AGENDA ITEM MO. ... 18

Application No: Proposed Development:

12/00442/FUL Installation of a Wind Turbine and Associated Ancillary Development, (Maxiumum Height to Blade Tip 91 m) Site Address:

Bedlay Colliery Site Birkenshaw Road Annathili Glasgow North 069 8HL

Date Registered:

26th Aprit 2012 Applicant: Agent: WhiteRock Energy UK Ltd Mike Molleson c-o LoganPM 8 Manor Place 8 Manor Place Edinburgh Edinburgh EH3 7DD EH3 7DD Application Level: Contrary to Development Plan: Local Application No

Ward: Representations: 006 Coatbrldge North And 1 12 letter(s) of representation and on- Fulton James MacGregor, Julie McAnulty, Michael line comments received. McPake, William Shields,

Recommendation: Approve Subject to Conditions

Reasoned Justification:

The proposed application meets the criteria set out in the relevant policies contained within the Northern Corridor Local Plan 2005 and of the Local Plan. The environmental impact, including visual impact of the proposed development is considered acceptable and the proposed development can be accommodated at this location without significant detriment to the amenity of properties located within the vicinity of the site or on the surrounding rural area. 1 - 3 outwith plan area PLANNING APPLICATION 12f00442FUL eptd@dbyperml=on lnstatlation of a Wind Turbine and Associated Pmduced by f'heOr*anceSu~on Development, (Maxiurnurn Height to PIanning and Devebpment ehalfof MSO &?Crown Ancillary Environmental Sew1 opynghtanddetdssenght loom) North Lanarkshire C 312 All riohts reserved Flerning Houw rdrarnce

1. That the development hereby permitted shall be commenced within 3 years of the date of the permission, which shall subsist for a period of 25 years from the first date of generation of electricity from the development to the grid. Written confirmation of the first date of electricity generation shall be confirmed in writing to the Planning Authority. Within twelve months of the end of the permission, unless a further planning application is submitted and approved, the wind turbine, ancillary equipment and buildings shall be dismantled and removed from the site and the land restored in accordance with a restoration and after-care scheme to be submitted for the approval of the planning authority no later than 2 year prior to the expiry of the 25 years period, referred to above, Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 as amended by the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006, to allow the planning authority to review the circumstances of the temporary permission in the interests of the amenity of the area in the longer term, beyond the 25 year period covered by the permission.

2. That except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved drawings.

Reason: To clarify the drawings on which this approval of permission is founded.

3. That the development hereby permitted shall not start until a Notice of Initiation has been submitted to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority,

Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (as amended by the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006).

4. That prior to its erection, details of the final specification of the turbine, including colour and finish, shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority prior to their erection on site.

Reason: To ensure that amenity and environmental assets are protected.

5. That prior to the erection or installation of any ancillary equipment or buildings, the design, colour and finish of the equipment and buildings shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of the visual amenity of the area,

6. That unless otherwise agreed in writing and prior to the installation of the turbine on site, the specification of the turbine with regard to noise predictions, shall be submitted to the Planning Authority for assessment and confirmation that the noise criteria in this approval will be met.

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of the area

7. That noise levels inclusive of any necessary tonal correction at any noise sensitive property existing at the date of this consent shall not exceed an external free-field level Lm,,,,dnof the greater of 35dB or 5dB above the prevailing background noise level at any 10m height wind speed up to 12m/s during 07:OO-23:OO and the greater of 43dB or 5dB above the agreed prevailing background noise level at any 10m height wind speed up to 12m/s during 23:OO-07:OO.

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of the area. That construction and decommissioning work, which is audible from the boundary of any noise sensitive receptor, shall only take place between the hours of 08.00-1 9.00 on Monday to Friday inclusive and 08.00-13.00 on Saturdays, with no working on a Sunday or local or national public holiday. Outwith these said hours, development at the site shall be limited to turbine commissioning, emergency works, dust suppression and the testing of plant and equipment, or construction work that is not audible from any noise sensitive property outwith the site. The receipt of any materials or equipment for the construction of the site, by track, other than turbine blades, nacelle and tower, is not allowed outwith the said hours, unless otherwise agreed by the council having been given a minimum of two working days notice of the occurrence of the proposed event.

Reason: To minimise disturbance and to protect the amenity of nearby residents.

That the turbine shall not be erected on site until the applicant has demonstrated that the following information has been provided to the Ministry of Defence:

0 Construction start and end dates; 0 The position of the turbine tower in latitude and longitude; 0 The height of the turbine in metres above ordnance datum and above ground level; and 0 Maximum height of construction equipment.

