Download Report

A STATEMENT BY HUGAG SUMMARISING THE PROPOSAL FOR FOUR WIND TURBINES
BETWEEN HAMSTERLEY FOREST AND THE VILLAGE OF WOODLAND
A six-year battle culminates at County Hall at 1.00pm on Tuesday 5th May. This will be when the Planning
Committee will decide on application no CMA/6/48 by Banks Renewables for four industrial-scale wind
turbines immediately adjacent to Hamsterley Forest.
The recommendation to the Committee by the Case Officer, Claire Teasdale, is for refusal. The decision,
however, must be taken by the Committee members alone, and it is not unknown for Committee
members to take a view contrary to that of the Case Officer.
Turbine size and location
These are not the sort of small turbines that can be seen at a number of local farms. Instead, at 125
metres, they would be nearly twice the height of many of the turbines at Tow Law, three times the height
of the two at Glaxo in Barnard Castle, or four times the height of the Angel of the North.
They would be immediately adjacent to the road that skirts the southern edge of Hamsterley Forest, so
close to that road, in fact, that if they were to fall over they would fall right across the road and into the
trees on the other side. No visitor to Hamsterley Forest, the county’s biggest outdoor leisure attraction,
could fail to be aware of them, no matter from what direction they approached.
They would be immediately opposite the Descend mountain biking site, on exactly the fields used by the
Air Ambulance to airlift people injured either on that deliberately challenging downhill facility, or in
walking or horse-riding accidents in other parts of the Forest.
Landscape implications
The landscape implications are equally alarming. The wind farm site is itself in an area classified as an
Area of High Landscape Value (AHLV) and within 1km of the North Pennines Area of Outstanding Natural
Beauty (AONB). DCC Head of Landscape Ged Lawson writes:
“The proposals would not be supported by the findings of the ARUP Wind Farm Development and
Landscape Capacity Study which identifies the area where they broadly lie as having no capacity for
development due to effects on local landscape character and the AONB.”
Later in the same document Mr Lawson continues: “The proposals would have significant cumulative
effects, in conjunction with existing and approved wind turbines in the area, on the special character and
qualities of the AONB in respect of the erosion of the sense of wildness, remoteness and tranquillity of
moorland landscapes along its eastern edges...”
The Director of the North Pennines AONB, Chris Woodley-Stewart, concurs:
“We contend that this proposed development is of a nature and scale that makes it wholly out of keeping
with its proposed setting and that it would have a significant adverse (effect) on the purpose of AONB
designation from much of the eastern part of the AONB.”
Mr Woodley-Stewart also draws attention to the view from the A68 that will be familiar to many readers,
saying:
“This is a well-known attractive vantage point from which to view the mosaic landscape of dales and
moors which constitutes large parts of the North Pennines. The quality of the view is such that a lay-by
was created here to facilitate people’s enjoyment of it. This important view of the AONB, one of several in
the area similarly affected, would be totally compromised by this proposal.”
Wildlife implications
Where local wildlife is concerned, the disruption to the site could be catastrophic. DCC Head of Ecology
Terry Coult reports as follows:
“Surveys in 2010 showed that eighty seven species of birds are recorded from the site survey area
including forty eight which are species of conservation concern, seventeen of which are red listed (severe
at least 50% decline in UK breeding population and range in the last 25 years) and thirty one are amber
listed (moderate 25-49% decline in UK breeding pop, range, and non-breeding population in the last 25
years). Twenty seven of these species were confirmed to be nesting (6 red list, 8 amber list).”
Mr Coult also predicts damage to bat populations, seven species of which are present on the site:
“This is an important assemblage of bat species for County Durham, given that only nine species are
recorded in the county. The table shows that two of these species are at high risk of being killed by wind
turbines and two are medium risk.”
Noise implications
The noise from these turbines would cause Mayland Lea, an attractive stone-built 18th century farmhouse
and associated buildings, to become uninhabitable and it would be closed down. Several other nearby
homes would be at risk of noise nuisance levels above the permitted standards for such developments.
Sarah Large for MAS Environmental, commissioned by DCC to report on the noise issues predicted for this
turbine installation, concludes her report as follows:
“It is recommended that the application is refused due to the predicted breach of daytime noise limits and
significant adverse noise impact, in excess of the level of impact envisaged by ETSU-R-97, that is predicted
to occur at night time. “
General implications for residents and visitors
Geoffrey Sinclair, of Environmental Services Consulting, explains the impact of the proposal on all who live
in or visit the area in these terms:
“Where turbines appear on familiar and cherished horizons or within the wider settings of buildings or
landscapes of cultural importance; dwarf or tower over the human scale of domestic living; or impede
upon areas, recreational routes and tranquil views - then they may be rationally considered as discordant,
even alien, features.”
Local responses to this application
Twenty-six Parish or Town Councils, including all immediately local ones but also others throughout
Teesdale and some further afield, have recommended against this application. No Parish Councils have
recommended approval.
Hundreds of letters have been sent to DCC in response to the application. Among the individually written
letters the vast majority object, often in strong and sometimes in passionate terms, to the proposal. In
all instances these letters come from residents or visitors, in other words persons with first-hand
knowledge of the area.
A large number of favourable letters have recently been uploaded on the DCC website also. These are
almost invariably one of three pro-forma letters, some clearly obtained as a result of canvassing in local
villages by the developer, some signed by the developer’s own employees and some by persons or
businesses with whom the developer regularly places contracts.