THIS REPORT RELATES STIRLING COUNCIL TO ITEM 12 ON THE AGENDA
ENVIRONMENT & HOUSING COMMITTEE CORPORATE OPERATIONS
17 SEPTEMBER 2015 NOT EXEMPT
PLANNING POLICY: WIND ENERGY DEVELOPMENTS DRAFT SUPPLEMENTARY GUIDANCE
1 SUMMARY
1.1 A meeting of the Environment and Housing Committee on 2 April 2015 agreed to publish for the purposes of public consultation:- i) Draft Supplementary Guidance SG33 Wind Energy Developments Spatial Framework and Supplementary Advice and Guidance, ii) Updated Stirling Landscape Sensitivity and Capacity Study for Wind Energy Development and, iii) the associated Environmental Report.
1.2 This Report, and the content of Appendix 1, outlines the comments received and Officers proposed response.
1.3 The revised and updated Spatial Framework and Supplementary Advice and Guidance is being presented to the Committee as a consequence of recommendations made in the Directorate of Planning and Environmental Appeals report on the Examination of the Stirling Local Development Plan, published March 2014, and revised and updated guidance from the Scottish Government regarding Onshore Wind as set out in Scottish Planning Policy, published in June 2014.
2 OFFICER RECOMMENDATION(S)
The Committee agrees to: -
2.1 approve the proposed responses to the comments received, as set out in Appendix 1, and agree that SG33 be amended accordingly; and
2.2 the amended SG 33 be submitted for the consideration of the Scottish Ministers in accordance with section 22 (6) the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, and that the views of the Scottish Ministers are reported to the next available meeting of the Environment and Housing Committee.
3 CONSIDERATIONS
Background
3.1 On 20 November 2014 the Environment and Housing Committee approved a programme for the preparation of updated planning guidance for wind energy development in the Stirling Local Development Plan area.
3.2 On 2 April 2015 the Environment and Housing Committee agreed to publish for the purposes of public consultation: - i) Draft Supplementary Guidance SG33 Wind Energy Developments Spatial Framework and Supplementary Advice and Guidance, ii) Updated Stirling Landscape Sensitivity and Capacity Study for Wind Energy Development and, iii) the associated Environmental Report. The background report summarised the contents of each document.
3.3 Draft Supplementary Guidance SG33 includes a Spatial Framework (see revised mapping included in Appendix 2) for Wind Energy Developments deemed to comply with the requirements of Scottish Planning Policy, and identifies:-
Group 1: Areas where wind farms will not be acceptable - National Parks and National Scenic Areas.
Group 2: Areas of significant protection - Includes Natura 2000 sites, Inventory Battlefields and Designed Landscapes, Sites of Special Scientific Interest, National Nature Reserves, Wild Land, Carbon Rich Soils/Peat, and Community Separation for Consideration of Visual Impact (2.0 km maximum subject to local topography). Scottish Planning Policy states – ‘Recognising the need for significant protection, in these areas wind farms may be appropriate in some circumstances. Further consideration will be required to demonstrate that any significant effects on the qualities of these areas can be substantially overcome by siting, design or other mitigation.’
Group 3: Areas with potential for wind farm development - Beyond groups 1 and 2 wind farms are likely to be acceptable, subject to detailed consideration against identified policy criteria.
3.4 Paragraph 163 of Scottish Planning Policy further states - 'The Spatial Framework requires to be complemented by a more detailed and exacting development management process where the merits of individual proposals will be carefully considered against the full range of environmental, community, and cumulative impacts.'
3.5 Following from this, the Draft Supplementary Guidance incorporates advice and guidance on a range of planning and environmental considerations relevant to wind energy development. This included advice on the capacity of the landscapes of Stirling Local Development Plan area to accommodate further wind energy development, derived from recommendations made in an update to the Stirling Landscape Sensitivity and Capacity Study for Wind Energy Development (January 2015).
3.6 In particular attention was drawn to those areas where, for the purposes of the public consultation, additional capacity had been provisionally identified for additional larger scales wind farms (defined as a group of more than three
turbines) or extensions to existing wind farms, as summarised out in paras. 3.7 and 3.8 below.
3.7 Subject to compliance with strict siting and design criteria:-
i. the Carron Valley and rising land to the south including Meikle Bin are identified as having low capacity for further development of up to 10 turbines between 15m up to 110m.
ii. the Fintry/Gargunnock and Touch Hills are identified as having low capacity for further development of up to 10 turbines between 15m to greater than 110m.
iii. small extensions to the established Craigengelt and Earlsburn windfarms (2-3 turbines each, matching heights) may also be possible.
3.8 Subject to compliance with strict siting and design criteria the landscape of the Craig Garbh Mountain Group between Loch Tay and Loch Earn has been identified as an area of having low capacity for further development of up to 10 turbines between 15m up to 110m.
Public Consultation
3.9 Public consultation commenced Monday 11 May 2015 and concluded Monday 6 July 2015. It was carried out in accordance with established practice and procedures and involve a full range of stakeholders, including community councils, other interested community groups, the Scottish Government, Key Agencies, the development industry and the wider public.
Overview of Representations
3.10 27 responses were received and are summarised in Appendix 1 along with the proposed Council response. An overview now follows:-
Key Agencies
3.11 The Scottish Government concerned at lack of positive support. Guidance could be clearer on where there are opportunities for development to achieve national aspirations for more renewable energy development. Scottish Environment Protection Agency request inclusion of further information on a range of technical issues. Historic Scotland welcomes requirement to take account of impacts on the historic environment. Scottish Water, Forestry Commission Scotland, NHS Forth Valley and Transport Scotland raise a number of general issues
3.12 Scottish Natural Heritage have a number of significant concerns regarding both SG 33 and the Landscape Study across a range of issues, as summarised in Appendix 1. They are also of the opinion there is no capacity for large scale turbines into the Creag Gharbh and Carron Valley areas and advise that SG33 should be amended accordingly.
Adjoining Planning Authorities
3.13 East Dunbartonshire Council and the Loch Lomond and the Trossachs National Park supportive of the approach taken. Falkirk Council continues to raise concern over the level of cumulative landscape and visual impact on the Falkirk Council area arising from current operational and consented developments in the Carron Valley.
There was no response from North Lanarkshire, Perth and Kinross, West Dunbartonshire and Clackmannanshire Councils.
Community Councils
3.14 Balfron, Cambusbarron, Croftamie, Drymen and Killearn generally supportive of the approach taken. Carron Valley and District concerned at the identification of further capacity in the Carron Valley. Bannockburn do not support any more wind energy developments.
There was no response from the remaining community Councils.
Other Organisations
3.15 Mountaineering Council of Scotland oppose increase in capacity at the Creag Gharbh area. The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds raise a number of issues regarding impacts on peatland habitats and carbon payback calculations. Endrick Valley Action Group endorses the guidance. The owners of the Thornhill Aerodrome seek amendments to the wording on advice on aviation.
