Which of these concerns reflect your own views?

Select one or more concerns. Only the points you choose will be included.

Description of the Proposed Development Scale and InfrastructureThe proposal consists of ten large wind turbines each up to 250 metres tall at blade tip, a Battery Energy Storage System facility, access tracks, crane hardstandings, cabling corridors, temporary construction compounds, and grid connection works, resulting in extensive land use and permanent engineered surfaces. Assessment of Environmental and Landscape EffectsThe development will cause significant long-term changes to the landscape and environment, including impacts on drainage, forestry or habitat clearance, peatland, and permanent engineered surfaces, which must be carefully evaluated. Comprehensive Planning Considerations RequiredPlanning decisions must consider not only the national energy benefits of the project but also its effects on landscapes, water environments, peatland, habitats, local amenity, safety, and the resilience of transport and service networks. National Planning Framework 4 Policy RequirementsNational Planning Framework 4 mandates significant emphasis on addressing climate and nature crises in planning decisions, emphasizing that nature impacts must not be treated as secondary considerations.

Which of these concerns reflect your own views?

Select one or more concerns. Only the points you choose will be included.

Failure to Address Global Climate and Nature Crises as Required by NPF4 Policy 1The proposal does not demonstrate compliance with NPF4 Policy 1, which mandates substantial emphasis on addressing the global climate and nature crises, requiring essential consideration of nature, soil, water, and biodiversity in development assessments. Proposal Fails to Demonstrate Biodiversity Net Improvement as Required by NPF4 Policy 3The proposal would contravene NPF4 Policy 3 by causing peatland disturbance and habitat loss without providing clear, evidenced biodiversity enhancement or net improvement of nature networks. Inadequate Avoidance and Minimisation of Soil Disturbance Contrary to NPF4 Policy 5The proposal’s construction activities involving turbine foundations, access tracks, and cable trenching through peatland are unlikely to comply with NPF4 Policy 5, which requires prioritising avoidance and minimisation of soil disturbance and protection from harm such as compaction and erosion. Proposal’s Impacts on Local Roads, Tourism, and Recreation Must Be Justified Under NPF4 Policy 11Although NPF4 Policy 11 supports renewable energy, it requires proposals to justify significant disruptions to local road networks, adverse impacts on tourism assets such as dark skies, and degradation of local recreation value by demonstrating credible local benefits. Potential Loss or Severance of Blue and Green Infrastructure Conflicts with NPF4 Policy 20The proposal risks fragmentation or net loss of blue and green infrastructure, including recreational land, nature park functions, and water-related habitats, contrary to NPF4 Policy 20 which aims to preserve the integrity of such networks. Proposal Risks Conflict with NPF4 Policy 22 Due to Sediment Runoff and Water Supply ThreatsThe development could generate sediment-laden runoff into watercourses and jeopardise private or public water supplies, conflicting with NPF4 Policy 22’s requirements for rain and surface water management and adequate drainage infrastructure unless compelling evidence is provided. Proposal’s Transport Impacts on Rural Route PA80W May Breach NPF4 Policy 13The proposal’s movement of heavy abnormal loads and sustained HGV traffic along the rural PA80W route raises concerns under NPF4 Policy 13, which requires developments to avoid transport harm and manage significant travel and traffic effects.

Which of these concerns reflect your own views?

Select one or more concerns. Only the points you choose will be included.

Concerns Regarding Abnormal Load Deliveries on PA80WThe delivery of wind turbines involves abnormal loads requiring long convoys and escorts, causing junction and verge modifications and frequent heavy goods vehicle movements on the PA80W. Prolonged Disruption on PA80W Due to Concurrent Construction ActivitiesDisruption from construction traffic on the PA80W will not be limited to short periods but may extend over many months, especially with simultaneous Battery Energy Storage System and grid connection works. Potential Safety Incidents and Business Access Challenges on PA80WThe increased traffic and construction activities on the PA80W could lead to delays, safety incidents, and practical challenges for local businesses, particularly affecting time-sensitive deliveries and access to essential services. Need for Evidence of Safe and Acceptable Transport Network ImpactAny proposal increasing risk or requiring ongoing temporary closures and traffic control on the PA80W must demonstrate that the transport network can safely accommodate these impacts without unacceptable harm, in line with NPF4 Policy 13.

Which of these concerns reflect your own views?

Select one or more concerns. Only the points you choose will be included.

