Directorate for Planning and Environmental Appeals T: 01324 696400 F: 01324 696444 E: [email protected] abcdefghijklmnopqrstu Ms Karen Hamilton Brodies LLP 2 Blythswood Square Glasgow G2 4AD Your ref: KLH/AIR 20.2 Our ref: PPA/270/452 13 December 2007 Dear Madam TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING (SCOTLAND) ACT 1997: SECTION 47 AND SCHEDULE 4 PLANNING APPEAL BY AIRTRICITY DEVELOPMENTS (UK) LTD: WIND FARM AT BEINN ROSAIL, INVERCASSLEY, STRATH OYKEL 1. I refer to your client’s appeal, which I have been appointed to determine, against the refusal of planning permission by the Highland Council (THC) for a wind farm comprising 23 wind turbines, associated infrastructure, including access tracks, an alteration to an existing access to the A837, a sub-station, connecting cabling, a permanent wind monitoring mast, two temporary power performance masts, a temporary construction compound, and borrow pits at the above location. I conducted a conjoined public local inquiry regarding the appeal, and an appeal by SSE Generation Ltd (SSE) against the refusal of planning permission by the Council for a wind farm at Achany Estate, about 5 km east of your client’s site, within Lairg Community Hall between 23 July and 14 August 2007. I made unaccompanied inspections of the appeal sites and their surroundings prior to, and in the course of, the inquiry and accompanied and further unaccompanied inspections on 13 and 15 August. For the reasons explained at paragraphs 116-168 of this letter, I have decided to dismiss your client’s appeal. 2. A copy of a letter stating that I intend to allow the Achany appeal, also issued today, is enclosed. The appeal site 3. The appeal site comprises 1,600 ha of moorland extending south-eastwards along a broad ridge south-east of Beinn an Eoin (544 m Above Ordnance Datum, AOD) across Beinn Rosail (420 m AOD) and Beinn an Rosail Beag (260 m AOD) about 15 km west of Lairg. Strath Oykel lies to the south-west of the site, beyond the smaller valley of the Tutim Burn. To the north-east is Glen Cassley where the River Cassley flows south-east to join the River Oykel. Watercourses in the north-eastern part of the site drain to the River Cassley. Those in the south-western part drain to the Tutim Burn, which is also a tributary of the Oykel. Houses in Glen Cassley, including Glen Rossal House, Glencassley Castle, Glencassley Lodge and March Cottage, are over 2 km from the nearest turbine. The nearest village is Rosehall, about 3 km south of the nearest turbine, where houses, local facilities and buildings on Invercassley Estate extend around the junction of Strath Oykel and Glen Cassley. The site is not covered by a statutory nature conservation designation, 4 The Courtyard, Callendar Business Park, Falkirk, FK1 1XR www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Planning/Appeals abcdefghij abcde abc a 2 but the Caithness and Sutherland Peatlands Special Protection Area (CSPSPA), Special Area of Conservation (CSPSAC) and Ramsar Site and the Grudie Peatlands Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), north-east of Glen Cassley, are about 3.5 km of the site boundary. The River Oykel SAC, at its nearest point, is about 500 m to the south while the Kyle of Sutherland Marshes SSSI is about 2.5 km to the south-east. North-east of Lairg are the Lairg and Strath Brora Lochs SPA and SSSI. The Assynt-Coigach National Scenic Area (NSA) is about 7 km north-west of the site, 10 km from the nearest turbine. The Kyle of Sutherland NSA is about 20 km south-east of the nearest turbine. The appeal proposal 4. Your client’s application, which was submitted on 28 October 2005, was originally for 25 turbines. It was amended in August 2006 when turbines 13 and 14, at the north-western end of the site, were deleted. The remaining 23 turbines would be erected on concrete foundations, each with a 20 m by 40 m crane hardstanding adjacent, and arranged in two lines about 50 m apart. They would have a maximum tower height of 65 m, a maximum height of 100 m to rotor tip, and an individual generating capacity of up to 2 megawatts (MW), giving the wind farm a total capacity of up to 46 (MW). The Environmental Statement (ES) submitted with the application states that a 2 m by 2 m by 2 m transformer would be located near the base of each turbine. A 65 m high lattice design anemometer mast and the sub-station, comprising a control building, car parking and electrical equipment set in a 50 m by 50 m fenced compound, would be located west and south respectively of Beinn an Rosail Beag. The construction compound would be sited at the north-western end of an existing 1.5 km long hardcore track that leads uphill from the A837 past agricultural buildings at Invercassley. The track, and its junction with the A837, would be upgraded for use by large vehicles. Thereafter, about 10 km of new hardcore tracks would be constructed between the turbine sites. Seven borrow pits, 4 in the south- eastern part of the site and 3 in the north-western part, are proposed to provide stone for the project. Connection to an existing SSE sub-station at Invershin 13 km to the south-east would be via underground cabling within the site and thereafter by means of an overhead line on wooden poles along the A837. 