Single wind turbine at Amazon UK Services Unit 1 Integra 61 West, Bowburn, Durham

The site and surroundings

The turbine would stand beside an Amazon distribution warehouse on existing hardstanding, near the A688, Tursdale, farmland and Durham’s heritage assets.

“The application site is the exiting Amazon distribution warehouse at the Integra 61 development at Bowburn which is 1.57ha in area. The warehouse is sited immediately west of the A688, less than 1km from j.61 of the A1(M).”

“The proposed WTG would be sited in a hard surfaced vehicular manoeuvring area, immediately south of the building 14. The west boundary of the Amazon site is formed of a short section of the disused 21 mile Leamside railway line, which is subject to long term plans to restore to passenger rail use. Immediately south and separated by an area of woodland is Tursdale Business Park, an older employment area based on the site of Tursdale Colliery.”

Officer report

Why officers recommended refusal

Officers gave significant weight to renewable energy benefits but concluded they did not outweigh harm to heritage, one dwelling and highway safety.

“In terms of the benefits of the proposal, the development is designed to meet the needs of the applicant and would sit alongside existent, and part implemented approvals for solar panels on the Amazon building’s roof. Officers give positive weight to the displaced draw of energy from the grid using sustainable technology methods. This reduced demand from Amazon increases the available supply to the surrounding area, relieving pressure on the network.”

“The NPPF, The Government’s Clean Power 2030 Action Plan (December 2024) and The Government’s Policy Statement on Onshore Wind (July 2024) make it clear that renewable energy deployment remains a priority for the Government. This is a matter which should be afforded significant weight in favour of the proposed development.”

Officer report

Consultation and objections

The proposal received 157 objections, mainly concerning visual and landscape harm, residential amenity, noise, shadow flicker, wildlife, heritage and safety.

“The application has been advertised in the local press, by site notice and individual notification letters sent to 183 neighbouring properties. A reconsultation exercise was undertaken in process when the WTG was reduced in height, an additional Community Consultation exercise was undertaken and additional information for Landscape and Heritage matters was submitted. 87.”

“Impact on residential amenity and quality of life: residents fear a permanent loss of enjoyment of homes and gardens, with the WTG considered overbearing, unavoidable, and intrusive, with cumulative impacts leading to stress and reduced wellbeing. • Noise (including low-frequency noise and health effects): widespread concerns are reported for continuous noise, low-frequency sound, and amplitude modulation, with claims that existing guidance is outdated.”

Officer report

Who spoke

A local councillor and a residents’ representative spoke against the proposal, while the planning agent spoke in support.

The vote and decision

Members unanimously refused the application for the four reasons set out in the officer recommendation.

“That the application be REFUSED for the reasons set out within the Officer report.”

Minutes