Significant Visual Impact Due to Turbine Height and VisibilityThe turbines, at 250 metres to blade tip, would be among the tallest onshore structures locally, visible from considerable distances and altering the perceived scale of the landscape and views from various vantage points. Detrimental Impact on Community Landscape Connection and Local IdentityThe rural setting with smaller communities relies on the connection to the surrounding landscape for identity, wellbeing, and tourism. The development would disrupt this relationship through the introduction of a prominent industrial skyline and associated infrastructure. Need for Holistic Evaluation of Visual and Contextual Effects on ResidentsPlanning assessment should not be limited to technical viewpoint analysis but must also consider how the development affects the context and environment of areas where people live and engage in daily activities.

Which of these concerns reflect your own views?

Select one or more concerns. Only the points you choose will be included.

Loss of Nature Park and Recreational SpaceThe proposal will result in the destruction of a nature park that serves local residents and visitors, removing accessible greenspace that supports daily walking, nature interactions, and contributes to local quality of life. Adverse Effects of Construction ActivitiesConstruction will generate noise and dust, require temporary fencing, restrict access, and cause ongoing disturbances, further impacting community amenity and site usability during development. Conflict with NPF4 Policy 20 on Green Infrastructure IntegrityThe development risks breaching NPF4 Policy 20, which seeks to prevent fragmentation or net loss of blue and green infrastructure and maintain network integrity. Replacing a cohesive natural and recreational asset with fragmented access, modified landforms, and engineered surfaces challenges compliance unless an equivalent or superior outcome is demonstrated.

Which of these concerns reflect your own views?

Select one or more concerns. Only the points you choose will be included.

Development Causes Extensive Peatland DisruptionThe proposed development will cause significant disturbance to peatland ecosystems through excavation for turbine foundations, construction of access tracks, and trenching, leading to drying, erosion, and prolonged degradation. Peat Reuse Fails to Maintain Peatland FunctionEven where peat is reused in the development, changes to drainage patterns and fragmentation of the peat body caused by infrastructure compromise the peatland's hydrological and ecological functions. Proposal Conflicts with NPF4 Policy 5 RequirementsThe proposal conflicts with NPF4 Policy 5, which requires avoidance and minimisation of disturbance to soils on undeveloped land and protection from damage such as compaction and erosion. Standard construction controls are insufficient to meet this policy requirement.

Which of these concerns reflect your own views?

Select one or more concerns. Only the points you choose will be included.

Adverse Effects of Lighting from Development on Dark Sky QualityThe proposed development's night-time lighting, including aviation lights on tall turbines and illumination from compounds, maintenance activities, substations, and BESS, threatens the low light conditions essential to the dark sky park's quality and visitor experience. Potential Negative Impact on Tourism and Local EconomyThe degradation of the dark sky park's quality due to the development's lighting could reduce its attractiveness to visitors, thereby affecting local tourism and economic activity. This is a material planning consideration linked to policy requirements for maximising net economic and socio-economic benefits.

Which of these concerns reflect your own views?

Select one or more concerns. Only the points you choose will be included.

Potential Contamination and Ecological Harm from DevelopmentThe proposed development risks significant contamination of local water supplies and detrimental effects on local flora and fauna due to sediment mobilisation, fuel and chemical handling incidents, altered drainage patterns, and increased peak water flows, especially with peatland disturbance. Requirement to Demonstrate Adequate Water and Drainage Management under NPF4 Policy 22NPF4 Policy 22 mandates appropriate management of rainwater and surface water, adequate water and drainage infrastructure, and protection of watercourses, wetlands, aquatic habitats, and private water supplies. The development must provide credible evidence that it can mitigate water environment risks to comply with this policy.

Which of these concerns reflect your own views?

Select one or more concerns. Only the points you choose will be included.

Impact of BESS on Land Use and Site IndustrialisationThe introduction of BESS facilities results in significant land use changes, including increased permanent engineered surfaces and enhanced industrial characteristics due to secured enclosures, hardstanding, equipment housing, and access requirements. Increased Lighting and Traffic from BESS Construction and OperationBoth the construction and operational phases of the BESS facility contribute to increased lighting and traffic levels on the site, which may have environmental and planning implications. Need for Integrated Assessment of BESS and Turbine DevelopmentPlanning evaluation must consider the BESS alongside turbines as a combined development to assess cumulative impacts on landscape character, surface water management, and green infrastructure fragmentation, consistent with NPF4 Policies 20 and 22.