PARISH
Elmton with Creswell
________________________________________________________________________
APPLICATION
LOCATION
Erection of Wind turbine (45m high to blade tip)
Land Approximately 400M To The East Of Markland Farm On
Disused Railway Line off Markland Lane Clowne
APPLICANT
Sheaf Energy Limited Wards Court 203 Ecclesall Road Sheffield S11
8HW
APPLICATION NO. 12/00588/SCREEN
FILE NO.
CASE OFFICER
Mr T Ball
DATE RECEIVED 17th December 2012
DELEGATED APPLICATION
________________________________________________________________________
SITE
Former railway line used as footpath route and as farm access to fields. Open agricultural
area with a mix of arable and pastoral land. Field boundaries generally maintained
hedgerows to southern side of former railway line, large open fields to northern side.
Boundaries to former railway fragmented overgrown hawthorn hedgerow with other trees
and shrubs. General flat landscape with to the north (approx. 200m), east (300m) and
south (300m) Markland and Hollinhill Grips – a limestone gorge with caves and wildlife
interests. – with woodland to gorge tops/sides and bottom.
Markland and Hollinhill Grips are an SSSI and a conservation area, also listed in the
Derbyshire Historic Environment Record (HER) and described as a limestone gorge with 3
arms containing 12 caves 41 possible rock shelters of various sizes and numerous
fissures.
The land in between the two gorges of Markland and Hollinhill is the Markland Grips
Promontory Fort, a scheduled Ancient Monument and described in the HER as an Iron
Age hill fort re-occupied in the 2nd/3rd century. The field to the west of the Ancient
Monument is also recorded in the HER as an area where prehistoric flints, and RomanoBritish pottery sherds have been found. The proposal is situated approximately 40m west
of this area which also forms the boundary of the Conservation Area.
The former railway line is recorded in the HER as part of the Lancashire, Derbyshire &
East Coast Railway Langwith to Beighton branch, opened 1989, closed to passenger
traffic in 1939. The former railway line is also a wildlife site recorded in the Derbyshire
Wildlife Sites Register being one of the few remaining disused railway lines still supporting
excellent examples of magnesian limestone habitats especially unimproved calcareous
grassland. .
PROPOSAL
This is request for a screening opinion as to whether an Environmental Impact
Assessment will be required for the proposed development.
The proposal is to install one wind turbine, 50kW, hub height 35m with10m blades giving
blade tip height of 45m on the former railway line in a position approximately 370m east of
Markland Farm, 560m south-east from Hollin Hill Road at Clowne (by the water treatment
works).
CONSULTATIONS
Local Highway Authority (DCC): No objections. 16.01.13
Report 12-588
Page 1 of 4
Derbyshire Countryside Services Greenway Officer (DCC): Railway line is safeguarded as
a trail through the Bolsover District Local Plan; it is still a long term strategic aim to develop
a multi-user Greenway along the railway line between Clowne and Creswell. It is essential
that the route be kept free of any development that may impinge on this. The proposed
Greenway is identified in the East Derbyshire Greenway Strategy and the Bolsover Green
Infrastructure Study. 17.01.13
Coal Authority: No observations or specific comments, the proposal does not fall within
the defined ‘Development High Risk Area’. 23.01.13
Elmton with Creswell Parish Council: Need an Environmental Statement. 25.01.13
Whitwell Parish Council: The Parish Council are concerned with the positioning of the
turbine and would prefer it to be sited at least 50metres from the footpath. We are also
concerned about its proximity to the Landmarks site regarding noise disturbance and what
impact this would have on those attending the site. 29.01.13
Clowne Parish Council: As a neighbouring Parish Council Members continued to express
concerns (as previous). The location of the turbine is inappropriate as it is the location of a
regular walk (R of W) for local parishioners. Members continued with the following
concerns: too close to residential properties, within a conservation area, noise pollution.
05.02.13
Pollution Control Officer (Noise): Potential noise levels will need to be addressed.
Applicants should be mindful that ETSU-97-R suggests that noise issues should be taken
into account when making an application. This is likely to require a background noise
survey, the noise assessment for the proposed turbine should then address all potential
noise related problems. 04.03.13
Derbyshire Wildlife Trust: The site for the turbine appears to be on or adjacent to Local
Wildlife Site BO096. At the very minimum an application should be supported by an
extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey and Protected Species Assessment with particular focus
on determining the level of bat activity in the vicinity of the proposed turbine. The
application should adhere to Natural England’s Technical Information note in relation to
Bats and the siting of turbines. 14.03.13
Development Control Archaeologist (DCC): Located on course of former railway
(Derbyshire HER 99014), therefore unlikely to encounter any significant archaeological
remains. General location however of high archaeological significance - 170m west of
Scheduled Monument – Markland Grips promontory fort. Likely to be significant visual
impacts on the setting and its amenity value; currently accessible by public footpath at its
south-western end. Views of English Heritage should be sought. Below-ground
archaeological resource associated with the fort extends further west than the scheduled
area, to within 40m of proposed location. Peripheral groundworks associated with the
turbine may impact on undesignated below-ground remains. Any application must
therefore make careful assessment of likely visual impacts to the scheduled fort in
particular, and in general to other designated heritage assets within the visual envelope of
the proposal and of direct impacts to undesignated below-ground archaeology to allow the
heritage impacts to be understood inline with the National Planning Policy Framework.