Developers and Operators
3.16 Force 9 Energy/EDF Energy provide a detailed response to both SG 33 and the Landscape Capacity study, raising a number of significant concerns, in particular that the guidance does not meet the requirement of Scottish Government advice and, overall, seeking a more positive approach to wind energy developments. See Appendix A for a full summary and responses to the matters raised.
3.17 Green Power provide a detailed response to SG 33, overall seeking a more positive approach to wind energy developments. See Appendix A for a full summary and responses to the matters raised.
3.18 Moray Estates disagree with conclusion that little strategic landscape capacity exists for any major extension of Braes of Doune Windfarm. Believe there is scope for extending the wind farm.
Individual Responses
3.19 Two responses supporting the guidance.
Environmental Report and Habitats Regulations Appraisal
3.20 Responses from the Consultation Authorities (Scottish Environment Protection Agency, Scottish Natural Heritage and Historic Scotland summarised in Appendix A. Scottish Natural Heritage agree that Spatial
Framework can be screened out and does not need to be subject to an Appropriate Assessment.
Overview of recommended responses
3.21 Developers and the Scottish Government seek a more positive approach to wind energy developments. Local Development Plan Policy 12.1 gives due support, in principle, to wind energy development in line with Scottish Government advice. However, para. 155 of Scottish Planning Policy states that Development plans should seek to ensure an area’s full potential for electricity and heat from renewable sources is achieved, in line with national climate change targets, giving due regard to relevant environmental, community and cumulative impact considerations."
3.22 With this in mind, careful consideration has been given to concerns raised by Scottish Natural Heritage, Carron Valley and District Community Council and Falkirk Community Council regarding a proposed increase in capacity in the Carron Valley. For the reasons set out in Appendix A, i.e. potential adverse landscape and visual impacts, including cumulative impacts, impacts on sense of remoteness and potential impacts on the areas of adjoining planning authorities, it is proposed to amend capacity in Landscape Character Type 3 Forested River Basin (Carron Valley) to no capacity (see revised mapping included in Appendix 2). It is however proposed to retain the capacity identified for the Fintry/Gargunnock and Touch Hills, i.e. low capacity for further development and also retain advice regarding the potential for extensions to Earlsburn and Craigengelt Windfarms. Any development would also have to comply with strict siting and design criteria. Retaining capacity would also ensure that the full potential for electricity generated by onshore wind is being achieved, in line with Scottish Government advice
3.23 With regard to the Craig Garbh Mountain Group between Loch Tay and Loch Earn Wind, taking account of the concerns raised by Scottish Natural Heritage and the Mountaineering Council of Scotland, it is accepted that development here would not fit with the established pattern of development in Breadalbane and the wider area of the Southern Highlands. There is also potential for development to affect the setting of the nearby wild land areas and National Scenic Areas. It is proposed therefore to amend Landscape Character sub type 8b – Mountain (Creag Gharbh) capacity to no capacity (see revised mapping included in Appendix 2).
3.24 With respect to the Braes of Doune Windfarm the conclusion that there is little strategic capacity is based on methodical landscape and visual assessments in the updated landscape study. In summary the Braes of Doune Windfarm 'is highly visible from a wide area and large viewing population. It forms a strong visual focus in many views towards the northern hills. Presently the wind farm is generally perceived to be a single though extensive feature, contained but not overwhelming or dominating the hills.
3.25 A number of responses seek amendments to technical and mapping information. It is also proposed to amend the text to provide clearly distinguish the relationship between the Spatial Framework, the supplementary advice and guidance and the updated landscape capacity study.
3.26 The finalised version of the Supplementary Guidance requires to be submitted to Scottish Ministers in accordance with section 22 (6) the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997. The Ministers may direct that the Guidance be modified prior to it being adopted.
4 POLICY/RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS AND CONSULTATIONS
Policy Implications
Equality Impact Assessment No Strategic Environmental Assessment Yes Serving Stirling Yes Single Outcome Agreement Yes Diversity (age, disability, gender, race, religion, sexual orientation) No Sustainability (community, economic, environmental) Yes Effect on Council’s green house gas emissions Decrease Strategic/Service Plan No Existing Policy or Strategy No Risk No Resource Implications Financial No People No Land and Property or IT Systems No Consultations Internal or External Consultations Yes
Equality Impact Assessment
4.1 With reference to the report presented to the Environment and Housing Committee on 2 April 2015 it was determined that an Equality Impact Assessment was not required. The Supplementary Guidance will operate throughout the Stirling Local Development Plan area. Its primary purpose is to provide advice and guidance on a range of locational, technical and design matters relating to wind energy developments. It will be used to inform decisions on relevant applications for planning permission. It is a revised and updated version of current guidance adopted by the Council in March 2011 that has operated with no likely implications for the Council's statutory equality duties and responsibilities. A copy of EqIA Relevance Assessment Form forms Appendix 2.
Strategic Environmental Assessment
4.2 With reference to the report presented to the Environment and Housing Committee on 2 April 2015 it was noted a full Strategic Environmental Assessment was required. The outcome of the consultation on the Environmental Report is summarised in Appendix 1.
Serving Stirling
4.3 With reference to the report presented to the Environment and Housing Committee on 2 April 2015 the proposals set out in the report were consistent with the following key priorities: -
L - Adopt a pragmatic approach to sustainability that protects and enhances the local environment.
Single Outcome Agreement
4.4 With reference to the report presented to the Environment and Housing Committee on 2 April 2015 the proposals set out in the report support the following outcomes in the Single Outcome Agreement: -
Communities are well served, better connected and safe.
Other Policy Implications
4.5 Following approval, the Supplementary Guidance will ensure the area’s full potential for electricity from renewable wind sources is achieved, in line with national climate change targets, giving due regard to relevant environmental, community and cumulative impact considerations. The controlled expansion of wind energy development, albeit on a limited scale, will make a positive contribution towards national targets to reduce carbon emissions.
Resource Implications
4.6 None
Consultations
4.7 Public consultation commenced Monday 11 May 2015 and concluded Monday 6 July 2015. It was carried out in accordance with established practice and procedures and involve a full range of stakeholders, including community councils, other interested community groups, the Scottish Government, Key Agencies, the development industry and the wider public.
Tick ( ) to confirm and add relevant initials The appropriate Convener(s), Vice Convener(s), Portfolio Holder and Depute Portfolio Holder have been consulted on this report The Chief Executive or Director has been consulted on this report as GOS appropriate
5 BACKGROUND PAPERS
5.1 Report and Minutes of Environment and Housing Committee meeting dated 20 November 2014 – Planning Policy: Wind Farms and Wind Turbines Revised Spatial Framework and Supplementary Guidance.
5.2 Report and Minutes of Environment and Housing Committee meeting dated 2 April 2015 – Planning Policy: Wind Farms and Wind Turbines Revised Spatial Framework and Supplementary Guidance.
