WilloWind Linfairn Limited Linfairn Wind Farm - Addendum Planning Statement December 2014
Report Summary The has been prepared by SgurrEnergy Ltd on behalf of WilloWind Linfairn Limited. The document provides an update to the submitted Planning Statement and should be read in conjunction with the original. Following further statutory and public consultation on the Project and additional site surveys, the layout has been revised with a reduction in wind turbine generator (WTG) numbers from 25 down to 17. The Planning Statement provides an update to planning policy where relevant, including the Development Plan, and an assessment of the revised scheme against such policy. 14/7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 1 of 40
Report Details Prepared for: Client Contact: WilloWind Linfairn Limited Suki Atwal Report Distribution: WilloWind Linfairn Ltd: SgurrEnergy: Report Classification: Suki Atwal Suzy Yendell FINAL Approval Record Name Job Title Signature Prepared by: Suzy Yendell Senior Planning Consultant Reviewed by: Vicky McLean Senior Environmental Consultant Authorised by: Chris Parcell Director of Feasibility and Development Date of issue: December 2014 NOTICE This document entitled, document number 14/7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 B1 has been prepared solely for WilloWind Linfairn Limited in connection with Linfairn Wind Farm. This document in whole or in part may not be used by any person for any purpose other than that specified, without the express written permission of SgurrEnergy. Any liability arising out of use by a third party of this document for purposes not wholly connected with the above shall be the responsibility of that party who shall indemnify SgurrEnergy against all claims costs damages and losses arising out of such use. 14/7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 2 of 40
Contents 1 Introduction... 5 1.1 Background... 5 1.2 Structure of Updated Planning Statement... 5 2 Project Description... 6 2.1 Site Description and Context... 6 2.2 Design Iteration... 6 2.2.1 Summary of Design Iterations... 6 2.3 Final Layout Scale and Appearance... 7 2.4 Consultation... 7 3 Legislative Framework... 8 3.1.1 Electricity Act 1989... 8 3.1.2 Town and Country Planning Act as amended by the Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006 9 4 National Policy and Guidance... 9 4.1.1 National Planning Framework 3... 9 4.1.2 Scottish Planning Policy... 9 4.1.3 Scottish Government Web-Based Renewables Advice: Onshore Guidance. 12 4.1.4 Policy Assessment... 12 5 The Development Plan... 16 5.1 Renewable Energy... 17 5.1.1 Policy... 17 5.1.2 Policy Assessment... 18 5.2 Landscape and Visual... 23 5.2.1 Policy... 23 5.2.2 Policy Assessment... 24 5.3 Natural Environment... 25 5.3.1 Policy... 25 5.3.2 Policy Assessment... 27 5.4 Water Environment and Soils... 28 5.4.1 Policy... 28 14/7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 3 of 40
5.4.2 Policy Assessment... 28 5.5 Historic Environment... 28 5.5.1 Policy... 28 5.5.2 Policy Assessment... 29 5.6 Noise... 29 5.6.1 Policy... 29 5.6.2 Policy Assessment... 30 5.7 Transport and Access... 30 5.7.1 Policy... 30 5.7.2 Policy Assessment... 31 5.8 Socio-Economics, Recreation, Tourism and Land Use... 31 5.8.1 Policy... 31 5.8.2 Policy Assessment... 32 5.9 Strategic Policy and Other General Policies... 33 5.9.1 Policy... 33 5.9.2 Policy Assessment... 34 6 Other Material Considerations... 36 6.1 South Ayrshire Local Development Plan Supplementary Guidance... 36 6.2 Wind Farms: Addendum to Ayrshire Joint Structure Plan Technical Report TR03/2006... 36 6.3 South Ayrshire Council Landscape Wind Capacity Study Main Report... 37 7 Conclusions... 39 14/7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 4 of 40
1 Introduction This updated Planning Statement has been prepared on behalf of WilloWind Linfairn Limited ( the Developer ) in support the submission of an Addendum to the application for consent under Section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989 for the construction and operation of Linfairn Wind Farm, near Straiton, South Ayrshire. Since submission of the original application in September 2013, a number of changes have been made to the Project. The revised proposals consist of 17 wind turbine generators (WTGs) each with a rated capacity of up to 3.2 Megawatts (MW), with a total site capacity of up to 54.4MW ( the Project ). 1.1 Background The Planning Statement sets out a detailed assessment of the revised Project against the Development Plan and relevant material considerations. Further it provides an update to planning policy since the submission of the application in September 2013 to November 2014. 1.2 Structure of Updated Planning Statement This updated Statement includes the following sections: Project Description. National Planning Policy and Guidance. The Development Plan. Other Material Considerations. Conclusions. This updated Planning Statement should be read in conjunction with the Environmental Statement (ES) Addendum and updated Design and Access Statement also submitted in support of the Section 36 application Addendum. This updated Planning Statement cross refers to the original where relevant to avoid duplication, and as such it should be read alongside the 2013 Planning Statement submitted in support of the original application. 14/7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 5 of 40
2 Project Description 2.1 Site Description and Context The revised site is situated approximately around 5km south of Straiton and 12km south-east of Maybole, South Ayrshire. Figures A1-1 and A2-1 of the ES Addendum illustrate the revised site location and indicative site layout. 2.2 Design Iteration The layout and individual siting of the WTGs and associated infrastructure have further been revised following submission of the Section 36 application, influenced by consultation with relevant stakeholders and consultees in addition to further specialist surveys on-site and a subsequent design review. 2.2.1 Summary of Design Iterations The main design iterations carried out following Section 36 application submission are set out in Table 2-1 below and form a continuation of Table 1 of the Design and Access Statement (2013). Table 2-1: Dynamic Design Process Site Layout Details of Design Rationale Phase 5 (19 x 3.2MW WTGs) Removal of six WTGs (WTG 1-6) closest to the village of Straiton following consultation with statutory and non-statutory consultees and the local community. Phase 6 (17 x 3.2MW WTGs) Following public exhibitions and a design review, proposals further reduced to 17 WTGs to reduce visual amenity impact. Micro-siting of remaining WTGs taking into consideration additional landscape and visual assessment, peat probing and updated peat slide risk assessment. Construction compounds Removal of temporary construction compound to the north of the site due to a reduction in WTGs. Access tracks Reduction in the length of the access tracks required due to removal of WTGs and reduction in number of watercrossings required. Sub-station building (control) Re-located closer to the remaining WTGs to reduce the length of cabling required. 14/7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 6 of 40