25.01.13
Natural England: On the basis of the material supplied, in so far as statutory designated
sites, landscapes and protected species are concerned, an EIA is not required because
the interest features of the nearby SSSI are not likely to be significantly affected by the
proposals. Not aware of any significant populations of protected species. If determine that
an EIA is not required should ensure that application is supported by sufficient biodiversity
and landscape information to assess the weight to give to these material considerations.
13.02.13.
English Heritage, Conservation Manager (BDC): No responses received.
Report 12-588
Page 2 of 4
PUBLICITY
N/A
POLICY
2011Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations (“the
EIA Regulations”)
The authority must consider whether the proposed development is either Schedule 1
development or Schedule 2 development that is likely to have significant effects on the
environment by virtue of factors such as nature, size or location, taking into account the
selection criteria in Schedule 3. Guidance for wind farm developments is also set out in
Circular 2/99: Environmental Impact Assessment.
ASSESSMENT
Under the EIA Regulations the proposed development is not Schedule 1 development.
Under the EIA Regulations the proposed development is a Schedule 2, Regulation 2(1),
development, being an installation for the harnessing of wind power for energy production
(wind farms). In accordance with paragraph 3 (i) of Schedule 2, the proposal does meet
the criteria for EIA development as it involves the installation of one turbine with a hub
height which exceeds the 15m criteria threshold.
Selection criteria for screening Schedule 2 development is set out at Schedule 3 of as
required under Regulation 4(6). Regard must be had to the characteristics of the
development (including: size, cumulation with other development, production of waste,
pollution, nuisance, accident risk); location of development (environmental sensitivity
having regard to factors including: land use, nature reserves, forest areas, densely
populated areas, historic landscapes etc); and the characteristics of the potential impact
(extent of the impact and size of the area/population affected, magnitude and complexity of
the impact, the probability of the impact, and the duration, frequency and reversibility of the
impact).
DETR Circular 02/99 Environmental Impact Assessment provides additional indicative
criteria and thresholds for the identification of Schedule 2 development requiring EIA. This
indicates for wind farms that the likelihood of significant effects will generally depend on
the scale of the development and its visual impact as well as potential noise impacts. EIA
is more likely to be required for commercial developments of 5 or more turbines or more
than 5MW of new generating capacity.
The Secretary of State’s view in Circular 2/99 is that an Environmental Impact Assessment
is required for Schedule 2 developments in three main types of case:



for major developments which are of more than local importance;
for developments which are proposed for particularly environmentally sensitive or
vulnerable locations; and,
for developments with unusually complex and potentially hazardous environmental
effects.
A sensitive area as defined in the Regulations includes Sites of Special Scientific Interest,
and scheduled monuments. The Circular confirms that the SSSI interest includes any
consultation areas around them. The site in addition to being in proximity to both Ancient
Monuments and an SSSI is within such a consultation zone for the Markland and Hollinhill
Report 12-588
Page 3 of 4
Grips SSSI.
The Circular indicates that in practice the likely environmental effects of Schedule 2
development will often be such as to require EIA if it is to be located in or close to an SSSI.
Natural England considers that the interest of the SSSI is not likely to be significantly
affected by the proposal.
With respect to impacts on the Ancient Monument the Circular advises that EIA is more
likely to be required if the development would be likely to have significant effects on the
special character of the sensitive area (i.e. the Ancient Monument). The proposed wind
turbine is not located within the Scheduled Monument but is within 170m. The open
agricultural character of the general area around and including the Monument is a
significant feature of its setting, although overhead power lines cross the area close to the
monument and the site of the proposal is a former railway line. The impact of the erection
of a wind turbine up to 45m high will have a visual impact on the area and the setting of
the fort. An assessment of the impact of the proposal upon this heritage asset in
particular, including its setting, will be an important requirement for any application, and
will be needed to address the policy requirements of the NPPF and the Council’s duties
under the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. English Heritage
has not responded to consultations on this request and on the basis of the available
information it is concluded that subject to such an assessment the impact of the proposal
is unlikely to be of more than local importance.
Conclusions/Reasons for Approval
From the information submitted it is therefore considered that taking into account the
characteristics of the development (one turbine, maximum height 45m), the location of the
development (unlikely to have more than a local impact on sensitive areas) and the
characteristics of the potential impact (remote from other occupied development) that the
development does not require an EIA.
RECOMMENDATION
An Environmental Impact Assessment is not required for the development proposed.
However the technical reports suggested by the applicant should accompany any
application and should include:
 An Assessment of Landscape and Visual Impact;
 Assessment of Impact on Heritage Assets in particular the Ancient Monument and
the Markland and Hollinhill Grips Conservation Area, and to include impact on other
nearby heritage assets;
 Ecological Assessment to include an Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey and
Protected Species Assessment with a particular focus on the level of bat activity in
the vicinity of the turbine;
 Impact on existing and proposed public rights of Way including the existing informal
use of the railway line as a footpath/cycle route;
 Noise Assessment.
_______________________________________________________________________
Officer
T Ball
Endorsing Officer
S. Phillipson
Date
15.05.13
Date 21.05.13
Report 12-588
(
Page 4 of 4
Determining Officer
C Doy
Date 24/5/13