6 APPENDICES
6.1 Appendix 1 - Draft SG 33 Public Consultation - Summary of Comments Received and Recommended Response
6.2 Appendix 2 Revised Mapping to be inserted into the Guidance in relation to the Spatial Framework (Maps 1 and 2) and Landscape Capacity (Map 3)
6.3 Appendix 2 – EqIA Relevance Assessment Form.
Author(s) Name Designation Telephone Number/E-mail
Richard Callender Planning Officer 01786 233662 [email protected]
Approved by Name Designation Signature
Gerard O’Sullivan Director of Corporate Services
Date 8 September 2015 Service Reference Appendix 1
Draft SG 33 Public Consultation - Summary of Comments Received and Recommended Response
Respondent Summary of Comments Recommended Response
Key Agencies
1. Scottish Concerns regarding lack of information and/or Concerns are noted. Modify SG 33 to take account of these matters Environment guidance relating to carbon rich soils, water by adding supplementary text in 'Other Issues' section. Protection environment, flood risk, forest waste, dispersal of Agency emission plumes and moving, storing and (SEPA ) reinstating soils. SG 33 should be expanded and reference should be made to relevant national guidance.
2. Scottish SPP requires local authorities to provide a Section 2.0 of SG 33 sets out in full the wording of Local Development Government supportive wind energy planning policy Plan Policy 12.1 (Wind Turbines). Para b) specifically states:- (also includes framework. The guidance could use more positive 'Developments will be permitted if they are of a scale, layout and comments language in places, e.g. Para 4.21. The planning nature such that adverse environmental impacts, including cumulative from Historic application stage may equally conclude there are impacts, are avoided or minimised to the satisfaction of the planning Scotland) acceptable solutions to constraints. authority. Para. 3.1 to 3.6 of SG 33 summarise the role of the planning system in fulfilling the Scottish Government's vision for a low carbon place, as set out in National Planning Framework 3 and Scottish Planning Policy. Para. 3.3 specifically draws attention to para. 155 of Scottish Planning Policy, which states - "Development plans should seek to ensure an area’s full potential for electricity and heat from renewable sources is achieved, in line with national climate change targets, giving due regard to relevant environmental, community and cumulative impact considerations." Para 4.6 refers to the Scottish Government's 2020 Routemap for Renewable Energy in Scotland which '… notes the planning system must continue to balance environmental sensitivities with the need to make progress on renewables targets. The planning system’s focus is on providing guidance on the locations where particular renewables are most likely
Respondent Summary of Comments Recommended Response
to be appropriate as well as shaping the criteria to be taken into account in the determination of applications.'
It is thus considered LDP Policy 12.1 and SG33 give due support, in principle, to wind energy development in line with Scottish Government advice. It remains the case however, as anticipated in SPP, that at the local level 'due regard' requires to be given to relevant environmental, community and cumulative impact considerations.
The spatial framework (Maps 1 & 2) appear to comply with the requirements of Scottish Planning Noted. In response to concerns raised by Scottish Natural Heritage Policy (SPP). (see below) it is intended to revise the maps to improve their legibility and reposition them to immediately follow section 3.0 – National Planning Policy Guidance and the Spatial Framework.
There may be some opportunity to locate larger wind turbine developments within landscape As noted in para. 4.7 of SG 33 Stirling Council has followed advice set types 7d and 8b. Following from this the guidance out in the Scottish Government's 'Some Wind Questions Answered' to could be clearer on where there are opportunities '… provide a clearer steer on development management……' and '… for development to achieve national aspirations identify scope for further development'. From experience potential for more renewable energy development, whilst in landscape and visual impacts are of most interest to local other areas more constraints will apply to meet residents/communities and the wind energy development industry. SG protection of communities or important 33 has been published in draft form for the purposes of public environmental assets. consultation and the Council considers Table 1 and Map 3 fulfill its intended purpose of showing potential opportunities for further development. Following consideration of responses to the public consultation it is however recommended that :-
i) capacity in Landscape Character Type 3 Forested River Basin (Carron Valley) should be amended to no capacity.
ii) capacity in Landscape Character Type 8b Mountain (Creag Garbh) between Loch Earn and Loch Tay should be amended to no capacity.
Respondent Summary of Comments Recommended Response
Historic Scotland - Welcome requirement to take Noted account of impacts on the historic environment. Section D - Guidance for extensions and re- powering of existing windfarms focus on landscape capacity.
Recommended Council specifically identifies extensions to Craigengelt and Earlsburn have potential for significant adverse impact on the The Guidance and supporting capacity study set out general advice setting of Stirling Castle. Whilst noted as a on extensions. If and when formal application(s) are submitted to constraint in paragraph 4.13 helpful if this cross- extend these wind farms it is considered para. 4.27 draws sufficient referenced in section D. attention to the importance of the Historic Environment in the determination of applications, including Stirling Castle.
3. Scottish Landscape Capacity Study Natural Heritage Agree with the main conclusion of the study that Noted. there remains very limited capacity for further wind farm development of varying scales within the study area if the intrinsic qualities of the landscape are to be maintained.
Advise we are not supportive of the approach to and some aspects of the findings of the study, including:-
Study very difficult to read and follow, and in The Update follows the style and structure of the previous study, places has conflicting advice. approved April 2008 and partly funded by Scottish Natural Heritage. This is a technical document with a wide range of audiences, utilising sometimes quite complicated landscape and visual impact assessment methodologies over a wide area of varied and complex
Respondent Summary of Comments Recommended Response
landscape character. With respect to 'conflicting' advice para. 6 of the study states:- 'Consequently, whilst the strategic level conclusions on landscape capacity in this report may indicate that no strategic capacity exists, detailed consideration of particular individual landscape character types/sub types may suggest that some limited scope for wind energy development of a particular typology may be feasible, subject to the adoption of a very specific siting and design strategy.' For clarification Para 4.11 of SG 33 could be expanded to refer to this advice.
Lacks an appreciation of the different impacts that The study fully recognises that different turbine sizes have different different size turbines may have, and is too broad. impacts, as highlighted in the above comments.
Generally insufficient account of cross boundary Similar comments made in respect of SG33 and discussed in more considerations, both between landscape detail below. character types within the Stirling Council Area and also between Stirling Council areas and neighbouring Authority landscapes.
Key siting and design guidance confusing and too Para 4.1 of SG 33 refers to para. 163 of Scottish Planning Policy prescriptive in its approach to numbers of turbines which states - 'The Spatial Framework requires to be complemented and is therefore contrary to our published by a more detailed and exacting development management process guidance and that of Scottish Government. where the merits of individual proposals will be carefully considered against the full range of environmental, community, and cumulative impacts.' Para 4.7 then states:- 'To provide a clearer steer on development management, planning authorities may wish to undertake or update their landscape capacity studies.' These requirements have largely dictated the need for Stirling Council to take such a prescriptive approach.
Guidance for extensions and repowering is also See above comments. too prescriptive, again contrary to our published guidance and that of Scottish Government.
Respondent Summary of Comments Recommended Response
Advise the study is revisited with a clear brief of Study was commissioned by the Council and approved for public how it will work in practice, and that a revised consultation. It is based on the earlier study and follows established study is produced that presents a sense of vision landscape and visual impact assessment methodologies. The main for wind energy in Stirling in a more easily findings have been used to provide a clearer steer on development accessible but concise format. management considerations.