2.3 Final Layout Scale and Appearance Following a review of the design of the Project and public exhibition responses, proposals have reduced down to 17 WTGs, each with a generating capacity increased to 3.2MW with a total generating capacity of up to 54.4MW. The overall maximum height-to-blade tip of the WTGs remain at 126.5m, however the hub height has reduced to a maximum height of 76m with an increase in the maximum rotor diameter to 101m. 2.4 Consultation A summary of consultation undertaken following the submission of the Section 36 application is set out within ES Addendum Appendix A4.2. 14/7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 7 of 40
3 Legislative Framework 3.1.1 Electricity Act 1989 An application for consent under Section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989 has been submitted to the Scottish Government for the Project. This Addendum submission updates that existing application. Schedule 9, Part 3 of the Electricity Act requires that such persons formulating such proposals shall have regard to two criteria, as stated within the act: (1) In formulating any relevant proposals, a licence holder or a person authorised by an exemption to [generate, transmit, distribute or supply electricity]. (a)shall have regard to the desirability of preserving natural beauty, of conserving flora, fauna and geological or physiographical features of special interest and of protecting sites, buildings and objects of architectural, historic or archaeological interest; and. (b)shall do what he reasonably can to mitigate any effect which the proposals would have on the natural beauty of the countryside or on any such flora, fauna, features, sites, buildings or objects.. (2)In considering any relevant proposals for which his consent is required under section 36 or 37 of this Act, the Secretary of State shall have regard to. (a)the desirability of the matters mentioned in paragraph (a) of sub-paragraph (1) above; and. (b)the extent to which the person by whom the proposals were formulated has complied with his duty under paragraph (b) of that sub-paragraph. (3)Without prejudice to sub-paragraphs (1) and (2) above, in exercising any relevant functions each of the following, namely, a licence holder, a person authorised by an exemption to generate or supply electricity and the Secretary of State shall avoid, so far as possible, causing injuries to fisheries or to the stock of fish in any waters. With regard to Part 3 (1), WilloWind Linfairn Limited holds a generating licence as defined within Part 1, Section 6 (1) of the Electricity Act. In the design of the Project layout, and in re-designing the revised Addendum proposals, the Developer has sought to minimise impacts on the natural beauty of the area, and to conserve (implementing mitigation measures where appropriate) the flora, fauna, geological, historic environment and archaeological features within and in proximity to the Project site in accordance with Part 1 and 2. Further, through the design of watercourse crossings (free span bridge design and bottomless arch crossings), mitigation and the implementation of appropriate buffers on watercourses, the Developer has sought to minimise impacts on watercourses and associated fish resources in line with Part 3(3). Further relevant discussion is set out within Section 5 below. 14/7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 8 of 40
3.1.2 Town and Country Planning Act as amended by the Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006 In addition to the Section 36 application for consent, a request is also made that a direction be issued that planning permission be deemed to be granted for the Project under Section 57 (2) of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997. The Planning Authority acts as a statutory consultee in the Section 36 application process. The Development Plan is a material consideration for the Scottish Ministers in determining this application. 4 National Policy and Guidance 4.1.1 National Planning Framework 3 National Planning Framework 3 (NPF3) 1 was published by the Scottish Government in June 2014 and is a statutory document under the Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006. The document sets out a long term vision for development and investment across Scotland for the next 20 to 30 years. The NPF3 outlines the Scottish Government s ambition to achieve at least an 80% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. Paragraph 3.8 states an aim to meet at least 30% of overall energy demand from renewables by 2020 which includes generating the equivalent of at least 100% of gross electricity consumption from renewables by this date, with an interim target of 50% by 2015. Paragraph 3.9 highlights that Scotland s wind resource will continue to be capitalised with paragraph 3.23 confirming that onshore wind will continue to make a significant contribution to diversification of energy supplies, whilst also noting that National Parks and National Scenic Areas will be protected from wind farm development. 4.1.2 Scottish Planning Policy Scottish Planning Policy 2 (SPP) has also recently been updated, with the revised version published in June 2014. SPP is a statement of Scottish Government policy on land use planning and priorities for the operation of the planning system. Onshore wind farm specific policies are set out within paragraphs 161 to 166. Updated guidance is provided on the preparation of spatial frameworks which should be used as a guide for developers and communities in identifying those areas likely to be the most appropriate for onshore wind farms (paragraph 161). 1 Scottish Government (2014). National Planning Framework 3. Scottish Government, Edinburgh. 2 Scottish Government (2014). Scottish Planning Policy. Scottish Government, Edinburgh. 14/7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 9 of 40
