Pannington Farm Wind TurbineNon-Technical Summary (NTS)

December 2013

Context

This Non-Technical Summary (NTS) forms part

of the Environmental Statement (ES) which has

been prepared by AMEC Environment &

Infrastructure UK Ltd (AMEC) on behalf of PfR

(Pannington Farm) Limited (the Applicant) to

accompany a planning application for the

proposed Pannington Farm Wind Turbine

Development (herein referred to as the

‘Proposed Development’) to construct and

operate a single wind turbine on land near

Pannington Farm south of Ipswich (herein

referred to as the ‘Development Site’). The ES

presents the findings of an Environmental

Impact Assessment (EIA) which aims to identify

any potentially significant effects from the

Proposed Development and, where

appropriate, to propose suitable mitigation

measures to address or minimise any effects

identified. This document is a ‘non-technical’

summary of the main findings of the ES.

Background

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate

Change (IPCC), which is the principal scientific

body advising governments on climate change,

has confirmed the significant influence on the

global climate of increases in atmospheric

levels of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other

greenhouse gases as a result of human

activities.

The burning of fossil fuels such as coal and gas

to generate electricity is a major source of

greenhouse gas emissions. A vital part of

reducing these emissions is increasing the

proportion of electricity generated from

renewable energy sources such as wind.

The Climate Change Act 2008 sets a legally

binding target of at least an 80% cut in UK

greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. In the

shorter term it sets a target reduction in

emissions of at least 34% by 2020. In addition,

as part of EU-wide actions to increase the use

of renewable energy, the UK has a legally-

binding commitment to source 15% of its

energy from renewable sources by 2020.

DECC published the 2020 UK Renewable Energy

Roadmap in July 2011 which sets out a path as

to how the United Kingdom intends to fulfil its

obligation to the European Union of sourcing

15% of its energy from renewables by 2020.

The Roadmap follows the Renewable Energy

Strategy with some changes made in terms of

wind energy deployment scenarios. The

current central scenario for offshore wind sees

scope for 18GW by 2020 with onshore wind

scope for 13GW by 2020.

02

The coalition Government re-affirmed its

commitment to meeting these targets in its Carbon

Plan: Delivering our Low Carbon Future published by

the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC)

in December 2011. It has also published the

Electricity Market Reform White Paper (DECC, 2011)

which proposes to overhaul the current electricity

market to create a level playing field for low carbon

technologies by:

Introducing a Carbon Price Floor from April 2013

to reduce investor uncertainty, place a fair price

on carbon and provide a stronger incentive to

invest in low carbon generation now.

Introduce new long-term contracts from 2014

(Feed-in Tariffs with Contracts for Difference) to

provide stable financial incentives to invest in all

forms of low carbon electricity generation. These

will replace the existing Renewables Obligation

(although they will run in parallel with it to 2017);

and

An Emissions Performance Standard set at 450g

CO2 per kWh starting in 2013 to reinforce the

requirement that no new coal-fired power

stations are built without Carbon Capture and

Storage while allowing the necessary short-term

investment in gas to take place.

The targets are set in order to combat climate change

and provide the UK with a more secure energy supply

by reducing reliance on imported fossil fuels. As the

UK has one of the windiest climates in Europe a

significant proportion of the electricity required from

renewables is expected to come from onshore wind

generation. In order to achieve national and regional

targets for renewable energy generation and to

transform the UK to a low carbon economy a range of

large and small scale renewable energy installations

will be required. As such the Proposed Development

will contribute to the attainment of these goals.

Developer and Project Team

Partnerships for Renewables (PfR) was set up by the

Carbon Trust in 2007 to develop, construct and

operate renewable energy projects primarily on

public sector land. Partnerships for Renewables

Development Company Ltd (PfR) was established to

facilitate the development of renewable energy

projects and has set up PfR (Pannington Farm)

Limited, a subsidiary development company, to

progress this project near Pannington Farm.

The EIA has been managed and co-ordinated by

AMEC on behalf of PfR. AMEC Environment &

Infrastructure UK Ltd is one of the UK's largest

environmental and engineering consultancies and

part of a global Environment & Infrastructure division

with 7,000 employees around the world. This

division of the AMEC business delivers

environmental, engineering and related consultancy

services to customers across the public and private

sectors.

AMEC is an Institute of Environmental Management

and Assessment (IEMA) Registered Assessor (the

principle professional body for EIA in the UK) and is

highly experienced in undertaking EIA of wind energy

developments with approximately 1,250MW of

development consented.

Further specialist input came from; Hoare Lea who

carried out the noise assessment and prepared the

ES chapter on noise; Archaeological Services from

Durham University who carried out the geophysical

surveys for the archaeological assessment and

Wynns who carried out the Abnormal Indivisible

Loads Access Survey and Davidson Walsh who were

consulting engineers for scheme design.