Reason: In the interests of aviation safety

That prior to commencement of development a Construction Method Statement shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority. Such Construction Method Statement shall cover:

Detalled and scaled map to include the anticipated layout and width of temporary and permanent tracks, cable routeing, turbine bases, crane standings, site storage compound, substation, on site switch gear and equipment store and any ancillary buildings. Details of any change to the layout shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority; Details of all on-site construction, including drainage (incorporate SUDS where appropriate), pollution prevention, mitigation, post-construction restoration, and reinstatement work, as well as the timetables for such work. Details of construction practices in terms of minimisation of the use of raw materials and the reuse or recycling of waste materials; Details of surface water drainage measures to comply with national guidance on pollution prevention, including surface water run off from internal access roads; Details of welfare facilities Details of concrete and vehicle washdown areas; A dust management plan during the construction period: Details of the arrangement for the on-site storage of fuel oil; Details of the working and re-instatement of borrow pits;

The development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved Construction Method Statement.

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of the area, to ensure that necessary contingencies are in place, to minimise pollution risks arislng from construction activities, and to ensure the site is satisfactorily restored.

That no symbols, signs or logos or other lettering, other than those required for health and safety and for traffic management, shall be displayed on any part of the turbine nor any other building or structures without the written consent of the Planning Authority,

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of the area. 12. That as 6 months or more has elapsed between the completion of survey work used to inform the relevant ornithology and ecological assessments dated June 201 1 and the development hereby approved commencing, a further survey shall be undertaken on the site to determine the presence of any statutorily protected species, the said survey shall thereafter be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority before any development commences on the site. As a result of the study, should any remediation measures be required for the relocation of any protected species, this shall be implemented in accordance with a timetable agreed in writing with the Planning Authority in consultation with Scottish Natural Heritage before works commence on the site.

Reason: To ensure compliance with The Conservation (Natural Habitats & c.) Amendment (Scotland) Regulations 2007 and the Protection of Badgers Act 1992.

13, That prior to the commencement of development a construction methodology statement for protected species shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Planning Authority. For the avoidance of doubt this statement shall include:

Measures for the protection of Otters and Badgers during construction. Confirmation that any pipes left on site during construction are capped to prevent entry of anlmals. Confirmation that excavations deeper than 1 metre are covered over night to prevent injury or death of animals. Where excavations are less than 1 metre deep, the sides should be graded or a ramp provided to allow easy egress of animals. Thereafter construction of the development shall be in accordance with this approved statement.

Reason: To ensure the protection of species on site.

14. That prior to the commencement of development a Radar Mitigation Scheme to prevent the impairment of the performance of aerodrome navigatlon aids and/or the efflciency of air traffic control services shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Council in consultation with BAA,

Reason: In the interests of aviation safety,

15. That the turbine shall not be erected until the Radar Mitigation Scheme approved as part of condition 14 above has been implemented and the development shall thereafter be operated fully in accordance with such approved scheme.

Reason: In the interests of aviation safety.

16, That should shadow flicker and/or sunlight reflection problems be identified, details of measures to overcome potential shadow flicker and/or sunlight reflection problems at any indentified receptor shall be submitted to, and approved in writing, by the Planning Authority; thereafter the approved measures(which may iRClUde the temporary shutthg down of the turbine over an agreed period) shall be brought into operation and shall continue throughout the operation of the wind turbine except as may be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority.

Reason: In order to overcome potential nuisance to sensitive receptors through shadow flicker/sunlight reflection,

17. That unless otherwise agreed in writing and before the turbine is erected on site, a survey of television signal reception (the scope of which to be agreed in advance with the Planning Authority) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority.

Reason: To establlsh a baseline against which to assess the impact of the wind turbine on television reception.

18. That except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, within one month of the approved wind turbine coming into operation a report covering the effect of the wind turbine on local television signal reception shall be submitted to the Planning Authority; thereafter any approved measures for overcoming television reception interference shall be brought into operation within two months of the reports submission to the Planning Authority unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority. For the avoidance of doubt the report shall include measures to ensure public engagement.

Reason: In order to overcome any television reception interference caused by the wind turbine.

19, That prior to the commencement of development on site, the undernoted details shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Council.

1. The finalised transportation route for the turbine. 2. The actual swept path analysis of the transportation route based on the agreed turbine design 3. The temporary road widening works on the proposed transportation routes and their removal (as required). 4. The proposed access widths and minimum 2.5 x 9Om visibility splay for the site entrance.

Reason: In the interests of road safety.

20. That the scheme of junction and access improvements and road widening works approved under the terms of condition 19 above, shall be completed prior to the transportation of turbines to the site.

Reason: To ensure satisfactory access and in the interests of road safety.

21. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts a Lapwing Habitat Management Plan (LHMP) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority for written approval in consultation with NLC Greenspace (Biodlversity). For the avoidance of doubt, the LHMP shall incfude measures to enhance lapwing habitat out-with a 200m buffer zone of the approved turbine location.

Reason: To allow the Planning Authority to consider these aspects 22. That the developer shall appoint an independent Ecological Clerk of Works (ECoW)to monitor the agreed Lapwing Habitat Management Plan Area (HMPA) over an agree aftercare period agreed in writing by the Planning Authority to ensure the required ecological mitigation works included in the Lapwing Habitat Management Plan as approved under Condition 21 are implemented.

Reason: In the interests of ensuring nature conservation mitigation measures for the site and surrounding area are implemented in accordance with the approved Lapwing Habitat Management Plan.

23. That within 4 weeks of the development hereby permitted being brought into use a Notice of Completion shall be submitted to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority. Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (as amended by the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006) and to monitor the development and to enable the Planning Authority to retain effective control, karound Paoers:

Representation Letters

Letter from William & Martha Campbell, 18 Annathill Gardens, Annathill, received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Rosalind Hutchison, West Barncraig, Blrkenshaw Road, Annathill received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Kenneth Hutchison, West Bamcraig, Birkenshaw Road, Annathill received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Margaret McNally, Bungalow South Medrox, Birkenshaw Road, Annathill received 22nd May 2012 Letter from James McNally, Bungalow South Medrox, Birkenshaw Road, Annathill received 22nd May 201 2 Letter from Martin James Callan, Medrox Villa, Gain And Shankburn Road, Annathill received 22nd May 201 2 Letter from Margaret Callan, Medrox Villa, Gain And Shankbum Road, Annathill received 22nd May 201 2 Letter from James Brownlie, 3 Bedlay Place, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Teresa Brownlie, 3 Bedlay Place, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Maurice McMahon, 3 Bedlay Place, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 201 2 Letter from C Cargill, 12 Annathill Gardens, Annathlll, Coatbridge received 22nd May 2012 Letter from S Cargill, 12 Annathiil Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Wiliiam Brass, 24 Annathill Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 201 2 Letter from Diane Broadley, 24 Annathill Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 201 2 Letter from Samantha Little, 24 Annathill Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Scott Brass, 24 Annathill Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 201 2 Letter from James Law, 1 Weir Cottages, Mollinsbum Road, Annathill received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Catherine Slnclair, 135 Leven Road, Townhead, Coatbridge received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Jack Nicholson, Ochilview, Road, Annathill received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Eileen Chrichton, 13 Annathill Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 2012 Letter from June Nicholson, Ochilview, Molllnsburn Road, Annathill received 22nd May 201 2 Letter from Shona Agnew, 26 Annathill Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 201 2 Letter from Andrew Paterson, 26 Annathill Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 201 2 Letter from J Harrison, 27 Annathill Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Josephine Harrison, 27 Annathill Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Stuart Harrison, 27 Annathill Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Mary Rodger, 28 Annathill Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 2012 Letter from John Rodger, 28 Annathill Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Mark Conlin, 28 Annathill Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Georgina Stewart, Campsie View, Mollinsburn Road, Annathill received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Robert Thomson, 22 Annathill Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Andrew Chrlchton, 13 Annathili Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 201 2 Letter from P Brown, 2 Weir Cottages, Mollinsburn Road, Annathill received 22nd May 2012 Letter from M Brown, 2 Weir Cottages, Mollinsburn Road, Annathill received 22nd May 2012 Letter from George Reid, 4 Weir Cottages, Mollinsburn Road, Annathill received 22nd May 2012 Letter from June Thomson, 22 Annathill Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Anne Anderson, 14 Annathill Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 2012 Letter from John Anderson, 14 Annathill Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 2012 Letter from James Michie, 7 Annathill Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Mary Michie, 7 Annathill Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 2012 Letter from April May, 8 Annathill Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Allan May, 8 Annathill Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Mr Jon Sigurdsson, 10 Annathiil Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 201 2 Letter from Mr Andrew Paterson, 26 annathill gds, annathill, coatbridge received 22nd May 201 2 Letter