5. The ES predicts that the construction of the wind farm would generate 5,922 vehicle movements, 3,600 of which would be light vehicles carrying employees, over a 9 month construction period. Over 1,500 of the 2,322 Heavy Goods Vehicle (HGV) movements would comprise ready-mix concrete trucks transporting concrete from Alness and Ullapool. It is proposed that turbine components would be delivered by sea to Invergordon Harbour. In common with other abnormal and normal load construction vehicles, except those carrying the 50% of concrete that is proposed to be sourced from Ullapool, these would use the A9 to The Mound, the A839 and A836 through Lairg, rejoin the A839 at the Black Bridge and then join the A837 east of Invercassley. The Ullapool concrete trucks would approach from the west via the A835 and then the A837 through Strath Oykel. The Council’s decision on the application 6. The Council’s Planning, Development, Europe and Tourism (PDET) Committee, which considered the application on 29 September 2006, resolved to grant planning permission, contrary to the recommendation by the Director of Planning and Development that permission should be refused. The Achany application, and an application by E.ON UK for 19 wind turbines at Rosehall Hill, were considered at the same meeting. The Committee accepted the recommendations that Achany should be refused and that Rosehall Hill should be granted permission, subject to conditions and to a legal agreement. However, following a 4 The Courtyard, Callendar Business Park, Falkirk, FK1 1XR www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Planning/Appeals abcdefghij abcde abc a 3 Notice of Amendment by some members of the Committee, this decision was reversed at a meeting of the full Council in December 2006. The refusal reasons listed in the decision notice issued on 13 December were that the proposal was contrary to: • the Council’s Renewable Energy Strategy and Planning Guidelines (HRES) in that the proposal is within an area classed as having a “presumption against development” for national and major scale onshore wind farm projects and where Policy E.7 would apply. The applicant has failed to satisfy the precautionary approach to development in National Planning Policy Guideline (NPPG) 14 and Policy E.7. • Policy G6 of the Highland Structure Plan (HSP) and NPPG 14 in that the proposal represents development in or adjacent to an NSA which detracts from the quality, character, integrity and setting of the landscape, and the scale, siting and design of the proposal are inappropriate to the NSA. • Policy E2 of the Highland Structure Plan (HSP) in that its visual and landscape impacts would be significantly detrimental and adverse and the cumulative landscape impacts when considered with the proposal for Invercassley and/or Rosehall would be likely to be significant and adverse. • Policy L4 of the HSP in that the proposal does not maintain and enhance present landscape character. 7. The Council subsequently advised that a further reason, which had also been included in the recommendation, had inadvertently been omitted from the notice. This was that the proposal would be contrary to Policy T6 of the HSP in that it would have an adverse effect on important scenic views enjoyed from tourist routes and viewpoints. 8. At the inquiry, the Council stated that the legal agreement for Rosehall Hill had been progressed and that it expected to grant permission for that scheme soon. Development plan policies 9. The HSP was approved by Scottish Ministers in May 2001. The remaining component of the statutory development plan covering the appeal site is the South & East Sutherland Local Plan (SESLP), which was adopted by the Council in May 2000. 10. The appeal site is in an area where General Policy ENV 3 of the SESLP presumes against development, particularly where there is significant damage to heritage, amenity, or public health. Strategic Policy 3 includes Rosehall among locations where opportunities to upgrade and improve the tourist business are to be encouraged. Strategic Policy 4 states that the Council will support action, including in the Rosehall area, that will attempt to reduce social and economic fragility. Special initiatives include extra resources for tourist promotion and development and the upgrading of infrastructure, notably road access and water supply.