SG 33
We consider the SG is too prescriptive in that it See above comments. directs development rather than identifying the criteria for assessment of development. We understand this is because the SG is based on the revised Landscape Capacity Study.
Recommend that the Spatial Framework should Mapping will be redrawn and repositioned in SG 33. consist of a single map (Map 2), clearly named and in the main body of the SG. The shading on Map 2 is confusing and we suggest it is amended.
SG introduces a concept of capacity for large These concerns mainly relate to proposed capacity increases in:- scale turbines into the Creag Gharbh and Carron Valley areas. Our view is that no such capacity i) Landscape Character Type 3 – Forested River Basin comprising exists and we advise that the SG should be the Carron Valley and rising land to the south including Meikle Bin, amended accordingly. identified as having low capacity for further development of up to 10 turbines between 15m up to 110m.
ii) Landscape Character sub type 8b – Mountain (Creag Gharbh) between Loch Tay and Loch Earn, identified as having low capacity for further development of up to 10 turbines between 15m up to 110m.
Respondent Summary of Comments Recommended Response
Following careful consideration of SNH's concerns, and taking account of other relevant comments received from Falkirk Council, Carron Valley and District Community Council and the Mountaineering Council of Scotland, it is recommended that for both these areas should be amended to no capacity for wind energy development.
In both cases the study highlights these areas as having high sensitivity and high landscape value. In the Carron Valley a principle reason for identifying additional capacity is that it is visually contained from the majority of the Stirling area, separated by an enclosing range of higher hills and plateaux, so that visibility of any large-scale windfarm development would be considerably limited throughout the wider Stirling area, restricted to the surrounding hills where views of windfarms are already a key characteristic feature. However taking account of the consultation responses it is considered appropriate to identify the area as an area with no capacity for further wind energy development. This would help maintain the attractive landscape setting of the reservoir and the popular summit of Meikle Bin , particularly when seen from the B818 from which there is generally only restricted views of the wind farms to the north on the Gargunnock/Touch and Fintry Hills. It would also help maintain the sense of remoteness, a 'sensitivity' highlighted in the Landscape Capacity Study.
With regard to the Craig Garbh Mountain Group between Loch Tay and Loch Earn it is also accepted that a wind farm at this locality would be isolated from other wind energy developments to east and south east, and that the Loch Lomond and Cairngorms National Park and National Scenic Areas generally preclude further development to the west and north west. As noted by Scottish Natural Heritage wind farm development here would therefore not fit with established pattern of development of Breadalbane and the wider area of the Southern Highlands. There is also potential for development to affect the setting of the nearby wild land areas and National Scenic Areas.
Respondent Summary of Comments Recommended Response
Habitats Regultaions Appraial
We agree with your outcome that the Spatial Framework can be screened out and does not Noted. need to be subject to an Appropriate Assessment.
We suggest that both the Loch Lomond Special Protection Area (SPA) and the Slammanan Plateau SPA are included in the list of sites in section 3.3. These SPAs have a potential connection with wind energy developments in the Stirling Council area as the notified features of both SPAs include migratory geese.
4. Scottish Request document advises all proposals and Modify SG 33 to take account of these matters by adding Water applications be sent to Scottish Water for review supplementary text in 'Other Issues' section. so we can assess for any impact on:- i) Drinking water quality and quantity, ii) Below-ground assets iii) – Radio telemetry interference, and suggest adequate control measures if required.
5. Forestry Minimal reference to land use change, and in Modify SG 33 to take account of these matters by adding particular the removal of trees to accommodate supplementary text in 'Other Issues' section. Commission wind turbines. The Scottish Government have a control of woodlands policy but no reference has been made to this.
Some 5000ha of woodlands removed across To date, within the Stirling Local Development Plan area, operational Scotland for Wind farm developments where and consented larger scale wind farms have been sited in elevated conditional compensatory tree planting has still moorlands (i.e. Braes of Doune, Earlsburn, Craigengelt or on not been carried out. Would be reassuring to agricultural land (Rosehill) and required no woodland removal.
Respondent Summary of Comments Recommended Response
know that within Stirling Council area if this condition has been applied,work has actually been completed, and where.
6. NHS Forth From the public health perspective it would be Noted. SG 33 already makes reference to shadow flicker and potential Valley useful for the guidance to take account of recently risks associated with structural failures. Research referred to by NHS published advice on health impact assessment in Forth Valley concludes:- 'With present day wind turbines and state of rural areas - especially the following hazards, i.e. the art electricity generation and distribution electromagnetic fields noise, shadow flicker, power cables/effects of (are deemed) not to be an important factor in the discussion of health electro-magnetic fields, blade breakage and effects from living near wind turbines and wind farms.' accidents.
7. Transport To cover the interests of Transport Scotland in Modify SG 33 to take account of these matters by adding Scotland relation to potential impacts on the Trunk Road supplementary text in 'Other Issues' section. Network It is recommended that further wording is included. The following would provide a more compete and robust description of potential discussion and steps involved in considering the potential issues and solutions. This may be best placed after paragraph 4.34, 'Other Community Issues'. 8. Stirling In relation to Section 4.31 (Noise) a link to Modify SG 33 to take account of these matters by adding Council Scottish Governments online renewables supplementary text in 'Other Issues' section. Environmental planning advice (28 May 2014) may help Health applicants.
Adjoining Planning Authorities
9. East No objections. Welcomed that Map 3 notes low Noted. Dunbarton- capacity for turbines above 15m in the landscape shire character areas immediately adjacent to the Council Kilpatrick Hills and Campsie Fells.
Respondent Summary of Comments Recommended Response
Should be clarified height is to blade tip rather Modify SG to remove any ambiguities. than hub.
10. Falkirk The Spatial Framework largely accords with SPP. Noted. Council Some parts of the Carron Valley emerge as Group 3: ‘Areas with Potential for Wind Energy Development, subject to detailed consideration against identified policy criteria, including the Stirling Landscape Sensitivity and Capacity Study for Wind Energy Development, updated Jan. 2015.
The SG and accompanying capacity study largely Noted. recognise there is relatively little scope for large scale wind energy development in the Carron Valley. Potential is identified for limited extensions to Craigengelt and Earlsburn windfarms. Four landscape character units are located adjacent to the Falkirk Council Area, for which projected capacities are identified.
Falkirk Council continues to raise concern over Noted. Taking account of concerns by Falkirk Council and separate the level of cumulative landscape and visual comments from SNH and the Carron Valley and District Community impact on the Falkirk Council area arising from Council it is recommended Landscape Character Type 3 Forested current operational and consented developments River Basin (Carron Valley) should be amended to no capacity for in the Carron Valley. Draft SG should therefore wind energy development. highlight cumulative landscape and visual impact within adjacent Local Authority areas, and proposals should require robust assessment as part of any application which may come forward.
Respondent Summary of Comments Recommended Response
In terms of Falkirk settlements closest to the Scottish Government advise it is the planning authority's (in this case boundary, requested Stirling Council apply a 2km Falkirk Council's) responsibility to establish community separation appropriate community separation distance for distances. As these are set out in Falkirk's SG 14 Spatial Framework settlements of Torwood, Airth, South Alloa, and Guidance for Wind Energy Development, then it is appropriate for Larbert and Stenhousemuir and Denny. Stirling to identify any limited overlaps within the Stirling Council area.