from Courtney Clelland, 23 Annathill Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 201 2 Letter from Mr Cameron Clelland, 23 Annathill Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Mr Alex McDonald, Glenayre, Mollinsburn Road, Annathill received 22nd May 201 2 Letter from Elizabeth McDonald, Glenayre, Mollinsburn Road, Annathill received 22nd May 2012 Letter from A McVeigh, The Beeches, Mollinsbum Road, Annathill received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Jane McVeigh, The Beeches, Mollinsburn Road, Annathlll received 22nd May 201 2 Letter from George Fegan, 3 Weir Cottages, Mollinsburn Road, Annathill received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Margaret M Fegan, 3 Weir Cottages, Mollinsburn Road, Annathill received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Mrs Margaret Boyd, 10 Annathill Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 2012 Letter from William Arbuckle, Missionhall House, Mollinsburn Road, Annathill received 22nd May 201 2 Letter from Maureen Innes, 4 Bedlay Place, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 2012 Letter from John Innes, 4 Bedlay Place, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 201 2 Letter from William Glass, Tirich Mlr, 18 Mollinsbum Road, Annathill received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Margaret Glass, Tirich Mir, 18 Mollinsburn Road, Annathill received 22nd May 201 2 Letter from K Murray, Rosebarr, Mollinsburn Road, Annathill received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Caroline Murray, Rosebarr, Mollinsburn Road, Annathill received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Mark Young, 1 Annathill Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Ellen Laird, 1 Annathill Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Joe Douglas, 1 Campsie View, Annathill, ML5 received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Mrs Rita Baillie, 1 Road, Mollinsburn, Glasgow received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Mr lan Baillie, 1 Cumbernauld Road, Mollinsburn, Glasgow received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Martha Campbell, 18 Annathill Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Mr Wllliam Campbell, 18 Annathill Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 201 2 Letter from Mr John Hadden, 19 Annathill Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Una Hadden, 19 Annathill Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 201 2 Letter from Mr Alexander McNeill, 25 Annathill Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Mrs E McNeill, 25 Annathill Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Mr John Leo Brannan, 20 Annathill Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Mrs Elizabeth Brannan, 20 Annathill Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Miss Margaret Stevenson, 6 Weir Cottages, Mollinsburn Road, Annathill received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Mrs Margaret Stevenson, 6 Weir Cottages, Mollinsburn Road, Annathill received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Cathie Cowie, 1 Bedlay Place, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 201 2 Letter from M MacGregor, 2 Bedlay Place, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Mr Peter MacGregor, 2 Bedlay Place, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Helen Hamilton, 16 Bedlay Place, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Fiona McNab, 17 Bedlay Place, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Mr David McNab, 17 Bediay Place, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Mr Hugh McLaughlin, 14 Bedlay Place, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 201 2 Letter from Mr Stephen Lees, 11 Bedlay Place, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 201 2 Letter from Karen Keir- Lees, 11 Bediay Place, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Anna Holmes, 6 Bedlay Place, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Mr Russell Holmes, 6 Bedlay Place, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 2012 Letter from A Fay, Ar-Baile, 4 Mollinsburn Road, Annathill received 22nd May 2012 Letter from J Fay, Ar-Baile, 4 Mollinsburn Road, Annathill received 22nd May 201 2 Letter from Mr Jack Sanderson, 5 Annathill Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 20 12 Letter from Mr Brian McCaffrey, 30 Annathill Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 201 2 Letter from Mrs P Murray, Rosebarr, Mollinsburn Road, Annathlll received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Helen Patton, Hazel Cottage, Mollinsburn Road, Annathill received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Elizabeth Brennan, 1I Annathill Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 201 2 Letter from Mr Brian Bolton, 11 Annathill Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 201 2 Letter from Mr George Wilson, 15 Annathill Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Christine Wilson, 15 Annathill Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 201 2 Letter from Nancy MacKay, 16 Annathill Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Finlay MacKay, 16 Annathill Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Mrs Sarah K Johnson, 21 Annathill Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 201 2 Letter from Mr James W Johnson, 21 Annathill Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 201 2 Letter from J Clelland, 23 Annathill Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 2012 Letter from Mrs M Clelland, 23 Annathill Gardens, Annathill, Coatbridge received 22nd May 2012

