Within the Nuon submission at section 4.1.20 the Design and Access Statement states that “A minimum standoff distance of 140m was used around all public rights of way and bridleways in the design of the turbine layout. Wherever possible the distance from turbines to rights of way has been maximised. This approach allows all of the public rights of ways to remain open throughout the operational life of the development, with no stopping up orders or diversions required”.

Further, at section 6.1.3  the Design and Access Statement  states that “The proposed wind farm is not intended for use by the general public. However, there are public rights of way through the site and rights of access will be maintained throughout operation….”

And… at section 6.2.3  the Design and Access Statement  states that “Three footpaths and a bridleway cross the planning application boundary. It is possible that some of these public rights of way would need to be temporarily closed during the construction phase for health and safety reasons, but once the site becomes operational their use by the public would be able to continue as normal. No permanent closures are planned. Indirect effects could potentially be sustained by users of the public rights of way network and are derived from visual effects.”

Now compare this with:

The following statement is a direct quotation from the operating handbook of Vesta, one of the leading manufacturers of wind turbines installed in the UK.

“Do not stay within a radius of 400m (1300ft) from the turbine unless it is necessary. If you have to inspect an operating turbine from the ground, do not stay under the rotor plane but observe the rotor from the front.” (Section 2 of the Vestas “Mechanical Operating and Maintenance Manual”)

Considering that what amounts to a leisure and recreational amenity runs through the site, the next sentence of the manual is significant, reading “Make sure that children do not stay by or play nearby the turbine.” (Section 2 of the Vestas “Mechanical Operating and Maintenance Manual”)

If turbine manufacturers consider 400m to be a minimum distance for their experienced installation/maintenance personnel, and that turbines are not a safe installation for children to be near, what is the justification for Nuon establishing a “A minimum standoff distance of 140m”? Especially in view of the claim regarding the Public Rights of Way that “once the site becomes operational their use by the public would be able to continue as normal.”

Does Nuon know more about the turbines than do the manufactures? After all there is no reason to expect that Vesta is significantly different in their approach compared to other manufacturers.

There is a report done by The University of Essex entitled ' Wind turbines, flicker and photosensitive epilepsy' to read this report click here