03

The Proposed Development

This project was initially named ‘Thorington Barn Wind Energy

Development’ and was developed in partnership with Ipswich

Borough Council (IBC). The Proposed Development is now located

on neighbouring agricultural land forming part of the Pannington

Estate near Belstead, Ipswich (the Development Site) where PfR has

established the viability of constructing a single wind turbine. The

original development area was initially considered for development

(centred on 614000E 240910N) and is shown in Figure 1.1 has been

considered during site surveys undertaken for this ES and has been

included in the results presented in parts of this ES.

Following a range of technical and environmental investigations and

after extensive consultation PfR is proposing a scheme at the

Development Site comprising:

“The erection, 25 year operation and subsequent de-commissioning

of a wind energy development comprising of the following elements:

one wind turbine with a maximum overall height (to vertical blade

tip) of up to 130 metres together with one new vehicular access from

the public highway, new on-site access tracks, associated crane pad

and transformer kiosk, control building and on-site underground

cables, temporary construction compound and laydown area and

other works and development ancillary to the main development.”

The purpose of the Proposed Development is the generation of

electricity. The choice of turbine to be installed will follow a

competitive tendering exercise and will depend on which turbine

models are available in the UK market. A number of turbine models

with an ‘installed capacity’ (the maximum amount of electricity

which can be produced at any one time) of between 2MW and 3MW

and a maximum height to vertical blade tip of 130m are potentially

suitable for the Development Site. The Nordex N100 (2.5MW)

turbine is used as the ‘candidate turbine’ for the purposes of the

Environmental Impact Assessment and for calculating the expected

energy yield.

One wind turbine with a maximum height to vertical blade tip of

130m and an installed capacity of 2.5MW could generate 5.48GWh

of renewable electricity per year. This is equivalent to the amount

of electricity used annually by approximately 1,280 average UK

households and could displace approximately 2,350 tonnes of

carbon dioxide (CO2) equivalent emissions per year1. The

methodology underlying these figures is explained in full in Section

6.2 of Chapter 6.

Pannington Farm Wind

Energy Development

Number of Wind Turbines: 1

Maximum Tip Height

(combined height of blade and

tower): 130m

Estimated Total Generation

Capacity: between 2

megawatts and 3 megawatts1

Estimated Electricity

Generated Per Annum: around

5.4 gigawatt-hours 1

Households Equivalent: 1,280

average UK homes1

04

1 The most recently available data is that in

2011 average domestic electricity

consumption in the UK was 4,266kWh per

household (see cell N400 in 2011 tab of the

Excel spread sheet “Sub-National Electricity

sales and numbers of customers 2005 –

2011” Publication number URN:12D/468

from the Department of Energy and Climate

Change). This consumption figure is also

used by Renewables UK.

It is expected that one turbine with an

installed capacity of 2.5 MW could generate

5.48GWh of renewable electricity per year

(based on a capacity factor of 25% – Note

that across the entire UK for onshore wind

the five year average capacity factor (2008–

2012) is 25.9 % (Table 6.5 from the July 2013

DUKES update available here:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publicatio

ns/renewable-sources-of-energy-chapter-6-

digest-of-united-kingdom-energy-statistics-

dukes). These figures are derived as follows

in the following example (using a 25%

capacity factor): 2,500kW (1 x 2.5MW

turbine) × 8,760 hours/year × 0.25 (capacity

factor) = 5,475,000kWh. Based on the

4,266kWh household figure and the

predicted electricity generation it is

estimated that the yearly output from the

wind turbine will be equivalent to the

approximate domestic electricity needs of

1,280 average households in Britain (e.g.

5,475,000÷ 4266 = 1,280). In September

2008 the Advertising Standards Authority

endorsed a figure of 430gCO2/kWh based

on the assumption that the energy

generated by the wind turbines displaces

Combined Cycle Gas Turbines and an

average mix generation

(430gCO2/kWh). On this basis and on

the assumption that the wind

turbine’s annual output is 5.48GWh

a wind energy development of this

scale is expected to displace 2,350

tonnes of CO2

The Development Site Location Plan (Figure 1.1 of

the ES) and Proposed Wind Energy Development

Layout (Figure 1.2a of the ES) are reproduced at the

end of this NTS along with a diagram of a typical

wind turbine structure (Figure 4.1 of the ES) which is

for a 2.5MW – 3MW machine with a 130m tip

height. This is the maximum overall height (to

vertical blade tip) of the turbine to be installed.

It is important to note that the works comprising the

electrical connection to the local distribution

network are not part of this planning application and

any consents required for these works will be

undertaken by the District Network Operator (DNO)

UK Power Networks. Negotiations are on-going

between the applicant and UK Power Networks to

confirm the exact method of connection to the local

distribution network. It is currently anticipated that

a connection will be made at the 11kV Tattingstone

Sub-station approximately 2.5km south of the

Development Site. The off-site grid connection is

anticipated to follow The Street south-east on to the

A137 (as shown in Figure 1.2b of the ES) where it

would head south-west following West Horse Hill

road and Coxhall road before reaching the sub-

station. At this stage it is not envisaged that any new

overhead line will be required to connect the turbine

to the local electricity network and therefore a

separate consent under Section 37 of the Electricity

Act is not anticipated.