11. LLTNP Generally supportive of the approach taken and Noted welcome being consulted over any proposals coming forward. Happy with the area wide capacity, i.e. four constraints and three sensitivities.
Following comments on the guidance for areas around National Park boundary:-
Cumulative impacts and the views of residents Noted would be considered as part of a case-by-case assessment.
Flanders Moss - Low capacity up to 15 m. Noted Content only allow a slight level of change and protect views out from LLTNPA
Moor Park /Cameron Muir - Low capacity for 15- Noted 50 metres welcomed given importance to approaches to LLTNPA. Also been large scale windfarm applications
Fintry, Gargunnock and Touch Hills/Campsie Noted Fells - Noted Campsie Fells have no capacity, indicating area's value and key views from LLTNPA. Remaining area has existing windfarm baseline and offers capacity.
Respondent Summary of Comments Recommended Response
Creag Garbh, by Killin - Low capacity - 15-50m Noted. and 51-110m Content this allows only slight level of change and protect views out from LLTNPA.
Killin Forested Area – Note low capacity for Noted. turbines up to 15m. allowing only slight level of change is capable and that views out from LLTNPA, cumulative impacts and the views of residents would be considered as part of a case- by-case assessment.
Other comments - Guidance enables appropriate Noted. detailed assessments to be made for proposals to extend or repower established wind farms. Visual intrusion is to be considered using appropriate best practice. Assessments will consider aims of National Park. Agree landscape and visual impacts are likely to be the most significant cumulative consideration in Stirling Council area.
Community Councils
12. Balfron Support position taken. Scottish Government Noted. policy has been heeded, but done so with due protection of the areas for which you have responsibility, including those within the remit of Balfron Community Council.
13. Do not support any more wind energy Noted. Stirling Council seeking to satisfy requirements of Scottish Bannockburn developments .Benefits far outweighed by Planning Policy to ensure the development plan achieves the full disadvantages. Present ones blight beautiful potential for electricity from renewable resources, giving due regard to Stirling landscape. Prominent Braes of Doune relevant environmental, community and cumulative impact Windfarm totally spoils the hills. Over provision at considerations.
Respondent Summary of Comments Recommended Response
present without any more development, which would ultimately impact on visitor numbers.
14. Approves Stirling Council’s revised and updated Noted. Cambusbarron proposals for planning guidance for wind energy developments with the proviso in relation to being involved in the consultation process for future planning applications of this nature. 15. Carron Took a position some time ago, based on the Para 6 of the study states:- Consequently, whilst the strategic level Valley and views of our ‘constituents’, of no more wind farms conclusions on landscape capacity in this report may indicate that no District in the Community Council area - we felt we had strategic capacity exists, detailed consideration of particular individual ‘done our bit’. Therefore concerned about the landscape character types/sub types may suggest that some limited ambiguities, i.e. Carron Valley has ‘limited (or scope for wind energy development of a particular typology may be ‘low’) capacity’ for further wind farm development, feasible, subject to the adoption of a very specific siting and design with ‘cumulative impact’ seeming to be an strategy.' important factor, howvere goes on to recommend the possibility of a further 10 turbines, maybe For the purposes of public consultation SG 33 identifies:- increasing finally to around 15. And this of course i) the Carron Valley and rising land to the south including Meikle Bin takes no account of potential developments in are identified as having low capacity for further development of up to neighbouring areas. Additionally, ‘landscape 10 turbines between 15m up to 110m. capacity does not form part of the spatial framework ‘subject to compliance with strict siting ii) the Fintry/Gargunnock and Touch Hills are identified as having low and design criteria’ : Who is setting these strict capacity for further development of up to 10 turbines between 15m to criteria? If it's not the Government then greater than 110m. presumably we must rely on the sensitivity of Stirling Council planners. iii) small extensions to the established Craigengelt and Earlsburn windfarms (2-3 turbines each, matching heights) may also be possible.
However taking account of these concerns and separate comments from Scottish Natural Heritage and Falkirk Council recommended Landscape Character Type 3 Forested River Basin (Carron Valley) should be amended to no capacity for wind energy development.
Respondent Summary of Comments Recommended Response
Given the established presence of large scale wind farms it is however considered appropriate to retain the recommended capacity increase for the Fintry/Gargunnock and Touch Hills and support small extensions to the established Craigengelt and Earlsburn windfarms. These are subject to subject to compliance with strict siting and design criteria as set out in SG 33 and the updated landscape study, and supported by relevant guidance from the Scottish Government and Scottish Natural Heritage.
Noted. Application under consideration and account will be taken of Concerned that planning permission may be relevant national and local planning guidance. sought—and approval given—by the use of precedent, e.g. recent example for one turbine, where a previous application for a larger windfarm on the same site was thrown out by the Scottish Reporter. We do not wish to see the thin ends of any wedges across the Carron Valley.
16. Croftamie A survey in 2012 indicated majority of local Noted. residents against proposed wind farm in the Kilpatrick Hills. Other comments were energy inefficiency of windfarms, disruption to local wildlife and the visual impact and noise. We are a small community with low 'turnover' and do not believe results would change substantially since 2012.
17. Drymen No adverse comments. The National Park is the Noted. main planning authority for the Community Council area, with very limited rural area subject to planning control by Stirling Council. In these
Respondent Summary of Comments Recommended Response
circumstances large scale wind farms would not be acceptable.
18. Killearn General view wind farms unsightly and detract Noted. from the landscape/countryside, therefore not something we wish to see developed to any great extent. With some relief we note limited capacity for development in our area. Sympathise with communities affected by major installations in the Gargunnock and Doune hills, identified with potential for extension. Interested to receive information on Stirling Council's contribution to Scottish Government 30% target by 2020 and the percentage in our area.
Other Organisations
19. Mount - 1. To avoid any uncertainty, para 4.10 should state Modify SG to remove any ambiguities. aineering that heights are to blade-tip. Council of Scotland 2. Agree with assessments derived from robust Taking account of these comments and concerns raised by SNH it is and careful ly updated landscape capacity study. recommended that capacity in Landscape Character Type 8b However insufficient attention paid to impacts on Mountain (Creag Garbh), between Loch Earn and Loch Tay should be landscapes outside study area when assessing amended to no capacity. ca pacity in Creag Gharbh. Turbines very likely to imp act upon valued surrounding landscapes, including Munro's north of Loch Tay, and appear all the more prominent because of their isolation, with nearest other large turbine wind farms located >20km away to the east and south, with none at all to north and west. We have seen several instances of wind farms being located on landscapes that are not themselves of high quality but are surrounded by high quality landscapes, resulting in a
Respondent Summary of Comments Recommended Response
substantial degrading of the quality of the surrounding valued landscapes.