On-line Comment from Mr A Paterson 26 Annathill Gardens Annathill Coatbridge received 22"d May 201 2. On-line Comment from Mr J Sigurdsson, 10 Annathill Gardens Annathlll Coatbridge received 22"d May 201 2. On-line Comment from Mrs M Boyd, 10 Annathill Gardens Annathill Coatbridge received 22"d May 201 2 On-line Comment from Ms S Agnew, 26 Annathill Gardens Annathill Coatbridge received 17th July 201 2

Letter from Mr and Mrs J.W. Johnston Annathill Gardens, Annathill received 18'h July 2012 Letter from Mr J Brannan 20 Annathill Gardens Annathill received 51h July 2012. (SV&H) Letter from Mr B Campbell 18 Annathill Gardens, Annathill received 2dhJune 201 2. (SV&H) Letter from Mr A McNeill25 Annathill Gardens, Annathill received 24Ih May 2012. Letter from Mr W Campbell 18 Annathill Gardens, Annathill received 241h May 2012. Letter from Ms U Hadden 19 Annathill Gardens, Annathill received 24Ih May 2012.

Consultation Responses:

BAA Aerodrome safeguarding received 23 August 201 2 Rathmell Archaeology Limited received 28 May 201 2 The Coal Authority received 4 May 201 2 NLC Greenspace Development (Biodiversity) received 4 May 201 2 Historic Scotland received 4 May 201 2 NLC Greenspace Development (Landscape) received 18 May 201 2 Ministry Of Defence Estates received 1gth June and 6Ih July 201 2 National Air Traffic Services (Safeguarding) Mailbox 25,400 received 4 May 201 2 NLC EnvironmentalHealth (including Pollution Control) received 8th and 24th May 2012 Scottish Rights Of Way and Access Society (Scotways) received 11 May 2012 Scottish Natural Heritage received 8 May 2012 Scottish Environment Protection Agency received 27 April and 17 May 201 2 Atkins (Windfarm Support to UK Water Industry) received I1May 2012 NLC Traffic and Transportation received 23 July 2012

Contact Information:

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Colin Marshall at 01236 632497

Report Date:

23rd August 2012 APPLICATION NO. 12/00442/FUL

REPORT

1. Site Descriotion

1.1 The application site extends to some 2.20 hectares and is located within the former partially restored Bedlay Colliery site located to the north west of Annathill. The site is situated approximately 0.8km from Annathill, 1.6km from Mollinsburn and 1.3km from Moodiesbum. The turbine site is located on a raised landform. 1.2 The area around the site is generally rural in nature, characterised by medium scale landforms including hillocks, mounds and ridges. Agriculture is the main land-use with rough grazing falrly dominant with some outlying arable land. Surrounding mature woodland areas generally consist of coniferous plantations and shelterbelts.

2. ProPosed Develoomen t

2.1 Planning permission is sought for the construction of a single turbine, access track, wind turbine unit transformer, switchgear control and metering kiosk and crane hard- standing area. The proposed turbine would have a hub height of 65 metres, a rotor diameter of 52 metres. The overall maximum height to blade tip would not exceed 91 metres. The total generating capacity of the turbine will be up to a maximum of 850kw.

2.2 The turbine would be designed with an operational life of 25 years and at the end of this period, the developer would decommission the wind turbine at which time the above ground infrastructure would be removed and the site reinstated. Alternatively the developer may seek a further planning permission to extend its operational lifespan.

2.3 It should be noted that the applicant decided to reduced the proposed overall height of the turbine from 100m to 91m during the course of consideration of the planning application.

3.

3.1 The applicant has submitted a Supporting Document dated March 2012 outlining the environmental effects of the proposed development. This report includes assessments on the following topics: planning policy and climate change; noise ecology; shadow flicker; aviation, radar and MOD;television and communication links; coal mining risk assessment; transportation; public access, drainage; landscape and visual amenity impacts; and community benefits.

4. Site History

4.1 Application 10/01157/AMD Amendment to Planning Permission to allow Extension of Time for the Restoration of Land (Non Compliance with Condition 1 of Planning Permission 08/01 550/MIN) approved 20 December 201 0.

4.2 Application 11/00612/FUL Erection of a 60m Meteorological Mast for a Temporary Period of Three Years approved 14 September 201 2.

5. Develooment Plan

5.1 The site is located within an area covered by policies ENV 2-8 (Greenbelt) and ENV 33 (Methane Gas Zone) of the Northern Corridor Local Plan 2005. 5.2 The application site is zoned as NBE 3A (Green Belt) in the emerging North Lanarkshire Local Plan.

6. Consultationa

6.1 The following consultees have no objection to the proposals:-

Historic Scotland NERL (NATS) Ofcom JRC Telecoms Atkins Wind Farm Support (Telecoms)

6.2 A summary of the comments from the additional consultees are set out as follows:-

i) Transportation has no objection subject to the submission of further details of the proposed transport route for the turbine delivery, upgrading of the access (if required) and provision of an adequate visibility splay at the site entrance.

ii) Greenspace Development (Biodiversity) had no objection subject to a condition that would require the developer undertake off-site wader habitat enhancement works to mitigate for the potential disturbance/displacement of Lapwings found in the vicinity of the site. The habitat enhancement works should be at least 200m from the turbine site.

iii) BAA had no objection to the proposed development subject to conditions regarding the submission and approval of a radar mitigation strategy.

iv) The Coal Authority considered that the content and conclusions of the submitted Coal Mining Risk Assessment (CMRA) are sufficient and had no objections subject to a condition which requires the developer to undertake appropriate site stability investigation works prior to the commencement of the development.

v) SNH had no objections subject to conditions that required updates to the existing surveys covering mitigation impacts on badgers should the development commence more that 6 months after the date of the current survey. In addition SNH requested that If any vegetation is to be removed during any bird breeding season (March to August inclusive) then an additional survey of any active nesting birds sites be undertaken and thereafter implement suitable mitigation as required.