The Development Site is centred on OS grid

reference 613939E 240345N and is comprised of

agricultural land. Furthermore the land on and

surrounding which the turbine is proposed to be

located is already subject to a consent for gravel

extraction and, therefore, already approved for

development. Because these two activities can

effectively co-exist this provides a way to optimise

the use of the developed land without impact on

further undeveloped land.

The Great Eastern Main Line railway runs south-west

to north-east forming the north-eastern boundary for

the Development Site. It is bounded by The Street and

Wherstead Wood to the south-west and agricultural

land in all other directions with Jimmy’s Farm (a

working farm and local tourist attraction) located to

the east at Pannington Hall. Pannington Hall cottage,

an occupied private residence, is located

approximately 450m to the south-east of the

Development Site boundary. Hill Covert Woodland is

located 500m north-east of the Development Site

boundary beyond Jimmy’s Farm. All other residential

properties are more than 700m from the proposed

wind turbine.

Existing topographical information indicated on the

Ordnance Survey map confirms that elevation of the

Development Site varies from 40m AOD in the south-

west to 35m AOD in the north-eastern corner.

Elevations fall to ~20m AOD in the easternmost corner

and alongside the railway line running into Ipswich.

There are no watercourses present within the

Development Site boundary. However, as described in

Chapter 13 paragraph 13.3.5, a field ditch was

identified along the south-western boundary of the

Development Site the location of which is shown on

Figure 13.1.

The A14 trunk road runs north-west to south-east

approximately 1km north-east of the Development

Site Boundary and the nearest village, Belstead, is

located approximately 900m to the north-west of the

proposed turbine.

Thorington Hall and Thorington Hall Cottage are

situated approximately 600m north-east of the

Development Site boundary. Both properties are

served by a private access track along which there is a

public right of way (a footpath and a bridleway) which

runs north-east to the south-west through the original

development area and linking to the public highway to

the north and south.

05

A residential housing estate which forms part of the

extreme south-western limits of the city of Ipswich is

present more than 1,200m from the wind turbine on

the northern side of the A14.

A number of Public Rights of Way traverse the

Original Development Area the key routes being FP31

and FP34 which cross the development site in an

east-west direction and FP33 which runs north-south

through the centre of the Original Development

Area. No Public Rights of Way are present within the

Development site boundary. However FP41 runs

approximately 100m to the north-east.

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)

EIA is a process that collects information about

potential environmental effects of a Proposed

Development and evaluates and presents this

information in a way that both assists consultation

and enables decision-makers to take account of these

effects when determining whether or not a project

should proceed. If the project does proceed the EIA

also helps identify any mitigation measures or

controls over the construction or operation that

might be required. The content and scope of the EIA

was agreed through consultation with Babergh

District Council following issue of their Scoping

Opinion in September 2011.

The EIA has identified the likely effects of the

Proposed Development on the environment and an

assessment has been made as to whether any of

these could be significant. In general terms

establishing whether an identified effect is significant

is determined by the importance of the receptor (e.g.

a particular listed building, ecological designated site

or landscape character area) and the magnitude of

change that will occur as a result of the construction,

operation and de-commissioning of the turbine

which, in turn, establishes the significance of effect.

Chapter 2 of the ES sets out the EIA methodology

employed in more detail.

A number of mitigation measures to reduce potentially

significant effects have been incorporated into the

design of the Proposed Development. Additional

measures are set out in a proposed Environmental

Management Plan (EMP) (Chapter 15 of the ES) to be

implemented during the construction and operation of

the wind turbine.

The Environmental Statement (ES) reports the findings

of the EIA which has been prepared in accordance with

The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact

Assessment) Regulations 2011. The ES comprises this

NTS and three volumes: Volume 1 – Written Statement,

Volume 2 – Figures and Volume 3 – Appendices.

The assessment of effects has been undertaken in an

impartial manner with the findings presented

systematically in the ES which will be used by Babergh

District Council to help inform its decision about

whether or not the Proposed Development should be

allowed to proceed.

Consultation

A vital aspect of the EIA process is consultation both to

agree which environmental topics need most attention

(scope of the EIA and methodologies to be adopted in

assessing likely effects) and to understand public

perception of the Proposed Development in order to

help inform the design process. Consultation with

statutory and non-statutory bodies was undertaken

through a formal scoping exercise with Babergh District

Council in September 2011. In addition there has been

continued dialogue with relevant statutory and non-

statutory consultees both before and after the Scoping

Opinion (setting out the environmental topics to be

considered further) was received from Babergh District

Council. The full list of consultees is set out in Chapter

2 of the ES and includes amongst others: Natural

England, English Heritage, Environment Agency, RSPB,

Suffolk County Council Highways, Suffolk County

Council Ecologist, Suffolk Wildlife Trust, Suffolk County

Council Archaeologist and Suffolk Coast and Heaths

AONB Partnership.