The spatial framework is outlined in Table 1 of the SPP, identifying three groups: Group 1 - Areas where wind farms will not be acceptable (National Parks and National Scenic Areas). Group 2 - Areas of significant protection (within which wind farms may be appropriate in some circumstances with further consideration required to demonstrate that any significant effects on the qualities of these areas can be substantially overcome by siting, design or other mitigation). Areas of significant protection include national and international designations; other nationally important mapped interests (areas of wild land, carbon rich soils, deep peat and priority peatland habitats); and community separation for consideration of visual impact (an area not exceeding 2km around cities, towns and villages identified on the local development plan with an identified settlement envelope or edge). Group 3 - Areas with potential for wind farm development (within which wind farms are likely to be acceptable, subject to consideration against identified policy criteria). Paragraph 163 indicates that the spatial framework is complemented by a more detailed and exacting development management process where the merits of an individual proposal will be carefully considered against the full range of environmental, community and cumulative impacts (as outlined in SPP paragraph 169). Individual properties and settlements not identified in the development plan will be protected by safeguards set out in local development plan policy criteria for determining wind farms, and the development management considerations accounted for when determining individual applications (paragraph 164). Paragraph 165 recognises that grid capacity should not be a reason to constrain the areas identified for wind farm development or decisions on individual applications for wind farms. Paragraph 166 also identifies that moratoria on onshore wind development are not appropriate. Relevant considerations for development management are detailed in paragraph 169. The paragraph states that proposals for energy infrastructure developments should always take account of spatial frameworks for wind farms and heat maps where these are relevant. A number of considerations are then detailed as follows: net economic impact, including local and community socio-economic benefits such as employment, associated business and supply chain opportunities; the scale of contribution to renewable energy generation targets; effect on greenhouse gas emissions; cumulative impacts planning authorities should be clear about likely cumulative impacts arising from all of the considerations below, recognising that in some areas the cumulative impact of existing and consented energy development may limit the capacity for further development; 14/7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 10 of 40
impacts on communities and individual dwellings, including visual impact, residential amenity, noise and shadow flicker; landscape and visual impacts, including effects on wild land; effects on the natural heritage, including birds; impacts on carbon rich soils, using the carbon calculator; public access, including impact on long distance walking and cycling routes and scenic routes identified in the NPF; impacts on the historic environment, including scheduled monuments, listed buildings and their settings; impacts on tourism and recreation; impacts on aviation and defence interests and seismological recording; impacts on telecommunications and broadcasting installations, particularly ensuring that transmission links are not compromised; impacts on road traffic; impacts on adjacent trunk roads; effects on hydrology, the water environment and flood risk; the need for conditions relating to the decommissioning of developments, including ancillary infrastructure, and site restoration; opportunities for energy storage; and the need for a robust planning obligation to ensure that operators achieve site restoration. Paragraph 170 states that areas identified for wind farms should be suitable for use in perpetuity. Consents may be time-limited but wind farms should nevertheless be sited and designed to ensure impacts are minimised and to protect an acceptable level of amenity for adjacent communities. With regard to community benefits, whilst it is recognised not to be a material consideration, SPP paragraph 177 identifies that where a proposal is acceptable in land use terms, and consent is granted, local authorities may wish to engage in negotiations to secure community benefit in line with the Scottish Government Good Practice Principles for Community Benefits from Onshore Renewable Energy Developments 3. In addition it is highlighted that the revised SPP defines cumulative impacts as an: 3 Scottish Government (2013). Scottish Government Good Practice Principles for Community Benefits from Onshore Renewable Energy Developments. Scottish Government, Edinburgh. Available at: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/publications/2013/11/8279 14/7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 11 of 40
Impact in combination with other development. That includes existing developments of the kind proposed, those which have permission, and valid applications which have not been determined. The weight attached to undetermined applications should reflect their position in the application process. SPP also contains policy in relation to a number of relevant topics including the historic environment, landscape and natural heritage. 4.1.3 Scottish Government Web-Based Renewables Advice: Onshore Guidance The web-based advice, Onshore Wind Farms 4, was last updated in May 2014. It provides guidance to Planning Authorities on how to assess applications for wind farm developments and how they can use the planning process to inform policy and decisionmaking. Furthermore, technical information is provided on WTGs in addition to examples of typical planning considerations in determining planning applications for onshore WTGs. 4.1.4 Policy Assessment The revised SPP updates the wind farm spatial framework established within the superseded SPP and confirms that spatial frameworks should still be used as a guide for developers and communities in identifying those areas likely to be the most appropriate for onshore wind farms. It is considered that the Project is located within Group 3 as defined by the revised SPP. The revised SPP recognises that wind farm proposals within Group 3 (as defined in Section 4.1.2 above) are likely to be acceptable, subject to detailed consideration against identified policy criteria. The revised SPP also identifies that the spatial framework is complemented by a more detailed and exacting development management process where the merits of an individual proposal will be carefully considered against the full range of environmental, community, and cumulative impacts. Those criteria set out in the SPP relevant to the Project are discussed briefly below: 4 Scottish Government, (2014). Onshore wind turbines. Report available at: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/resource/0045/00451413.pdf (Accessed on 07 August 2014) 14/7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 12 of 40
