradually rising to the north with a slight dip slope to the east. Indistinct field boundaries, sparse settlement in view due to differences in levels. Predicted View with Operational Wind TurbineThe proposal is seen as an isolated vertical structure in the landscape, piercing the skyline form this position. Some properties nearby will have angled views to the site, however these views are, in the main, not primary. Type and Sensitivity of Visual ReceptorMedium; Visual receptors with a general interest in their surroundings or with transient viewing opportunities. General footpaths. Residential locations over 1km from the proposal. Residential and local roads. Public spacesMagnitude of Change to Baseline ViewMedium; The development would form a conspicuous element within the view resulting in conspicuous change. Distinct, noticeable. This is not an isolated structure. There are other built turbines of the same manufacture and scale nearby.Assessed Significance of Visual impactSlight to Moderate



Viewpoint 5:B6478, adjacent to Pyethorns. A middle distance view. The proposal is 1.34km distant, bearing 305 deg at an AOD of 234mExisting ViewThis is typical of the view that may be seen by walkers on the nearby footpath, views to traffic are rapid and perpendicular.An open landscape featuring a variety of irregular sized and shaped fields, bounded by dry stone walls, isolated and small groups of trees are seen. There are isolated properties visible, settled in the landscape. The ridge line is dominated by the edge of the Forest of GisburnPredicted View with Operational Wind TurbineThe proposal is clearly seen against the background ridgeline of trees. The middle and upper parts pierce the skyline.Type and Sensitivity of Visual ReceptorMedium/High; Visual receptors with a general interest in their surroundings or with transient viewing opportunities. General footpaths. Residential locations over 1km from the proposal. Residential and local roads. Public spaces.Magnitude of Change to Baseline ViewModerate; The development would form a conspicuous element within the view resulting in conspicuous change. Distinct, noticeable.Assessed Significance of Visual impactModerate

Viewpoint 6:Forest Becks Brow. A far distance view. The site is 3.5km distant on a bearing of 297 deg at an AOD of 196 deg.Existing ViewA panoramic, long distance view over a gently undulating landscape, featuring isolated groups of trees and farms. Again dry-stone walls form the field boundaries. The distant ridgeline is dominated by the upper parts of the Forest of GisburnPredicted View with Operational Wind TurbineThe proposal will be seen as a small, distant structure set against a backcloth of woodland plantation. Only the very upper parts of the blade geometry will break the skyline but this will not be a distinct feature.Type and Sensitivity of Visual ReceptorLow; Visual receptors with limited or passing interest in their surroundings. Views from places of work. Indoor facilities. Users of A-roads and trains.Magnitude of Change to Baseline ViewSmall; The development would form an apparent small element within the view without affecting the overall quality or character of the view. Evident.Assessed Significance of Visual impactSlight.



Viewpoint 7:Jack Lane. A far distant view. The proposed turbine is 3.65km distant on a bearing of 272 deg at an AOD of 147mExisting ViewAn undulating agricultural landscape. Field pattern is not evident due to changes in levels, evidence for streams cutting intothe middle view landscape. A part of the Higher Tarn Coppy plantation is seen. A line of small power-lines can be seen. Also seen in the view are two 'Gaia' wind turbines settled and low in the landscape. Clear evidence that the area has the capacity for small scale wind projects.Predicted View with Operational Wind TurbineThe proposal will be seen as an inconspicuous feature in the landscape at a similar scale to the existing wind turbines.Type and Sensitivity of Visual ReceptorLow; Visual receptors with limited or passing interest in their surroundings. Views from places of work. Indoor facilities. Users of A-roads and trains.Magnitude of Change to Baseline ViewVery Small; The development would form an inconspicuous minor element within the view, without affecting the overall quality or character of the view. Not obvious, lacking definition.Assessed Significance of Visual impactSlight.

Viewpoint 8:B6480 towards Settle. The proposal is 6.2km distant on a bearing of 220 deg at an AOD of 145mExisting ViewA long distance, wide view over an agricultural landscape with varied features. Predicted View with Operational Wind TurbineThe proposal will be a barely perceptible feature on the horizon, and views will vary depending on the season and weather.Type and Sensitivity of Visual Receptor. Low; Visual receptors with limited or passing interest in their surroundings. Views from places of work. Indoor facilities. Users of A-roads and trains.Magnitude of Change to Baseline ViewNegligible; The development would result in a barely perceptible change in the view, or would cause a ‘no change’ situation to the existing view. Weak, not legible.Assessed Significance of Visual impactNegligible/Zero

6. CONCLUSION

The proposal would result in the introduction of a single vertical structure of a small-medium scale to the baseline landscape. At near distance views visual impact will quite naturally be significant, particularly to footpaths that pass close to the site. The small footprint of the proposal and the absence of permanent access roads will result in only a minor and reversible loss of land. The site is close to the Forest of Bowland AONB. The joint advisory committee for the Forest of Bowland AONB states that a turbine of this scale is acceptable in the landscape around the boundaries of the AONB. The proposal is not on the skyline. There are no archaeological assets within 500m of the proposal. A search of the English Heritage portal also shows no listed



buildings within 1km of the site. MOIRA informs that the landscape capacity for wind turbines is of low sensitivity. There will be no loss of any area of Gisburn Forest and the effect on land cover is negligible and reversible. There will be no impact on watercourses or grassland.

Overall impact is: Low/medium

6.1 Summary (Overall Effect) of Cumulative impacts

The location of the proposed turbine is amongst 8 other sites in application in the area

Due to the separation and distance of the viewpoints from the proposal and changes in landscape levels and environments between the various other sites the cumulative impacts are seen to be moderate in nature, with the combined sensitivity being minor/moderate due to the their positioning in the landscape. Sequential effects are seen to affect mainly road users; the views are rapid and transient.

Overall Impact: Moderate.

lvia report for a proposed wind turbine development of a ......lvia report for a proposed wind...

Documents