06

PfR’s projects enter the public domain at the very

early stages of development before any of the

detailed environmental work has been carried out.

This project first entered the public domain in March

2011 and evolved over time from a three-turbine

proposal to a single turbine project. Throughout the

lead up to the submission of this planning

application PfR has used a variety of communication

methods to keep local communities and other

stakeholders informed and to encourage them to

engage in the development process. These included

holding public exhibitions, wind farm visits,

producing periodic written correspondence and e-

mails to keep stakeholders informed, holding

community surgeries at various intervals throughout

the development process, providing a dedicated

website, giving presentations to interested parties

and attending house visits to nearest neighbours of

the proposed development. PfR’s consultation

events were advertised extensively with a series of

project newsletters, press releases and local radio

interviews. The following table summarises the key

events in the pre-application consultation:

March 2011 - Project-specific website launched

23rd March 2011 - Public Exhibition (Belstead

Village Hall)

14th July 2011 - Community Surgery (Belstead

Village Hall) & Site Walkover

September 2011 - Jimmy’s Farm Opinion Survey

Photomontage and Information Display

1st November 2011 - Community Surgery

(Belstead Village Hall) and walk up to the

recently installed wind monitoring mast

29th and 30th May 2012 - Wind Farm Visit with

presentation on wind energy

28th January 2013 - Community Surgery

(Pinewood, Belstead Brook Hotel)

29th January 2013 - Community Surgery

(Belstead Village Hall)

26th September 2013 - Single Turbine Proposal

Announced

The specific details of these communication methods

and results are outlined in the Statement of

Community Involvement. Furthermore the

Statement of Community Involvement clearly

demonstrates that PfR has listened and responded to

the concerns of local people by the evident evolution

of the project which has been revised from a three-

turbine proposal initially to a two-turbine and finally

a single turbine proposal.

Environmental Effects

The scoping exercise identified a range of potential

environmental effects that could arise as a result of

the development (which was a scheme of three

turbines at that time). These potential effects were

subject to detailed assessments using methodologies

specific to the relevant environmental topic. Those

topics considered in the EIA and presented in this ES

are listed as follows:

Climate Change Mitigation and Other

Atmospheric Emissions - Chapter 6;

Traffic and Transport – Chapter 7;

Noise – Chapter 8;

Landscape and Visual Impact – Chapter 9;

Cultural Heritage– Chapter 10;

Ecology – Chapter 11;

Ornithology – Chapter 12;

Hydrology – Chapter 13; and

Shadow Flicker – Chapter 14.

The following sections provide a brief, non-technical

summary of the main findings of the EIA split by

environmental topic. These findings are described in

detail within the individual environmental topic

chapters of the ES.

07

The Environmental Statement

The ES, which accompanies the planning

application to Babergh District Council, provides

detail of the assessment of identified significant

environmental effects resulting from the

construction, operation and de-commissioning

of the Proposed Development. The following

sections provide a brief, non-technical summary

of the main findings of the EIA which are

described in detail within the individual chapters

of the full ES.

Climate Change Mitigation and Other

Atmospheric Emissions– Chapter 6

The assessment of the effects on climate change

included calculating the expected renewable

electricity that would be produced by the

Proposed Development. The assessment

calculated that the Proposed Development could

annually generate 5.48GWh of renewable

electricity per year. This is equivalent to the

amount of electricity used annually by 1,280

average households and avoids 2,350 tonnes of

CO2 equivalent emissions per year1. Maximising

the renewable energy potential of the

Development Site will result in a positive effect

on climate change although it is not considered

appropriate to assign any level of significance to

this effect.

There is the potential for an increase in dust

during construction of the Proposed

Development due to earthworks and traffic

movement. The assessment comprised a desk-

based study to identify potential receptors

affected by dust emissions. It concluded that

the embedded mitigation measures, in line with

existing policy guidance and environmental

legislation, will reduce the risk of any dust

nuisance occurring at adjacent residential

properties during construction.

Traffic and Transport – Chapter 7

The Traffic and Transport element of the EIA has

considered the environmental effects associated

with abnormal load and HGV traffic movements

that will occur during the construction period. The

construction traffic is proposed to route to the

Development Site from the A14, the A137 and The

Street. It has been assumed that the turbine

nacelles and blades, as well as transformers, will be

shipped to the Port of Felixstowe and will be

delivered to the Development Site by road on

abnormal load transporters. The methodology

used for the assessment is based on the Institute of

Environmental Management and Assessment

(IEMA) guidance document entitled ‘Guidelines for

Environmental Assessment of Road Traffic’. The

purpose of this guidance is to provide a systematic

framework for the appraisal of environmental

effects as a result of traffic associated with a

development proposal.

The maximum traffic effects associated with the

whole development are predicted to occur during

turbine foundation concrete pouring during which

there would be 75 daily HGV movements over a

two-day period in the third month of construction.

During the remainder of the six-month

construction period the maximum traffic

movement generated by the development would

be 11 HGVs in the first month in addition to the 20

staff trips at the beginning and end of the day.