Net economic impact, including local and community socio-economic benefits such as employment, associated business and supply chain opportunities net economic benefits would be beneficial to local communities through provision of up to 40-50 full time equivalent jobs and indirect benefits to local services and accommodation providers. Further, whilst recognised not to be a material consideration, the Developer would seek to put in place a community benefits package with the aims of supporting the delivery of community projects, investment in skills and training for local people, provision of financial support for local businesses (for example through a Business Growth Fund) and employment opportunities. The Developer has committed to provide 5,000 per MW of installed capacity, which will amount to around 272,000 per annum and approximately 6.8 million over the 25 year lifetime of the Project. The scale of contribution to renewable energy generation targets the anticipated capacity of the Project is 54.4MW thereby making a valuable contribution to the Scottish Government s and UK renewable energy targets. Effect on greenhouse gas emissions - the Project would result in a beneficial effect on the wider air quality by way of making a positive contribution to carbon emission reduction targets. The Project would result in carbon savings of approximately 1,174,858 tco 2 (grid mix), 1,725,230 tco 2 (fossil fuel mix) and 2,511,921 tco 2 (coal-fired) and emissions savings of approximately 1,337,063 tco 2 (grid mix), 1,887,436 tco 2 (fossil fuel mix) and 2,674,127 tco 2 (coal-fired). Cumulative impacts It is recognised that the revised SPP defines cumulative sites as those at operational, consented and application stage only. Only limited significant cumulative effects are anticipated (landscape and visual). With regard to landscape capacity, only two Landscape Character Types are anticipated to receive a significant cumulative effect (taking into account operational, consented and application schemes in line with SPP definitions). It is recognised that significant effects would only be localised and of Moderate effect (and therefore not considered by the assessment to have reached or exceeded their capacity for wind farm development). Impacts on communities and individual dwellings, including visual impact, residential amenity, noise and shadow flicker no communities are located within 5km of the Project WTGs. A limited number of individual properties are located within 5km of the Project that receive intervisibility with the revised Project layout. With mitigation implemented, no significant noise or shadow flicker effects are predicted and only a minimal number of receptors are anticipated to receive significant effects with regard to visual amenity, considerably reduced from the original layout (see Section 5 for further detail). Landscape and visual impacts, including effects on wild land significant effects are limited to a minimal number of receptors, generally within 5km of the site. No significant effects are anticipated on wild lands, including the Merrick Wild Land Area (see Section 5 for further detail). 14/7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 13 of 40
Effects on the natural heritage, including birds - no significant effects are predicted with regard to ecology or ornithology, further habitat and peat management measures are proposed to include reinstatement and enhancement of key habitats and improvements to habitat for protected species (see Section 5 below). Impacts on carbon rich soils, using the carbon calculator the Project was originally designed, and the layout further refined, to minimise impacts on carbon rich soils, no significant effects predicted (see Section 5 below). Public access, including impact on long distance walking and cycling routes and scenic routes identified in the NPF with the implementation of mitigation, no significant effects to public access are predicted (see Section 5 below). Impacts on the historic environment, including scheduled monuments, listed buildings and their settings no significant effects on the historic environment are predicted (see Section 5 for further detail). Impacts on tourism and recreation - no significant effects are predicted (see Section 5 below). Impacts on aviation and defence interests and seismological recording - no significant effects are predicted with the implementation of appropriate mitigation (see Section 5 below). Impacts on telecommunications and broadcasting installations, particularly ensuring that transmission links are not compromised - no significant effects are predicted (see Section 5 below). Impacts on road traffic - no significant effects are predicted (see Section 5 below). Impacts on adjacent trunk roads - no significant effects are predicted (see Section 5 below). Effects on hydrology, the water environment and flood risk no significant effects are predicted (see Section 5 below). The need for conditions relating to the decommissioning of developments, including ancillary infrastructure, and site restoration - the Developer would be content to enter into such a condition arrangement. Opportunities for energy storage not applicable. The need for a robust planning obligation to ensure that operators achieve site restoration the Developer would be content to enter into such an agreement. With regard to cumulative impacts, SPP requires the consideration of operational, consented and application stages as part of a cumulative assessment, albeit with less weight applied to those sites still at application stage. SPP does not require scoping sites to be included within a cumulative assessment. 14/7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 14 of 40