vi) Protective Services has no objection subject to conditions which require the developer to undertake a comprehensive site investigation. It was further advised that noise from the operational turbine should not give rise to a noise level, assessed with the windows open, within any dwelling or noise sensitive buildings in excess of the equivalent to Noise Rating Curve (N.R.C.) 35 between 07.00 hours and 22,OO hours and N.R,C. 25 at all other times.Finai Protective Services advised that impacts from ail temporary construction works (noiseldustldlsposal of waste materialdworking hours) comply with current BS environmental regulations.

vii) The Scottish Right of Way and Access Society (Scotways) had no objection and noted that the developer had consulted the Core Paths Plan and that separation distance between the proposed turbine and local recreational routes would be much greater than the height to blade tip and therefore would be acceptable. Scotways considered that the visual impact of the turbine from these local paths would be significant. viii) SEPA had no objections and based on information available to them considered the proposed development would not lead to any apparent flood risk. SEPA advised the proposals should comply with their standing advice on small scale development.

ix) Greenspace Development (Landscape) had no objection as there appeared to be no major landscape or visual effects. Some receptors may experience moderate views at close proximity but overall, in terms of cumulative landscape and visual effects, the development would not constitute any significant detrimental effect. It was further advised that the developerk voluntary decision to reduce the height of the turbine from 1OOm to 91m would further reduce the overall visual impact and cumulative visual impacts.

x) Defence Infrastructure Organisation (MOD) had no objection subject to condition requiring they be advised of the date construction works starts and ends, the maximum height of construction equipment and the actual latitude and longitude of the turbine location.

xi) Rathmell Archaeology had no objections and advised the proposed development would not have any physical nor visual impact on the local or outlying Historic Environment.

7 Rewesentations

7.1 Following the standard neighbour notification process and newspaper advertisements, 112 letters of representations were received. Most of these included copies of a pro-forma objection letters and there were 4 on-line comments, There was also a formal request for a site visit and hearing. A summary of the material terms of objection are set out as follows:

The proposed turbine shall result in a Significant negative visual impact on the surrounding area and on the lives of local residents. The turbine structure is out of scale and keeping with the surrounding rural area and settlements, particularly Annathill village. Noise impacts are of great concern. The Noise Impact information is based on generic statistics and cannot be relied on to demonstrate that noise impacts would be acceptable when the turbine is operational, particularly. Increased noise would be detrimental to the health and wellbeing of local residents. Any shadow flicker impact would be unacceptable. "Reflective sunlight flashing" would be detrimental to the well-being of local residents and cannot be quantified or mitigated. It is well documented that such impacts can increase symptoms for epilepsy/migraine sufferers. The turbine proposal would reduce the environmental improvements made to the former colliery site through the ongoing restoration works and restrict public access over the site and surrounding area. This commercial turbine will offer no benefits to the residents of Annathill or surrounding area. The developer's offer to make a financial contribution to a local community benefit fund for the life of the project is an admission that the proposed development will bring significant disturbance to residents in the Annathill. There are no positive benefits to local residents, only negative impacts on the local environment, health, well being and living standards. There would be a detrimental impact on local house prices. There are other sites within North Lanarkshire that would be more suitable for this type of development without the need to locate so close to existing communities, Scottish Planning Policy (SPP) recommends that a separation distance of 2km from any city, town or village to reduce the visual impact. The current proposals are contrary to this recommendation. 0 Local residents have endured significant increases in traffic movements due to outlying landfill sites. The current proposals would exacerbate such impacts.

0 The Scottish Governments National Renewable Energy Targets are unrealistic and will result in significant detriment to the small villages and the wider Scottish landscape.

7.2 Although most of the letters of representation refer to the original proposal to install a 100m high turbine, it is considered that the terms of objection should also be assessed against the amended turbine height of 91 m.

8

8.1 In accordance with Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, planning decisions must be made in accordance with the development plan unless material consideratlons indicate otherwise. 8.2 As the proposed wind turbine would have an output capacity of less than 20 megawatts (MW), the proposals are not of strategic significance and do not require to be assessed against the Strategic Development Plan, The application requires to be assessed under the terms of both the adopted Northern Corridor Local Plan and the emerging North Lanarkshire Local Plan.

8.3 Develooment P& Northern Corridor Local Plan 2005. The site is located within an area covered by policies ENV2-8 (Greenbelt) and ENV 33 (Methane) of the NCLP.

8.4 The proposals are directly supported by Policy ENV4: Development in the Greenbelt which sets out the types of development that would be appropriate in such areas. This includes development associated with the need to generate power from renewable resources provided it can be demonstrated there is a need to locate such facilities in the green belt. It is considered that the proposals are in accordance with this policy.