The traffic and transport assessment has identified

that the potential environmental effects of driver

delay and accidents and safety will be minimal and

‘not significant’ as the duration of effects is limited.

In addition the implementation of a Traffic

Management Plan (TMP) will manage the effects of

the development construction.

08

The TMP which will be agreed with Babergh

District Council prior to construction

commencement will detail measures aimed at

minimising adverse environmental effects

associated with traffic and transport during

construction. The TMP is expected to include

details on car parking, measures to encourage

multi-occupancy of vehicles bringing construction

personnel to site, temporary road signage

requirements, off-loading proposals, construction

traffic routing and timing of deliveries.

During the operation of the wind turbine a low

level of light vehicle traffic for maintenance is

expected with occasional requirements for larger

vehicles/plant for component

maintenance/replacement. Therefore the effects

on the local traffic numbers are not significant.

De-commissioning of the wind turbine is likely to

require less vehicle traffic than during

construction as delivery of some materials is not

required. The effects on local traffic numbers are

therefore likely to not be significant.

Noise – Chapter 8

Hoare Lea Acoustics (HLA) were commissioned by

Partnership for Renewables (PfR) to undertake a

noise impact assessment for the construction and

operation of the Proposed Development.

Noise will be emitted by equipment and vehicles

used during the construction and de-

commissioning of the wind energy development

and by the wind turbine itself during operation.

The level of noise emitted by the sources and the

distance from those sources to the receiver

locations are the main factors determining levels

of noise at receptor locations resulting from the

development.

Construction Noise

Construction noise has been assessed by a desk-

based study of potential representative

construction programme and by assuming the wind

energy development is constructed using standard

and common methods. Noise levels have been

calculated for receiver locations closest to the

areas of work and compared with guideline and

baseline values. Construction noise, by its very

nature, tends to be temporary and highly variable

and, therefore, much less likely to cause adverse

effects. Various mitigation methods have been

proposed to reduce the effects of construction

noise the most important of these being

restrictions of hours for heavy goods vehicle

deliveries and activities that may give rise to

audible noise at the surrounding properties to

08:00 to 18:00 Monday to Friday and 08:00 to

13:00 on Saturdays. It is concluded that noise

generated through construction activities will have

a negligible effect.

De-commissioning is likely to result in less noise

than during construction of the proposed

development. The construction phase has been

considered to have negligible noise effects;

therefore de-commissioning will, in the worst case,

also have negligible noise effects.

Operational Noise

Operational wind turbines emit noise from the

rotating blades as they pass through the air. This

noise can sometimes be described as having a

regular ‘swish’. The amount of noise emitted tends

to vary depending on the wind speed. When there

is little wind the turbine rotors will turn slowly and

produce lower noise levels than during high winds

when the turbine reaches its maximum output and

maximum rotational speed. Background noise

levels at nearby properties will also change with

wind speed increasing in level as wind speeds rise

due to wind in trees and around buildings, etc.

09

Noise levels from operation of the proposed wind

turbine have been predicted for those locations

around the development site most likely to be

affected by noise. Surveys have been carried out to

establish existing baseline noise levels at a

representative number of these properties. Noise

limits have been derived from data about the

existing noise environment following the method

stipulated in national planning guidance. Predicted

operational noise levels have been compared to the

limit values to demonstrate that a wind turbine of

the type and size which would be installed can

operate within the limits so derived. It is concluded

therefore that operational noise levels from the

wind energy development will be within levels

deemed, by national guidance, to be acceptable for

wind energy schemes.

Landscape and Visual – Chapter 9

The assessment has considered the potential for

significant landscape and visual effects to arise as a

result of the construction and operation of the

proposed turbine. Landscape effects may include

changes to the landscape elements and patterns

within the development site, changes to landscape

character and effects upon nationally and locally

designated landscapes.

The landscape assessment considered the potential

for effects on three nationally designated

landscapes (the Suffolk Coast and Heaths and

Dedham Vale Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty

and the Suffolk Heritage Coast), six locally

designated Special Landscape Areas and sixteen

landscape character types (as defined by the Suffolk

and Essex Landscape Character Assessments). It

concluded that there would be no significant effects

upon any nationally or locally designated

landscapes and that there would be significant

landscape effects to only the two landscape

character types closest to the development site:

• The western and central parts of LCT B – Ancient

Estate Farmlands; and

• The Belstead Brook Valley and northern Alton Water

parts of LCT I – Rolling Estate Farmlands.

The landscape assessment therefore concluded that the

proposed development is appropriate to the capacity of

the receiving landscape and is acceptable in landscape

terms.

The assessment of visual effects is concerned with

changes to views available to people and to their visual

amenity. These include views from individual residential

properties, settlements, transportation routes and

outdoor recreational facilities such as public rights of

way, open access areas, country parks, or golf courses.

The visual assessment considered the potential for

significant levels of visual effect to be sustained by one

hundred and sixty-eight separate visual receptors.