With this in mind, scoping sites, whilst included as a consideration within the ES at the specific request of South Ayrshire Council, are not considered further within this Planning Statement, as SPP does not require scoping sites to be considered as part of the cumulative assessment. Further it is emphasised that the introduction of scoping sites within the ES assessment introduces an assessment of a potential development which may never go forward to planning application stage and which is, as yet, underdetermined in exact size and form. This introduces an intangible series of elements into the assessment process, which in this case has the effect of considerably elevating the degree of potential local cumulative impacts. It is noted that the revised assessment within the ES Addendum has therefore been careful to identify any cumulative visual effects arising specifically from the addition of Scoping sites. Overall the NPF3 and SPP are strongly supportive of renewable energy and wind farm development in order to meet the ambitious Scottish Government s targets. As outlined above, with a total anticipated generating capacity of 54.4MW this Project will make a valuable and considerable contribution to meeting both the Scottish and UK Government s renewable energy targets and assist in the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. The Project is considered to be largely in accordance with the overall aims of the NPF3 and revised SPP. This consideration should be afforded significant weight in the determination of this application. 14/7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 15 of 40
5 The Development Plan The current Development Plan of relevance to this Project is the South Ayrshire Local Development Plan 5 (LDP), adopted in September 2014. The LDP sets out the strategic land use priorities and policies for South Ayrshire. The LDP replaces the South Ayrshire Local Plan and Ayrshire Joint Structure Plan. Development Plan policies of relevance to this Project are set out in Table 5-1 below. An updated assessment of the revised Project against the newly adopted LDP is provided in the sections below. Table 5-1: Development Plan Policy Topic Renewable Energy LDP Policy LDP Policy: Renewable Energy LDP Policy: Wind Energy Landscape and Visual LDP Policy: Landscape Quality LDP Policy: Protecting the Landscape Natural Environment LDP Policy: Natural Heritage LDP Policy: Preserving Trees Water Environment and Soils LDP Policy: Water Environment LDP Policy: Flooding and Development Historic Environment LDP Policy: Historic Environment LDP Policy: Archaeology Noise Transport and Access LDP Policy: Air, Noise and Light Pollution LDP Policy: Land Use and Transport LDP Policy: Strategic Road Development Socio-Economics, Recreation, Tourism and Land Use LDP Policy: Tourism LDP Policy: Galloway and Southern Ayrshire Biosphere LDP Policy: Dark Skies LDP Policy: Outdoor Public Access and Core Paths Strategic Policy and Other General Policies LDP Policy: Spatial Strategy LDP Policy: Sustainable Development 5 South Ayrshire Local Development Plan (2014) http://www.southayrshire.gov.uk/documents/localdevplan_final.pdf 14/7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 16 of 40
5.1 Renewable Energy 5.1.1 Policy The LDP generally encourages renewable energy developments, although recognises they may have harmful effects locally. The Council will try to ensure they do not have any unacceptable effects on the natural or built environment. The LDP generally supports renewable energy through LDP Policy: Renewable Energy. The policy supports proposals for generating and using renewable energy in standalone locations, and as part of new and existing developments, if they will not have a significant harmful effect on residential amenity, the appearance of the area and its landscape, biodiversity and cultural heritage. In addition, the policy states that development proposals will not be permitted where they would adversely affect the integrity of a Natura 2000 site. The LDP recognises that South Ayrshire has above-average wind speeds and is an attractive area for generating wind energy and as a location for wind farms. It also recognises that the Council has a responsibility to find wind farm locations that would contribute to the overall national targets, taking into account any effects on the environment. The LDP also recognises that local benefits arising from wind farms can be important to the economic future of rural communities. LDP Policy: Wind Energy provides policy specific for wind farm development. The policy states: We will support proposals if: a. they are capable of being accommodated in the landscape in a manner which respects its main features and character (as identified in the South Ayrshire Landscape Wind Capacity Study or in any subsequent updates to that study), and which keeps their effect on the landscape and the wider area to a minimum (through a careful choice of site, layout and overall design); b. they do not have a significant detrimental visual impact, taking into account views experienced from surrounding residential properties and settlements, public roads and paths, significant public viewpoints, and important recreational assets and tourist attractions; c. they do not have any other significant detrimental effect on the amenity of nearby residents, including from noise and shadow flicker; d. they do not have a significant detrimental effect on natural heritage features, including protected habitats and species, and taking into account the criteria in LDP policy: natural heritage; 14/7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 17 of 40
