Objections Lodged

This is a summary of our continuing objections to the CRE application to erect 9 turbines on Chelveston Airfield. These issues were highlighted in letters and emails sent to the Planning Officers at East Northants and Bedford Borough councils; and in Position Statements sent to the members of each Planning Committee in February 2011 prior to their determination meetings where the application was refused:

1. VISUAL IMPACT:

  • The proposal will have a detrimental effect on the local environment in terms of the visual intrusion of 9 turbines. The developers deliberately misrepresent the area in their attempt to minimise the visual impact of a development which would, given its prominent location, dramatically transform the character of the local landscape.
  • Cumulative impact within the region: the proposed Chelveston wind farm would be in addition to the large number of wind farms which are either built, approved or proposed for sites within 20km (12½ miles) of the airfield.

    Sites include: Ringstead Grange (6km), Bicton (6km), Burton Wold (10km), Molesworth (10km), Podington (10km), Cranford (12km), Nun Wood (14km), Woolley Hill (16km), Catshead Wood (Stoke Doyle)(16km), Gt Gransley, (20km). This means that the potential number of visible turbines within a 20km radius of the Chelveston site is 68 turbines!

    • Cumulative impact: the creeping encroachment of wind turbine proposals in the area.

  • Conclusion: These will transform the landscape; creating ‘wall to wall’ turbines, which will permanently degrade the attractive countryside. Journeys along the A14, A45, A6, A509 and A510 as well as several B roads in East Northamptonshire, North Bedfordshire and Huntingdon would be adversely affected.

2. CULTURAL HERITAGE:

  • There has been disregard for the impact the development will have on the cultural heritage of the area surrounding the airfield, as illustrated by the false claim that there are “no historic or cultural features which are close to the sites of the proposed turbines” (PDAS 5.17). This is in stark contrast to the portrayal of Yelden and Melchbourne in an article in the Spring 2010 edition of Discover Bedfordshire – “For those who love the mystery, romance and intrigue of life in medieval England these are two adjacent villages in the north of Bedfordshire that encompass it all. Little effort is required to conjure up pictures of life in the time of the Conquest”.
  • The strong wartime links forged with the USA draw frequent visitors to the area to see the Chelveston Village Monument to American airmen and the commemorative plaques in Yelden Church. We should not allow these heritage assets to be dominated by turbines.
  • We believe that the proposed turbines will have an overwhelming impact on the context in which several historic sites and buildings can be seen and appreciated. The attractiveness of the area for local walkers, riders and potential tourists will be significantly diminished.
  • If the wind farm proposal is granted, it will have a negative impact on tourism in an area which includes the regularly walked Three Shires Way.

3. AMENITIES:

  • Many residents will suffer impaired living conditions as the site is so close to housing.
  • There are in the region of 200 dwellings within 2 km of the proposed wind farm: some only 600m away. Moreover, including the Chelston Rise development on the perimeter of the airfield, there are over 50 houses only 700-900m away from the nearest turbine.
  • The network of footpaths and bridleways which criss-cross the former airfield, and provide links between the surrounding villages, will be adversely affected. These are used extensively and enjoyed both by the local community and visitors.

4. NOISE:

  • The noise generated by the 9 turbines is likely to exceed the recommended limits of ETSU-R-97, the guidance document produced by the Energy Technology Support Unit.
  • The methodology employed and presentation of results are flawed with regard both to the acquisition and analysis of data within the Noise Impact assessment. This means that several claims in the Environmental Statement cannot be validated.
  • Once turbines are installed and working, nothing can be done to reduce the noise impact so we need to be very clear that there is no risk over breaching the noise limits.

5. SUSTAINABILTY: There is now a substantial body of evidence which highlights the economic fallacy of providing Government money to subsidise underperforming wind energy developments in areas of low wind speed.

The applicant makes exaggerated wind generation capacity claims:

  • A figure of 30% has been used. The average figure for England is 22% and Burton Wold (the nearest existing wind farm to the site) achieves an average of 19%. In addition, there will be further reduction in efficiency arising from aligning seven of the nine turbines in two lines.
  • Planning guidelines call for the balance to be weighed between any benefits of wind power and the impairment and degradation of the landscape. For the local villages, any claimed benefits are clearly far outweighed by the loss of landscape, amenity and the creation of adverse living conditions. This is contrary to PPS 1 Paras 4-7.