It is widely recognised that wind energy development

will inevitably result in some significant visual effects due

to the height and movement of turbines. However the

number of significant visual effects assessed as certain or

likely to arise as a result of the introduction of the

Pannington Farm Wind Turbine is relatively limited being

concentrated upon a proportion of residents in

properties within 1.2 km and users of the parts of the

public rights of way network within 3km.

The assessment effects on the views of residents within

1.2km concluded that the proposed development may

result in significant effects on the views available from

twenty-two of the forty individual residential properties

or groups of properties within this area as might

reasonably be expected for any wind turbine

development within this distance. If the groupings used

in the assessment are disaggregated this represents a

maximum of forty-eight individual properties out of the

total of eighty-eight within 1.2km.

09 10 10

It should be borne in mind that this figure is

likely to overstate the actual number of

properties at which significant effects on views

might be sustained as the group assessments

were based on the highest level of effect

sustained by any one property within a group.

The distribution of potentially significantly

affected properties in relation to the proposed

turbine would be:

• one property to the north-east

(Thorington Hall);

• three properties to the south-east

(Pannington Hall, Pannington Hall Cottage

and Bluegates Farm);

• two properties to the west (36 & 37

Bentley Lane); and

• forty-two properties within Belstead (Pine

Lodge, Belstead Group 2, Garden House,

Belstead Groups 3 & 4, Windmill Ridge,

Belstead Groups 5, 6 & 8, Cropley Grove,

The Bogan, Strathlea and Belstead Groups

9, 10, 14 & 15).

Of these properties thirty-two may sustain a

‘moderate’ level of effect and sixteen a

‘substantial’ level of effect. No properties are

assessed as being likely to sustain the highest

‘very substantial’ level of effect.

With regard to other settlements the

assessment concludes that no other residential

visual receptors would be likely to sustain

significant adverse visual effects. The

assessment also concludes that no recreational

visual receptors using country parks, visiting

parks and gardens, at golf clubs, at caravan

parks, walking regional trails or cycling regional

or national cycle routes would sustain

significant adverse visual effects.

Recreational visual receptors using sections of any

of the PRoWs that are entirely or partly located

within the development site itself would sustain

significant adverse effects due to the proximity and

therefore the scale of the turbine augmented in

some instances by the presence of ground level

components. The assessment also included

recreational visual receptors using PRoWs within

3km of the proposed turbine grouped together as

seven PRoW networks (A – G). It was concluded

that significant adverse visual effects would be

experienced by users of some of the PRoWs in

three of these seven groups of PRoWs: those to the

north, west and east of the development site.

Detailed consideration has also been given to the

potential for the residents at the closest properties

to sustain unacceptable levels of effects upon their

residential visual amenity. Although residents at

forty-eight properties within 1.2km could sustain

significant adverse visual effects none would

sustain the highest ‘very substantial’ level of effect

and when the wider criteria employed in

determining residential visual amenity are applied

none of the residents at these properties would

sustain unacceptable adverse effects upon their

residential visual amenity. A key factor in this is

that the proposed wind energy development

consists of a single turbine avoiding any scope for

residents in any property to have a sense that they

are surrounded by turbines. All properties would

be separated from the proposed turbine by at least

540m (at least 700m with the exception of

Pannington Hall and Pannington Hall Cottage). In

conjunction with the fact that there would always

be at least some intervening vegetation to help to

provide the requisite sense of separation the scope

for the turbine to seem overbearing is effectively

removed.

11

The cumulative assessment concluded that the

separation distances between the proposed

Pannington Farm Wind Turbine and the limited

number of other onshore and offshore wind

farms included within the cumulative assessment

are sufficiently large to ensure that there would

be no potential for significant cumulative

landscape or visual effects to arise.

Cultural Heritage – Chapter 10

The potential for archaeological remains within

the Development Site has been suggested by

artefact finds and areas of interest in the

surrounding area which are recorded on the

Suffolk Historic Environment Record. A

geophysical survey was undertaken at an early

stage in the development design process which

covered key areas of the Development Site and a

wider surrounding area (the original

development area). This identified the possible

course of a palaeochannel within the

Development Site. The survey did not indicate

any archaeological remains within the

Development Site but did confirm the presence of

some recorded features in the vicinity of the

Development Site. No direct effects on

archaeological remains have therefore been

identified.

There is some potential that further

archaeological remains, which have not currently

been identified, could be encountered during

construction. The possibility for this can be

addressed by trial trench archaeological

evaluation following determination of the

planning application and prior to construction

works commencing and which could be made a

condition of any planning permission

There is the possibility for the construction

methodology of some elements of the scheme,

such as access tracks, to be adapted to preserve

any important remains thus identified. There is

also some potential for the micro-siting of

elements of the scheme by up to 50m in order to

avoid any important archaeological remains

identified subject to other constraints. However

the lack of identified archaeological remains and

the small footprint of the Proposed Development

is such that it is expected that any remains which

are affected can be excavated and recorded and

there will be no significant effects on heritage

assets within the Development Site. The

potential for any effect on archaeological remains

as a result of the Proposed Development should

also be seen in the context of an existing

permission for the extraction of sand and gravel

from land including the Development Site which

would, in any case, be expected to completely

remove any remains of archaeological (or

palaeoarchaeological; palaeoenvironmental)

interest which may be present.