e. they do not have a significant detrimental effect on the historic environment, taking into account the criteria in LDP policy: historic environment and LDP policy: archaeology; f. they do not adversely affect aviation, defence interests and broadcasting installations; and g. their cumulative impact in combination with other existing and approved wind energy developments, and those for which applications for approval have already been submitted, is acceptable. We will produce supplementary guidance on wind farms, which will identify preferred areas of search, areas with potential constraints and areas requiring significant protection; and will provide more detail on how the above-mentioned criteria will be applied in assessing all proposals for wind farms and turbines. We will use the South Ayrshire Landscape Wind Capacity Study (or any subsequent updates to that study) to help us decide the effect of proposals on the landscape. Development proposals will not be permitted where, either individually or cumulatively, they would adversely affect the integrity of a Natura 2000 site. 5.1.2 Policy Assessment With regard to LDP Policy: Renewable Energy, it is emphasised that the policy generally supports proposals for generating and using renewable energy. The policy requires that there will be no significant harmful effects on residential amenity, the appearance of the area and its landscape character, biodiversity and cultural heritage. It is noted that the policy refers to a significant harmful effect. The LDP does not define or quantify a significant harmful effect. It is therefore considered that such an effect does not simply equate to a significant effect as defined under the terms of the Electricity Works (Environmental Impact Assessment) (Scotland) Regulations 2000 (as amended) (the EIA Regulations). It is emphasised that in considering whether the Project has a significant harmful effect or otherwise with regard to this policy, it should be considered in the context of acceptability, i.e. whether the overall effect is acceptable or unacceptable, with reference to the revised SPP. With regard to residential amenity, the ES Addendum includes a Residential Amenity Study (RAS) (Appendix A6-7) which provides an assessment of residential amenity of properties within 2km of the Project. The RAS considers visual amenity, noise and shadow flicker effects in relation to the associated implications on amenity. The RAS concludes that no overbearing or unsatisfactory effects would be received at residential receptors as a result of the Project. 14/7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 18 of 40
With regard to landscape and visual impacts, it is recognised that the Project would result in locally significant landscape and visual effects, however it is emphasised and recognised that all commercial wind farms will have a degree of significant effect on the environment, particularly with regard to landscape and visual effects. In relation to the effects on the appearance of the area and its landscape character, landscape mitigation for the Project has involved amendments to the layout, including a reduction in WTG numbers and adjustments to some WTG locations. The layout revisions have sought to achieve a more aesthetically pleasing composition when seen from key viewpoints, reducing visibility from nearby communities, including Straiton, individual built receptors and reducing adverse landscape effects upon important local landscape features. Measures have included removing WTGs close to those key landmark hills identified within the South Ayrshire s 2013 Landscape Capacity Study including Glenalla Fell and Genoch Inner Hill to ensure the WTGs are better contained within the landscape. Glenalla Fell is no longer sandwiched between the southern WTG group and the (now omitted) northern WTG group and the removal of the two closest WTGs to Genoch Inner Hill, has had the effect of reducing the proximity of this hill to the remaining WTG group. Removal of WTGs has reduced effects from the Merrick Wild Land Area, indeed WTGs are now not visible from The Merrick, a popular hill top within the Wild Land Area, and no significant effect are predicted on the Wild Land Area as a whole. The revised Project has seen significant effects on Landscape Character Types (LCTs) reduce, with four LCTs assessed as receiving significant effects locally as a result of the revised Project. It is highlighted that impacts are generally localised and within 5km of the Project with distance and limited potential intervisibility limiting impacts beyond this distance for LCTs. Furthermore, of the remaining LCTs and sub-types that are predicted to receive potential intervisibility of the Project, none are expected to receive a significant impact. The layout revisions have reduced the number of receptors receiving significant effects, although it is recognised, as is the nature of wind farm development, that some significant effects do remain, the re-design has sought to minimise these as far as practicable on balance with other site constraints. Overall effects on the appearance of the area and its landscape character are not considered materially significant. With regard to biodiversity (ecology and ornithology), the reduction in WTG numbers means that any potential collision risk, disturbance and displacement to birds will be greatly reduced. Further the area of habitat lost has decreased through revisions to the layout and removal of eight WTGs. Overall, with the implementation of appropriate mitigation, the revised Project does not significantly affect the ornithological resource. As outlined within the 2013 Planning Statement, no significant effects are anticipated with regard to ecological receptors. 14/7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 19 of 40
The layout revisions have also considered the presence of peat within the site boundary, seeking to avoid areas of deeper peat where feasible in micrositing WTGs. The low proportion of catotelmic peat required to be excavated for the Project reflects the design principle of avoiding the siting of infrastructure in deeper peat. Further, an Outline Habitat Management Plan (HMP) (ES Addendum, Appendix A7.4) has been prepared which sets out recommendations for the re-establishment of wetland areas, especially modified bog and blanket bog, and improvement to woodland habitats for bats. In addition, a grazing management regime is recommended to prevent animal poaching. These benefits resulting from the Project seek to enhance important Annex 1 habitats and habitats for protected species including provision of enhanced roosting and foraging habitat for bats, of sufficient distance from risk of collisions with WTGs. With regard to cultural heritage, no significant effects on the historic environment are predicted as a result of the Project. Further the revised Project (reduction to 17 WTGs) has seen a reduction in the level of effect on key receptors from the original layout. It is noted that the revised layout has resulted in a greater distance (approximately 5km) from the Project to the conservation village of Straiton,,with the western side of the village no longer receiving views of the WTGs. In addition, the ES and Addendum confirms there will be no significant adverse effect on the integrity of a Natura 2000 site. With the