20. RSPB Welcome guidance to ensure disturbance to Noted. Considered advice in SG 33 sufficient at this stage. These peatlands is avoided wherever possible. matters will be also be considered more thoroughly at the detailed Recommend wind farm infrastructure should be application stage. sited and micro-sited to avoid deep peat. Opportunities to mitigate impacts on peatlands via enhancement and restoration at the site should maximised.
SPP states that all development should seek to Para 4.25 (Carbon Rich Soils) provides link to Carbon Calculator. minimise carbon emissions resulting from peatland disruption (para 205 SPP). Recommend all wind farms affecting deep peat should use the carbon calculator and carbon payback period be confirmed.
Recommend approach of Natural Resources Stirling Council obliged to follow advice of Scottish Government on Wales whereby developments are required to carbon balance thresholds. have a net zero or net positive carbon impact so encouraging developers to avoid deep peat and commit to peatland restoration.
In relation to identifying areas of significant Noted. SG 33 identifies carbon rich soil mapping as 'Provisional' and protection, the draft SNH map should not be used will be amended when mapping is finalised. as there are significant issues with the mapping approach which have been highlighted by a number of NGOs including RSPB Scotland.
Stirling Council should ensure currently damaged Noted. It is a general function of SG 33 to guide new development to but recoverable peatland habitat is protected e.g. appropriate locations. inappropriately planted afforested deep peat sites.
Respondent Summary of Comments Recommended Response
Siting on deep peat can significantly undermine carbon benefits of renewable energy. Constraints are considered at an early stage of development i.e. at site selection, to ensure wind farms are steered towards areas where constraints are likely to be lowest.
21. Endrick We endorse the draft guidance and are of the Noted. Valley Action opinion that once again Stirling Council has Group admirably integrated, into the SG, protection of the amenity of the whole Stirling Council area and its citizens with current Government policy.
22. Thornhill Section on aviation definitely needs further Noted. Alternative wording is considered acceptable, and appropriate Aerodrome clarification. The development of sites for wind to directly refer to Thornhill Airfield and Cumbernauld Airport. Modify turbines has the potential to cause a variety of SG33 accordingly. negative effects on general aviation and local aerodromes. Alternative wording suggested which we believe covers all forms of Aviation as well as Air Traffic and Air Navigation Services, and based on Civil Aviation Publications 764 and 738. Would welcome direct naming of Thornhill Airfield and Cumbernauld Airport.
Developers and Operators
23. Force 9 Detailed letter raising a number of significant Energy/EDF concerns. In summary:- Energy With reference to SPP Spatial Framework should Para 1.1 noted the Spatial Framework will be brought into the Stirling not be part of the Supplementary Guidance. Local Development Plan at first review, upon which work has now commenced.
Scottish Government advises renewable
Respondent Summary of Comments Recommended Response
electricity targets for 2020 “remain challenging”. Stirling Council seeking to satisfy requirements of SPP to ensure the Restrictive approach being taken to onshore wind development plan achieves the full potential for electricity from energy development, contrary to national planning renewable resources, giving due regard to relevant environmental, policy and advice. community and cumulative impact considerations.
Background on renewable energy development in Stirling could be set out. Council has viable wind For the purposes of SG33 considered sufficient attention drawn to resource and previous development deemed advice promoting renewable energy in Scottish Planning Policy, environmentally acceptable. The need for the National Planning Framework 3 and 2020 Route Map for Renewable Council to take a positive and proactive approach Energy in Scotland. should be reinforced
Status of the draft SG in terms of its position within development management and LDP Section 2.0 of SG 33 sets out in full policy 12.1: Wind Turbines. Sub- policies should be clearly set out. section a (iii) specifically notes SG 33 will be used to assess wind turbine proposals. Group 1 and 2 areas should be identified by different colours. Entirely possible to identify The Spatial Framework mapping is being modified and re-positioned areas with potential for windfarm development within the document. SG 33 refers to SPP text that wind farms in within Group 2 areas. Map 3 represents the Group 2 areas '….. maybe appropriate in some circumstances.' The Councils approach to Supplementary Guidance, purpose of Map 3 is clearly stated. and not Spatial Framework.
No justification in relation to LDP Policy 12.1 is provided. Primary Policy 12 ‘Renewable Energy’ Considered relationship between LDP policies and SG 33 is clearly is also not properly referenced. stated.
Approach to community separation is unclear. Fundamental message is the 2km separation Considered sufficient explanation given in para 4.29. Also quotes from distance is a guide and not a rule and decisions relevant Scottish Government guidance, e.g. 'The intended outcome is will take into account specific local circumstance a greater emphasis being placed on sensitive design of wind farms and geography. located in the separation areas. '
Respondent Summary of Comments Recommended Response
The Council fails to accord with para. 162 of SPP by not identifying any area of strategic capacity Taking account of landscape constraints and sensitivities, iconic for within Group 3 areas. landscape features and impacts of existing and consented wind energy development there remains very limited strategic capacity for further wind energy development.
In June 2015 SNH published a new guidance ‘Spatial Planning for Onshore Wind Turbines – Noted. SG 33 will be modified accordingly. Natural Heritage Considerations'
Reference should be made to the Scottish Governments Route Map for Renewable Energy Consenting processes are associated with the development in Scotland (July 2011) requirement that “ a management stage. further increase in consenting and deployment rates will be required …. by driving excellence in planning and consenting processes.
There is no requirement to identify capacity by way of a landscape study within Scottish Planning Para 4.1 of SG 33 refers to para. 163 of Scottish Planning Policy Policy, as part of defining a Spatial Framework for which states - 'The Spatial Framework requires to be complemented wind farms. Matters associated with landscape by a more detailed and exacting development management process capacity should be clearly set out in a separate where the merits of individual proposals will be carefully considered document. against the full range of environmental, community, and cumulative impacts.' Para 4.7 then refers to Scottish Government guidance that states:- 'To provide a clearer steer on development management, planning authorities may wish to undertake or update their landscape capacity studies.' Should be stated all wind energy proposals should be considered on their own unique Section 2.0 of SG 33 sets out in full policy 12.1: Wind Turbines, with locational and design characteristics as well as para. b) specifically stating:- 'Developments will be permitted if they their strategic context, and where appropriate, are of a scale, layout and nature such that adverse environmental should be subject to detailed landscape and impacts, including cumulative impacts, are avoided or minimised to the satisfaction of the planning authority.'
Respondent Summary of Comments Recommended Response
visual impact assessment,as set out in the updated study.
Section relating to the Stirling Landscape Potential landscape and visual impacts were recognised as being of Sensitivity and Capacity Study for Wind Energy most interest to local residents and communities and the wind energy Developments is very lengthy (Paragraphs 4.8 to development industry, and this is reflected in the level of detail in 4.21). these paragraphs.
Status of the Landscape Study should be The status of the landscape study is fully explained in paragraphs 4.7 explicitly stated within the SG, as a Technical and 4.8 of SG 33. Report which forms guidance.