There are a number of nationally designated

monuments and buildings in the area surrounding

the Proposed Development. However there are

few monuments with upstanding remains whose

settings contribute to their heritage significance

and would be likely to be affected. Listed

buildings in the vicinity of the Development Site

tend to occupy relatively sheltered locations and

few have outward views which are important to

their heritage significance or which are likely to

be affected where they do occur. Listed buildings

within the vicinity of the Development Site also

tend to be well screened by mature trees and

hedgerows which predominate in this area.

13 12

It is considered that the effect of the

operational wind turbine on the setting of

those assets identified will result in no

significant effects. Moreover any effects are

entirely reversible on the de-commissioning of

the development. Given the 25 year term of

the consent applied for this is a relatively small

length of time in view of the longevity of

buildings and particularly of monuments in the

vicinity of the Development Site and changes

wrought on the landscape during this time.

It is judged that all effects on heritage assets

arising from the Proposed Development fall

considerably short of substantial harm in

terms of the National Planning Policy

Framework (NPPF) and must be weighed

against the wider benefits associated with the

proposal accordingly.

Ecology – Chapter 11

The biodiversity baseline was established by

obtaining data relating to statutory and non-

statutory biodiversity sites, priority habitats

and species and legally protected and

controlled species within the zone of influence

of the Proposed Development. Surveys

undertaken included an extended phase 1

habitat survey, hedgerow surveys, surveys for

protected species (badgers, bats, dormouse,

great crested newts and reptiles) and legally

controlled plants. The effects of the Proposed

Development on the following biodiversity

receptors were considered in the detailed

assessment: Spinney Wood/Wherstead Wood

County Wildlife Site, hedgerows, badger, bats,

dormouse, reptiles and great crested newt.

Initial assessment of effects on these receptors

was based on the incorporation of a number of

mitigation measures into the scheme design.

These include: dust suppression measures,

retention of the highest-value habitats on the

Development Site, a minimum distance of 50m

between turbine blade tips and the nearest

point of woodland and hedgerows to reduce

the likelihood of bat collisions with rotating

turbine blades, a Construction Environmental

Management Plan (CEMP) and accompanying

method statements in relation to the protection

of legally protected species, dust suppression

measures, a site speed limit of 10mph to reduce

the risk of collisions with fauna including

badgers, operational noise limits to be set

relative to the background noise levels and

siting of the turbine and associated

infrastructure away from any known badger

setts.

No significant effects were predicted for any

ecological receptors other than hedgerows.

Not significant, but greater than negligible,

effects were predicted for some bat species as a

result of potential turbine collisions and on

hedgerows and dormice as a result of the

removal and/or trimming back of section of

hedgerow to facilitate the access road.

Furthermore the required visibility splays at the

site entrance have been designed based on

data relating to the actual speed at which

vehicles travel along the road as opposed to the

road speed limit of 60mph. This minimises the

requirements for hedgerow removal and

trimming to reduce effects on the hedgerow

resource and dormice habitat.

16 04 13

Further mitigation and monitoring measures were

proposed and will be incorporated into the

Environmental Management Plan namely:

Minimum two-for-one replacement of

hedgerows to be removed or trimmed back with

new planting;

Additional measures to improve habitat

suitability for dormouse foraging and nesting

through sensitive habitat management;

Maintenance of short vegetation/arable crop

around the turbine to discourage bat foraging

and therefore further reduce the risk of

collisions; and

A monitoring scheme to assess the effectiveness

of the mitigation proposed for bats.

No significant residual effects are predicted as a

result of constructing and operating the Proposed

Development. No significant in-combination effects

of the present scheme and other developments

(including the gravel extraction scheme and the off-

site grid connection) are predicted.

Ornithology – Chapter 12

Twelve months of bird surveys were carried out at

the Development Site between April 2011 and March

2012 comprising vantage point watches, winter

walkover surveys and breeding bird territory

mapping surveys.

The breeding bird community observed on site and in

the wider survey area comprised a range of common

and widespread farmland species including skylark,

linnet, chaffinch, whitethroat and yellowhammer.

The winter bird community was found to be typical

of similar arable farmland habitats within the wider

area. Those species most regularly occurring on-site

and within the wider survey area included wood

pigeon, black-headed gull, herring gull, chaffinch,

starling and skylark. Those species most regularly

recorded along hedgerow, tree lines and scrub

habitats in the wider area included fieldfare and

redwing.

Flight activity of focal species was limited to a

number of kestrel flights throughout the survey

season and very low numbers of lapwing and pink-

footed goose flights during the winter. The risk of

collision is predicted to be negligible for all three

species.