above in mind, it can be seen that significant effects as a result of the Project are localised and minimal, with no overall significant material or harmful effect on residential amenity, the appearance of the area and its landscape character, biodiversity or cultural heritage. Overall the Project accords with, and is supported by, LDP Policy: Renewable Energy. With regard to LDP Policy: Wind Energy, it is noted that the policy refers to a significant detrimental effect. The LDP does not define or quantify a significant detrimental effect. It is therefore considered that such an effect does not simply equate to a significant effect as defined under the terms of the EIA Regulations. It is emphasised that in considering whether the Project has a significant detrimental effect or otherwise with regard to this policy, it should be considered in the context of acceptability, i.e. whether the overall effect is acceptable or unacceptable, with reference to the revised SPP. Each aspect of this policy is taken in turn below. a. Landscape - the capacity of the landscape to accommodate this type of development was considered as part of the revised cumulative landscape and visual impact assessment (ES Addendum Chapter A6). The methodology of the assessment indicates that those significant impacts identified as Substantial due to the addition of the Project into the cumulative baseline scenario would result in the capacity of the landscape to accommodate wind farm / WTG development being exceeded and the combined appearance of WTGs in the landscape 14/7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 20 of 40
becoming a dominant and character defining feature. In relation to LCTs, no Substantial landscape effects have been identified with regard to the cumulative assessment of the revised Project (i.e. consideration of operational, consented and application sites in line with policy requirements). It is therefore considered that the landscape is capable of accommodating the Project in accordance with this policy requirement. Effects on the landscape character as a result of the revised Project are localised and generally found within 5km of the Project, the revised scheme has particularly sought to minimise effects through revisions to the layout and design as discussed above. The localised impacts of the Project on LCT components are considered to be kept to a minimum within the wider landscape character, further reduced as a result of the reduction in WTG numbers. Overall, due to the significant effects being localised and limited in number the Project is not considered to have a materially significant or detrimental landscape effect. b. Visual The revised layout sees the closest WTGs located approximately 5km from Straiton, the nearest community to the Project. The distance between Straiton and the WTGs has increased considerably through the removal of the northern WTGs previously proposed. This distance exceeds that outlined within SPP, seeking a minimum separation distance of 2km to the edge of settlements. Six of 24 viewpoints are assessed as receiving a significant effects, the majority of which are within 5km of the Project. As a result of the revised layout, four of the 20 original viewpoints assessed would no longer receive views of the Project including the Merrick Hill, and the public park at Straiton. With regard to built receptors, previously 26 were identified as receiving a significant effect as a result of the Project. The layout revisions have led to a considerable reduction in built receptors predicted to receive a significant effect with 14 of the 53 receptors assessed as significant within the ES Addendum (ES Addendum Chapter A6). Of these, all are located within 2.7km and only three have been assessed as receiving a substantial effect. With regard to route receptors, four of the 12 assessed are anticipated to receive a significant effect, all within 2.1km of the Project. Overall, effects on communities, built and route receptors have reduced considerably as a result of the layout revisions, particularly through the removal of the northern WTGs previously proposed. Where significant effects remain these are related only to a minimal number of receptors. Overall, due to the significant effects being localised and limited in number the Project is not considered to have a materially significant or detrimental visual effect. c. Amenity as discussed above, a RAS undertaken for the Project concludes that no overbearing or unsatisfactory effect on the amenity of nearby residents would result from the Project. No significant detrimental effects are therefore anticipated. 14/7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 21 of 40
d. Natural Heritage as discussed above, no significant effects on natural heritage are predicted. Further enhancement measures are proposed through habitat management proposals. No significant detrimental effects are therefore anticipated. LDP Policy: Natural Heritage is discussed below. e. Historic Environment as discussed above, no significant effects on cultural heritage are predicted. No significant detrimental effects are therefore anticipated. LDP Policy: Historic Environment and Archaeology are discussed below. f. Aviation No significant effects are predicated with regard to broadcasting installations. In relation to aviation and defence interests, it is considered that mitigation measures can be implemented to ensure no significant effect. Two aspects have the potential to require mitigation. The Prestwick Airport Primary Surveillance Radar and Ministry of Defence (MoD) military low flying requirements. Prestwick Airport is working closely with suppliers, in particular Aveillant and C-Speed although others may also be considered developing competing mitigation options for a regional solution (as opposed to a site-by-site solution) to Prestwick Airport s wind farm and radar issues. It is expected that either supplier s solution should be satisfactory for the Project. Consultation is on-going with Prestwick Airport in this respect. With regard to concerns raised by the MoD, consultation is on-going in order to address their concerns. Following this, it is anticipated that infra-red lighting will be proposed to be placed on a number of WTGs, this is anticipated to mitigate any impacts (see ES Addendum Chapter A12 for further detail). No significant detrimental effects are anticipated. The Project is therefore not anticipated to adversely affect aviation, defence interests and broadcasting