Consultation on the Stirling Landscape Sensitivity and Capacity Study for Wind Energy Development
‘Capacity’ is required in Scotland generically but The Scottish Government does not specify the contribution to be no caps set for different parts of Scotland. As made in each separate local authority area from each renewable such it is unclear what ‘capacity’ the study is energy source. Para. 4.7 of SG 33 refers to Scottish Government referring to which is why it is considered to be a advice on undertaking or updating (as Stirling has) landscape capacity sensitivity study. studies.
Relative sensitivities of the landscape making up Section 2.0 of the updated Landscape Study explains, at some length, the Stirling Area are fairly judged within the study. the methodology of the study. Determination of landscape capacity However not clear how turbine numbers and relevant to other forms of development as well. As noted in the Study heights are derived from the study within a (para. 29) 'The concept of capacity is premised on what types and vacuum of understanding how capacity is derived levels of landscape and visual change can take place before the (i.e. what contribution to national targets Stirling landscape is critically or significantly changed from its current Council area should plan for). Such judgements condition.' are arbitrarily made within the study.
Paragraph 5 of the study should be stressed and It is considered Local Development Plan Policy 12.1 and SG33 give emphasised within the draft SG note as set out due support, in principle, to wind energy development in line with above. Scottish Government advice. It remains the case however, as
Respondent Summary of Comments Recommended Response
anticipated in SPP, that at the local level 'due regard' requires to be given to relevant environmental, community and cumulative impact considerations."
24. Green Unclear which parts constitute spatial framework Section 3.0, paras 3.0 - 3.6 set out the context for the Spatial Power to be brought into emerging replacement SLDP. Framework, with the Spatial Framework itself shown in Appendix 1 Clarity is also needed on status in advance of the maps 1 and 2. For clarity it is proposed these maps are modified and SLDP review. re-positioned within document.
Detailed mapping of Peat & Carbon Rich Soils Noted. SG 33 identifies carbon rich soil mapping as 'Provisional' and had yet to be completed, so mapping may need to will be amended when mapping is finalised. be modified.
The Council has discretion to determine Considered sufficient explanation given in para 4.29 of SG 33, which community separation distances but first has to refers to relevant Scottish Government guidance, e.g. 'The intended consider the particular circumstances of each outcome is a greater emphasis being placed on sensitive design of settlement and its setting. That exercise has not wind farms located in the separation areas.' been conducted. Regardless of comments in para 4.29 each defined settlement should be considered on an individual basis.
Draft spatial framework will need to take account Stirling Council is aware of this guidance and section 3.8, which lists of new guidance from SNH on natural heritage relevant SNH publications, will be updated accordingly. It is not considerations for spatial planning for onshore considered the new guidance materially affects advice set out in wind turbines. SG33.
Beauly-Denny powerline should not feature in the This is a now a substantial engineered feature of the landscapes of consideration of cumulative impacts or capacity eastern Stirling and it is therefore appropriate for it to be included. constraints/assessment.
Figure 9 includes parts of the lower Strathallan This mapping is derived from detailed landscape and visual valley, where intervisibilty of existing wind assessments. It is therefore highly likely the Braes of Doune Windfarm developments is not an issue. will be visible form this area.
Respondent Summary of Comments Recommended Response
Conceivable that specific development proposal Policy 12.1 allows for this possibility. Paragraph b) states:- exceeding capacity may be acceptable, having 'Developments will be permitted if they are of a scale, layout and regard to the site specific landscape nature such that adverse environmental impacts, including cumulative assessments. SG should include text which impacts, are avoided or minimised to the satisfaction of the planning expresses this point, similar to capacity study authority. (paragraphs 6 and 21).
Text ‘….and commensurate with the scale of wind Considered this is adequately covered in the above noted policy energy development’ should be added at end of wording. para. 4.30 to reflect the fact that what might be appropriate for a multi-turbine large typology wind farm may not be necessary for single turbine developments, and vice versa.
Section 37 of the Electricity Act only deals with Noted. overhead lines, not wind farms.
25. Moray Significant contribution to the local community has Noted. Para. 4.37 of SG 33 draws attention to community benefits Estates been made through Braes of Doune Windfarm and the Scottish Government's Good Practice Principles for Trust, c. £72 000 pa. Community Benefits from Onshore Renewable Energy Developments (November 2013).
Like to object to statement "it is considered that Para 4.7 of SG 33 states that:- little strategic landscape capacity exists for any 1 major extension of Braes of Doune Windfarm. A The Scottish Government advises the following :- “Landscape sufficiently detailed definition of what "major capacity does not form part of the spatial frameworks for wind as development" is not provided, making decision defined in the SPP. To provide a clearer steer on development making very difficult for the landowner, and any management, planning authorities may wish to undertake or update potential developer, including one which may their landscape capacity studies to: - involve a community interest. We believe there is scope for extending the Braes of Doune • establish a better view of local landscape sensitivities; Windfarm. Whilst extension similar in scale to the • identify acceptable levels of landscape change;
Respondent Summary of Comments Recommended Response
existing windfarm is not desirable in landscape • identify cumulative effects and set objectives and guidance terms, a more modest extension of say 7-10 to managing those effects; and turbines of similar size to those existing, should • identify scope for further development.” not constitute a major development. We would very much like to see this clarified. Such an The conclusions reached in the study are based on detailed extension would allow Stirling Council to meet landscape and visual assessments, based on well established Scottish Government Policy (SPP para. 155). methodologies that are fully set out in section 2.0. As noted in the Also challenge description as a complex study (para.238):- 'The Braes of Doune Windfarm ……. is highly arrangement of wind turbines, a very subjective visible from a wide area and large viewing population, where it forms a phrase, dependant entirely on point of view of the strong visual focus in many views towards the northern hills…… . author. Presently the wind farm is generally perceived to be a single though extensive feature, contained but not overwhelming or dominating the hills.'
The analysis concludes (para. 243):- The combination of these factors reinforces the opinion that little strategic landscape capacity exists for an appropriate extension to the existing Braes of Doune Windfarm in landscape and visual terms, as any extension is likely to result in further visual confusion of turbine layout, exacerbating existing adverse siting and layout issues and impacting to a greater degree on the distinctive hill edge of the Uahm Beagh Hills.
As has been noted previously Policy 12.1 does however allow for the possibility of an extension. Paragraph b) states:- 'Developments will be permitted if they are of a scale, layout and nature such that adverse environmental impacts, including cumulative impacts, are avoided or minimised to the satisfaction of the planning authority.'
Individuals 26. Mr. John We have been fortunate to live in a district where Noted MacMillan a robust line has been maintained and Boghall Farm indiscriminate multiplication of wind turbines has
Respondent Summary of Comments Recommended Response
Thornhill been avoided. Trust policy will be formally adopted in the very near future.