Active crops will however be maintained within

and around the turbine location in order to avoid

the presence of rough grassland and fringe

habitats which are important for kestrel foraging

further reducing collision risk.

No significant residual effects are predicted as a

result of constructing and operating the Proposed

Development. No significant in-combination

effects of the present scheme and other

developments (including the gravel extraction

scheme and the off-site grid connection) are

predicted.

Hydrology – Chapter 13

An assessment was carried out to provide an

understanding of the hydrological, hydrogeological

and ground conditions baseline for the

Development Site. In summary a desk-based study

identified several receptors that have the potential

to be affected by the development resulting from a

change in water quality or flood risk not only by

the construction phase but also by the change in

land use associated with the Proposed

Development. The associated impacts of the

Proposed Development on the water environment

including those associated with flood risk and

ground conditions were considered. However, in

line with existing policy guidance and

environmental legislation, mitigation measures in

the form of pollution prevention and drainage

control will be put in place to ensure there will be

no residual significant effects on hydrological or

hydrogeological receptors arising from the

development.

14

Shadow Flicker – Chapter 14

Under certain combinations of geographical

position, time of day and time of year and weather

conditions the sun may pass behind the rotor of a

wind turbine and cast a shadow on to nearby

properties. When the blades rotate the shadow

moves and, where the shadow is cast over an

aperture such as a window or an open door, the

light intensity within the room may appear to

increase and decrease as the shadow passes

repeatedly and this is known as ‘shadow flicker’.

Experience has shown that shadow flicker has the

potential to cause annoyance to occupants of

affected properties under certain circumstances.

The National Policy Statement (NPS) for

Renewable Energy Infrastructure (EN-3) (DECC,

2011) discusses the planning and development of

nationally significant renewable energy schemes

across England. This guidance is also of relevance

to smaller schemes as emphasised by Paragraph 3

of the NPPF which states that the NPSs form part

of the overall planning framework and are a

material consideration in decisions on planning

applications. Reference is made to shadow flicker

in NPS EN-3 which states that “Where wind

turbines have been proposed within 10 rotor

diameters of an existing occupied building, a

shadow flicker assessment should be carried out

by the applicant”. It also states that there is

“unlikely to be a significant impact at distances

greater than ten rotor diameters from a turbine”.

A study has therefore been carried out to identify

whether shadow flicker is likely to occur at

residential and selected non-residential properties

in the vicinity of the proposed wind turbine

location (a study area of 1,050m has been used to

reflect a 100m rotor diameter with an addition of

50m to allow for micro-siting of the turbine).

Modelling has been carried out to predict the

duration of any shadow flicker effects and the

times of day and year when it could occur. The

effect of shadow flicker on nearby residential and

selected non-residential properties (e.g. village

hall) is quantified by calculating the predicted

theoretical maximum number of hours per year

that shadow flicker may occur at a dwelling from

the relative position of the turbine, the geometry

of the wind turbine and the latitude of the

Proposed Development. The model does not take

into account the screening effect of nearby

vegetation or neighbouring buildings. There are

sixty-four potential receptors within 1,050m of the

proposed wind turbine; the potential receptors

have been grouped by location and, where

necessary, average window parameters have been

used in the model. In summary the assessment

has shown that there is the possibility of eleven

individual receptors predicted to experience a

significant theoretical level of shadow flicker effect

prior to accounting for real weather conditions and

the application of mitigation measures.

In practice the magnitude of shadow flicker effect

will be less than that calculated due to a number of

factors which are not considered in the model

including the presence of obstacles such as trees

and buildings, times when the wind turbine is not

turning and the orientation of the rotor relative to

the windows of nearby properties due to wind

direction. The base model used in this assessment

also does not account for cloud cover which may

prevent shadow flicker from occurring. Historical

data for Wattisham met office, located 15km from

the Proposed Development, indicate that 38% of

daylight hours are considered sunshine hours.

Therefore as part of this shadow flicker assessment

the likely amount of shadow flicker effect has in

addition been calculated based on this average

number of sunshine hours.

15

The proposed turbine will incorporate an automatic turbine control system which can be programmed

and activated to fully mitigate and avoid any shadow flicker effect that is predicted to occur once

operational. No significant residual shadow flicker effects are therefore anticipated.

Further Information

Printed copies of the non-technical summary and ES (including figures and appendices) may be obtained

from Partnerships for Renewables, Station House, 12 Melcombe Place, London, NW1 6JJ. This non-

technical summary is available free of charge and a limited number of hard copies of the Environmental

Statement are available for £500.00 per copy. A limited number of CDs/DVDs containing PDF files of the

Environmental Statement are available for £15 per CD/DVD. Alternatively these electronic files can be

downloaded at no charge from PfR’s Pannington Farm website; http://www.pfr.co.uk/panningtonfarm.

Copies of the Environmental Statement may be viewed at the following location during opening hours:

Babergh District Council

Corks Lane

Hadleigh

Ipswich

IP7 6SJ

16