installations. g. Cumulative - the cumulative landscape and visual impact assessment identifies that some significant cumulative effects may still arise as a result of the revised Project layout, however these are identified as local, with only a minimal number of receptors affected. Overall cumulative significant effects only represent a small proportion of those landscape and visual aspects assessed. No further significant environmental cumulative effects are anticipated. The cumulative effect of the Project is therefore considered in accordance with this aspect of the policy. No significant detrimental effects are therefore anticipated. With regard to the second part of LDP Policy: Wind Energy it is noted that the spatial framework is currently being updated and the associated draft spatial framework is due to be published for consultation early 2015. Until such time that this supplementary guidance is adopted regard should be had to the Ayrshire Joint Structure Plan (AJSP) Addendum and the South Ayrshire Landscape Wind Capacity Study (see Section 6 for further detail). 14/7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 22 of 40
Areas of Search currently of relevance to South Ayrshire Council are therefore still defined by the AJSP Addendum. This document is based upon an outdated baseline and policy situation, with the Addendum based on policy two iterations behind the current national policy (revised SPP) and national renewable energy targets. The weight to be placed upon a Project s location in relation to a current defined Area of Search should therefore be considerably limited due to the outdated nature of the associated spatial framework. It is also emphasised again here that generally the LDP promotes renewable energy, and policy does not preclude wind farm development outwith Areas of Search. Considerations with regard to the Capacity Study are discussed within Section 6.3 below. Further, the Project will not have a significant adverse effect on any Natura 2000 site. Overall, with the above in mind, the Project is considered to meet the requirements of LDP Policy: Wind Energy, with the overall support policy support for wind energy proposals that meet these requirements emphasised as carrying considerable weight in the determination of this application. 5.2 Landscape and Visual 5.2.1 Policy The LPD seeks to maintain and protect the landscape through LDP Policy: Landscape Quality and LDP Policy: Protecting the Landscape. LDP Policy: Landscape Quality seeks to maintain and improve the quality of South Ayrshire s landscape and its distinctive local characteristics. Proposals for development must conserve features that contribute to local distinctiveness including: a. community settings, including the approaches to settlements, and buildings within the landscape; b. patterns of woodland, fields, hedgerow and tree features; c. special qualities of rivers, estuaries and coasts; d. historic landscapes; and e. skylines and hill features, including prominent views. LDP Policy: Protecting the Landscape requires applications within or next to Scenic Areas to be considered against three conditions: a. The significance of impacts and cumulative impacts on the environment, particularly landscape and visual effects as informed by the Ayrshire Landscape Character Assessment (SNH 1998). b. How far they would benefit the economy. c. Whether they can be justified in a rural location. 14/7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 23 of 40
5.2.2 Policy Assessment LDP Policy: Landscape Quality largely follows the policy requirements of the now superseded AJSP Policy ENV1. It is recognised that the Project layout revisions have further sought to maintain the landscape resource, through reducing intervisibility with and associated impacts on the setting of local communities, including considerably reducing impacts on the closest settlement of Straiton. The revisions have also sought to conserve local features including skylines and hill features through setting the WTG locations back and removing WTGs, from key landscape features and landmark hills including Glenalla Fell and Genoch Inner Hill. The layout revisions have also sought to protect the Merrick Wild Land Area from any significant effect, seeking to minimise intervisibility with this area and removing views from the popular Merrick Hill. Intervisibility with historic landscape have also been considerably reduced. It is recognised that LDP Policy: Landscape Quality also requires development to improve the quality of South Ayrshire s landscape. It is recognised that the nature of the Project as a wind farm development does not specifically lend itself to landscape improvements, however it is noted that the policy also seeks to improve distinctive local characteristics. Whilst not directly a landscape enhancement, habitat management measures are proposed which will seek to plant additional native broadleaf woodland resource to the north of the Project site. The planting aims to enhance habitat for protected species, as well as indirectly enhancing the landscape resource through the introduction of native woodland and tree features, identified within ENV1 as an important aspect of local distinctiveness. The revised layout amendments draws on the policy aims to conserve the quality of Ayrshire s key landscapes and protect key distinctive features through sensitive re-design of the layout, improving features of the landscape where feasible in accordance with LDP Policy: Landscape Quality. LDP Policy: Protecting the Landscape also largely follows the policy requirements of the now superseded South Ayrshire Local Plan Policy ENV8. With regard to part a) the redesign of the Project has sought to reduce impacts associated with designated landscapes. Whilst it is identified that there would continue to be locally significant direct and indirect effects to the South Ayrshire Scenic Area due to the presence of the Project within this designations, the wider indirect impact of the Project on this area will be limited and not significant. Cumulative effects are predicted to continue to receive the same cumulative landscape effects as described in the ES assessment; slight and not significant, as a result of the introduction of the Project into the cumulative operational/consented baseline scenario; which would increase to significant if all the application sites were added to the cumulative baseline scenario. 14/7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 24 of 40