27. Tim Reid Fully endorse these guidelines. Recommend Noted Gartincaber adoption and incorporation into the review of the House Local Development Plan as soon as possible. Doune Perthshire
Response to Environmental Report
SEA Scottish Natural Heritage Consultation Authorities Happy with methodology and agree Noted. (Scottish environmental issues and key trends correctly Natural identified. Environmental baseline is Heritage, comprehensive and covers all relevant natural Historic heritage issues. Overall, assessment of likely Scotland and significant effects on the environment has been Scottish carried out satisfactorily. Environment Protection Disagree with comments in section 9.3 that Refer to response to Scottish Natural Heritage's comments on SG 33 Agency) “…adverse [landscape] effects…can be reduced or minimised through strict application of location, siting and design criteria”. Draft SG33 introduces a concept of capacity for large scale turbines into the Creag Gharbh and Carron Valley areas where, in our view, no such capacity exists. Therefore do not agree adverse landscape effects can be minimised because there are no capacity in the Creag Gharbh and Carron Valley areas. With regard to cumulative effects, section 9.6
Respondent Summary of Comments Recommended Response
correctly identifies the potential for impacts in the Carron Valley area. If SG revised to reflect our advice on Draft SG 33 then we will be able to agree with the conclusions in the ER. Historic Scotland
Historic Scotland is content with the assessment and level of detail in the Environmental Report. Noted.
Scottish Environment Protection Agency
The ER has not taken on board a number of Refer to response to Scottish Environment Protection Agency's comments at the scoping stage. Beneficial for the comments on SG 33 ER to either include the issues raised or explain why they were not considered relevant.
Noted ER does not contain any information on SEA topics of air and material assets (including waste). Wind turbines can effect dispersal of air emission plumes causing plumes to 'ground' quicker ER should have identified locations of stack emissions.
Concerns regarding lack of information and/or guidance relating to carbon rich soils, water environment, flood risk, forest waste, dispersal of emission plumes and moving, storing and reinstating soils.
Appendix 2
Stirling Council: EqIA Relevance Check, as presented to the Environment and Housing Committee on 2 April 2015
Completing this form will help you determine whether or not an equality impact assessment is required and provide a record of your decision. This is a screening process to help you decide if the proposal under consideration requires an EqIA - it is not an EqIA and the impact of the proposal will be determined by the EqIA itself.
The Guidance: Equality Impact Assessment Toolkit June 2014 may help when completing this form this can be accessed via the following link - http://web.stirling.gov.uk/eqia_toolkit.doc
The term proposal used below is intended to include “policy, strategy, service, function, procedure or project.”
When is an EqIA required?
While each proposal must be considered individually, it is anticipated that an EqIA will always be required when: • introducing a new policy/strategy/service/function • reviewing a current policy/strategy/service/function • reducing / discontinuing an existing service • considering budget proposals resulting in any of the above Reports on technical or procedural matters or which confirm progress on previously considered proposals, may be less likely to require an EqIA but this can only be determined by using this form.
SUMMARY DETAILS
1. Title of Proposal: Service PBB Ref (if applicable)
Wind Energy Developments Corporate Operations N/A Draft Supplementary Guidance
2. Service, and Lead Officer (Head of Service/ Service Manager) undertaking assessment
Service Lead Officer
Corporate Operations Richard Callender
3. What is the nature of the proposal? (Tick/complete all that apply)
Review of an existing policy/strategy Review of an existing service/function Reduction in an existing service / function Removal of an existing service Introduction of a new policy/ strategy Introduction of new service/function Other e.g. technical, progress, procedural report PBB category e.g. transformational change
4. For proposals with implications for budgets complete the following:
(£ 000s) Current expenditure on activity In Council area as a whole In/for specific community/ies
Total anticipated savings or In/for Council area as a whole proposed increased spend In/ for specific community/ies Start date for savings/increased spend End Date for savings/increased spend Savings/increased spend Year 1 Delivery Timescale and Phasing Savings/increased spend Year 2 Savings/increased spend Year 3 Savings/increased spend Year 4 Savings/increased spend Year 5
AIMS & OBJECTIVES
Answering questions 5 - 7 will help you decide whether or not your proposal needs to be accompanied by an EqIA.
5. What longer term outcomes is the proposal expected to achieve?
To ensure the Stirling Local Development Plan area’s full potential for wind generated electricity is achieved, in line with national climate change targets, giving due regard to relevant environmental, community and cumulative impact considerations.
6. What are the main aims of this proposal? If this proposal revises an existing policy have its aims changed?
To set out a refreshed spatial framework and supplementary guidance and advice that will provide local residents and communities, prospective developers and other interested parties advice and guidance on a range of planning and environmental considerations that will be used to determine the planning merits of wind energy developments.
7. Who is most likely to be affected by this proposal? Consider current and potential future service users including people with particular needs, specific geographical communities and current and prospective employees.
The Supplementary Guidance will apply across the entire Stirling Local Development Plan area.
POTENTIAL IMPACT
Answering Questions 8 -12 will help you consider the potential impact of the proposal.
8. What potential impact will this proposal have on people in terms of the needs of the public sector equality duty and the Council’s responsibilities to:- • eliminate discrimination, harassment and victimisation • advance equality of opportunity • foster good relations - including the need to tackle prejudice and promote understanding • See guidance for additional information.
The Supplementary Guidance sets out advice and guidance on a range of locational, technical and design matters relating to wind energy developments. It is considered these will have a neutral impact on the above mentioned duty and responsibilities.
9. Will this proposal have a potential impact on people with “protected characteristics”*? Please consider all protected groups listed below. A detailed explanation of these is provided in the guidance.
Group Impact Group Impact Group Impact Yes/No/Unclear Yes/No/Unclear Yes/No/Unclear Age No Disability No Gender No Reassignment Marriage No Pregnancy No Race No and Civil and Maternity Partnership Religion No Sex No Sexual No and Belief Orientation
10. Will this proposal have an impact on communities, household groups or individuals with a higher risk of experiencing poverty? Please answer Yes/No/Unclear. Information on communities, households and individuals with a higher risk of experiencing poverty is provided in the guidance.
No.
11. Do you already have any evidence that has influenced or shaped this proposal in relation to people in protected characteristic groups or communities, groups or individuals vulnerable to poverty? If so please summarise what this evidence includes.
No.
DECISION
12. Based on your responses and any evidence you already have, is an EqIA required for this proposal? In making your decision please note:
• if answering Yes to any part of either questions 9 or 10 an EqIA is required
• if answering Unclear to any part of questions 9 or 10 you are strongly advised to do an EqIA to allow you to comprehensively assess the impact of the proposal
• if answering No to any part of questions 9 or 10 please justify your response and why you consider an EqIA is not required for this proposal in the box below
The Supplementary Guidance will operate throughout the Stirling Local Development Plan area. It primary purpose is to provide advice guidance on a range of locational, technical and design matters relating to wind energy developments. It will be used to inform decisions on relevant applications for planning permission. It is a revised and updated version of current guidance adopted by the Council in March 2011 that has operated with no likely implications for the Council's statutory equality duties and responsibilities.
13. Who was involved in making this decision?
Claire Milne, Principal Planning Officer, Corporate Operations
Authorisation by Lead Officer (Head of Service / Service Manager)
This decision has been approved Name by (Director/Head of Service/ Senior Manager – delete as Title appropriate) Date
H:\PLANNING\Richard\AA Wind Energy Refreshed Spatial Framework\AA Committee Report Sept 2015\Draft Report (finalised version 20 Aug 2015) .docx