8.5 Policy ENV 33 (Methane) required all developers to provide written confirmation that no gas seepage has been detected on site. The developer has advised this issue has been assessed and that a site specific coal mining risk assessment has been undertaken. The developer further advised that the previous land fill operations dealt only with inert waste material which would not give rise to methane seepage. The proposed control building would be unoccupied, ventilated and set on a concrete foundation giving low potential for methane impact. Whilst the developer has assessed such impacts it is considered that further safeguards could be covered by a planning condition requesting further site investigation survey before works commence. 8.6 Other Material Considerations : North Lanarkshire Local Plan. Policy NBE 3 A (Greenbelt) aims to protect the character and promote appropriate development in the Greenbelt through restricting development to acceptable types and operational assessment criteria set out under this policy. In this regard the policy is supportive of the proposed wind turbine as this is associated with the generation of power from renewable resources, which is considered an acceptable development in the Greenbelt. The proposed turbine may offer a positive economic benefit through its assistance in meeting national targets for sustainable power generation. Whilst it is noted that there may be some adverse visual impacts at a local level these are not considered significant enough to suggest they are unacceptable. Overall it has been reasonably demonstrated by consideration of the detailed support information that there would be no significant adverse environmental impacts or pose undue infrastructure implications, Moreover there is a specific locatlonal need for its countryside location. The proposals are therefore considered to accord with Policy NBE 3A (Green Belt).

8.7 All development proposals are subject to assessment against Development Strategy Policies DSP 1, DSP 2, DSP 3 and DSP 4 of the NLLP as follows:

DSP 1 Amount of Development: This relates to planned land supplies and is not of relevance to this proposal.

DSP 2 Location of Development: The proposed site is located within an area of search considered acceptable for wind turbine development as set out in SPG 12 (Wind Turbine Development). The site is located within an area designated as Zone 3 Area of Search which advises that the landscape character type has capacity to accommodate turbines up to 100m in height subject to other impact criteria. It is considered the proposals are in accordance with DSP 2 in this regard.

DSP 3 Impact of Development: The proposals would have no significant impact on environmental infrastructure and as such are consistent with DSP 3.

DSP 4 Quality of Development: Although the proposed single turbine may be visible from local residential areas these would not be considered unacceptable or significant enough to suggest the proposals would be contrary to DSP 4. It Is considered that high standards of site planning would be achieved as the proposals would have no significant detrimental impact on landscape or biodiversity interests or from any unacceptable noise impacts. Moreover there would be no unacceptable significant impacts on local residential amenity in terms of visual impacts or noise impacts.

8.8 Consultations 8.9 There was no objection from Historic Scotland, NERL (NATS), Ofcom, JRC Telecoms or Atklns Wind Farm Support (Telecoms), Rathmells, Rights of Way Society and SEPA

8.10 The additional matters raised by Transportation, Greenspace (Biodiversity), BAA, The Coal Authority, SNH, Protectlve Services, and MODcan adequately be covered by planning conditions.

8.12

8.13 In respect of the terms of objections set out at paragraph 7.1 above, the following comments can be taken into account on each of the points raised.

0 It is considered that the proposed turbine would have a moderate visual impact on local residents from Annathill but this is not considered significant enough to merit a refusal of planning permission. There would be less visual impact when the turbine is viewed from greater distances. As noted above Greenspace Development (Landscape) has no objection to the proposals.

0 The proposal would involve the installation of a 91m high wind turbine and it is agreed that its overall appearance may dominate the local landscape. By their very nature in terms of their form and function, turbines can have an incongruous appearance particularly in a rural setting. However it has been adequately demonstrated that its visual impact would not be unacceptable at this locus. As noted above Greenspace Development (Landscape) has no objection to the proposals

0 Protective Services had no objection to noise impacts from the proposed turbine provided it did not exceed the standards set out in the supporting Noise Impact Assessment. Such thresholds can be covered by planning condition,

0 The developer provided information on potential shadow flicker impact in the Supporting Statement*. This advised that there could be occasions (on a bright winter day when the sun is at its lowest course) that incidents of shadow flicker could have an impact for some properties located within 800m of the turbine: For example Annathill Farm (located 480 to the northsast) may be subject to a total of 38 hours of shadow flicker per annum, and some houses in Annathill (located 750m to the east) could be subject to shadow flicker over a total of 15 hours per annum. Mollinshillhead located 800m to the north of the site could be subject to 5 hours per annum. It should be noted the actual amount of shadow flicker occurrences would be reduced due to normal cloud cover, wind direction, calm periods and turbine maintenance downtime. However whilst it can be noted that actual shadow flicker incidents are likely to have a minimal impact on some residential properties it is considered that appropriate mitigation measures should be in place and covered by planning condition which would require the developer to temporary shut down the turbine when such incidents are investigated. * Supporting Statement estimated worst case shadow flicker impacts in terms of hours per annum: Total period of time measured over one year assuming constant sunshine (no cloud cover), wind always blowing, turbine always operational, wind direction always blowing towards receptor and takes into account terrain but excludes any shading provided trees/buildings. It is envisaged that any annoyance from sun light reflecting off the revolving turbine blades would be a rare and temporary occurrence, However such incidents if reported could also be investigated and if deemed significant the turbine could be shut down for a temporary period. This could also be covered by planning condition.

0 The proposed turbine development would not adversely affect the restoration of the former Bedlay Colliery Site. Some small trees and bushes may be removed to facilitate the development but there would be no significant woodland clearance operations. The proposed development does not affect any core paths or public rights of way. The public however may currently enjoy some ad-hoc access over the former colliery site but this would not be restricted by the proposed turbine development.

0 Whilst the applicant is to consider offering some contribution to local residents this would be a voluntary option and is not material to the determination of the planning application. The main benefit from the turbine would be the generation of a sustainable power resource which would be linked to the national grid.

0 It is accepted that the proposed wind turbine would provide no direct benefits to the local residents, but neither will it result in any significant unacceptable environmental impacts that may otherwise suggest the proposals should be refused planning permission. As noted above the main impact would be a moderate negative visual impact at a local level which is not considered to be significantly detrimental to merit refusal of planning permission. Objections based on concerns over a loss of property values as a result of the proposed development is not material to the consideration of the planning application and should not be given weight in the decision making process.

0 It is agreed that there are other areas located within North Lanarkshire that may be capable of supporting wind turbine developments. SPG 12 (Wind Turbine Developments) includes an Area of Search Map which sets out 4 different development zones which are deemed capable of accommodating turbines at various heights and numbers subject to other assessment criteria. The proposal site is located within a zone 3 area which has flexibility to accommodate turbine development up to 100m in height. The site is located some 800 m to the west of Annathill and is considered an acceptable location for a single wind turbine of this scale.

0 It should firstly be clarified that the SPP offers guidance and is not prescriptive in terms of its advice on recommended separation distances which Planning Authorities may take into account when considering land use zonings for large scale wind farm development in their respective development plans. The current proposal is for a single turbine located some 800m from Annathill and it has been demonstrated that visual and noise impacts would not be unacceptable. The supporting information provided by the applicant took into account specific local circumstances and geography in accordance with the guidance set out in the SPP.

0 The applicant has provided information on abnormal vehicle load movements which indicates that a total of 11 HGV trips would be undertaken to deliver the turbine blades, towers, nacelle, hub, foundation ring and crane. Additional HGVs may also deliver concrete supplies from a local supplier. The proposed route for delivery of the turbine to the site is from Junction 2A M73, A752, 8804 then via Drumcavel Road to the site entrance (3Skm). On site construction works are estimated to be concluded within 3 months. As noted above Traffic and Transportation had no objection to the proposals and it is considered such vehicle movements would not have a significant impact on the public road network. Whilst the objectors' criticism of the viability and long terms impacts of the Scottish Governments national energy policy targets can be noted, this viewpoint must be considered as a subjective opinion and cannot be regarded as a material consideration in the assessment of the planning application. As noted above, the visuai impacts of the proposed 91m high turbine on the local area is considered moderate but not unacceptable. 8.14 Following consideration of the terms of objection set out above it can be concluded that they cannot be sustained in this instance, The main impact on local residents would be a moderate visual impact as the turbine would be some 800 m from Annathill. However such an impact would not be considered significant enough to merit a recommendation that planning permission should be refused.

9 sonclueiona

9.1 The proposed development is considered acceptable and accords with the policies contained within the Northern Corridor Local Plan and the emerging North Lanarkshire Local Plan. Following an assessment of the environmental assessment information submitted In support of the application the landscape, visual and cumulative impact of the proposed development is considered acceptable and any outstanding concerns over loss of local bird species habitat can me mitigated through condition requiring the developer to undertake an off-site Lapwing HMP scheme. There were no significant outstanding concerns from consultants that cannot be covered by condition. Whilst there was a significant level of representations received it can be concluded that the terms of objection cannot be sustained in this instance. The proposed development Is therefore considered to accord with the relevant planning policies set out above and it is recommended that planning permission be granted subject to conditions.

9.2 As noted above there has been a request for a Site Visit and Hearing from Mr J Brannan 20 Annathill Gardens Annathill and Mr B Campbell 18 Annathill Gardens, Annathill,