MERTHYR TYDFIL COUNTY BOROUGH COUNCIL
DATE WRITTEN December 2006 – October 2008
REPORT AUTHOR A N Davies
HEAD OF SERVICE A N Davies
COMMITTEE Special Council
COMMITTEE DATE 1st December 2008
TO: Mayor, Ladies and Gentlemen
Application No. Date Determining Authority P/06/0573 23 rd October 2006 MTCBC
Proposed Development Location Name & Address of Applicant/Agent
Wind Farm comprising 5 Land at Merthyr/ Bheara wind turbines, wind monitoring Gelligaer common, north Knowle Farm mast, switch station, access of Pengarnddu West Compton tracks and ancillary works Dowlais Top Shepton Mallett (Full) Merthyr Tydfil BA4 4PD
PURPOSE OF REPORT: To consider report and recommendation on Planning Application No. 060573.
CONTENTS
1.0 SUMMARY REPORT
2.0 DESCRIPTION OF APPLICATION SITE AND REASONS FOR SITE SELECTION
3.0 PLANNING HISTORY OF APPLICATION SITE AND BACKGROUND TO CURRENT
APPLICATION
4.0 PROPOSALS SUBJECT OF PLANNING APPLICATION
5.0 PLANNING APPLICATION DETAILS
6.0 PUBLICITY AND THIRD PARTY REPRESENTATIONS
7.0 CONSULTATIONS AND RESPONSES
8.0 PLANNING POLICIES AND PLANNING GUIDANCE 9.0 MATERIAL PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS
10.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION
APPENDIX 1 Environmental Statement Non Technical Summary (submitted by applicants)
APPENDIX 2 Aerial Photograph of Application Site and Surrounding Area
Please note:
• the bold figures in brackets in the summary report refer to the relevant sections of the main report.
• italicised text usually refers to quoted extracts from other documents.
1.0 SUMMARY REPORT
SR1 The previously submitted application was refused planning permission in November 2005 for two distinct reasons: firstly the unacceptable, adverse impact of the development upon the quality and character of the landscape; secondly the adverse impact of the wind farm construction on the ecology of the area (3.4) .
The current proposal is situated within the same application site, but seeks permission for 5 rather than 9 wind turbines. (4) . This fresh application falls to be determined on its respective merits.
The conclusion of the case officer, (my Head of Town Planning), is that the effect of the reduction in the number of wind turbines is marginal and that the potential benefits of this proposal to generate renewable energy are outweighed by the adverse landscape and ecological impacts. For that reason the recommendation is to again refuse planning permission for essentially the same two reasons, albeit worded slightly differently from the previous refusal decision.
SR2 The purpose of the town planning system, as enshrined in post war national government policy, is to regulate the development and use of land in the public interest. The Welsh Assembly Government, through Planning Policy Wales (PPW), advises local planning authorities that it has a duty to reconcile the often competing needs of development and conservation, securing economy, efficiency and amenity in the use of land and protecting natural resources and the historic environment, thereby contributing to sustainable development, i.e. development which meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.
The decision in this context has to be made between two laudable, but competing, requirements. On the one hand there is a need to combat global warming and halt climate change by, amongst other things, encouraging the use of renewable energy, in place of fossil fuels. On the other hand, there is the need to maintain the integrity and quality of the landscape, particularly designated landscapes (in this case National Park) in the public interest.
In this revised application, the applicants have offered a compromise: a reduced number of wind turbines. An issue now for decision takers is whether a compromise is possible or whether the competing requirements are mutually exclusive:- the acceptance of one of the propositions would, by definition, preclude acceptance of the other.
WAG and this Council, via the Town Planning Division, are committed both to protecting the designated and other landscapes and to encouraging renewable energy in all its forms, including (but not exclusively), wind generated energy.
SR3 The planning report attempts to address and balance all relevant issues in the report. The report is set out as follows.
The application site and turbine positions, including their distances relative to settlements are described in detail (2) .
The development control history of the application site is also described (3) .
The report describes the proposals in some detail, including the wind turbine elements, dimensions, construction and other details. (4) .
The planning application is described in detail (5) and reference is made to the Environmental Statement, the Planning Appraisal and the Non Technical Summary, along with the “further” information submitted by the applicants. This section describes, in detail, the issues covered by the Environmental Statement, the conclusions of the Statement, the stated economic and other benefits deriving from the scheme, together with proposed planning obligations (5.3; 5.4; 5.5) .
The measures to publicise the application, together with third party responses are detailed (6.1 and 6.2) . The representations received by individual letters and, in petition form, together with issues raised by the Commoners are summarised. Reference is also made to those representations submitted with the previous application.
The report refers to statutory consultee responses. Of the internal consultees, objections were lodged by the Town Planning Division’s Countryside Officer and by the Landscape Architect (7.1.6 and 7.1.7) .
Of the external consultees, objection was lodged by CCW, Environment Agency, RSPB (Cymru) and Brecon Beacons National Park (7.2.4, 7.2.6, 7.2.15 and 7.3.1) .
The remaining consultees offered no objection, advice, comment or did not respond.
The policy section of the report illustrates the dilemma for the decision taker.
The key international, EU and UK policy statements and strategies are set out in the report (8.1.1 to 8.1.13; 8.15 – 8.1.18) . They, together with the national policy statements and strategies acknowledge the threat of global warming and the need to halt climate change by, amongst other things, encouraging renewable energy in its various forms, including wind farm generated electricity.
Whilst this Council, through the Town Planning Division, takes these obligations seriously, planning applications must be assessed in accordance with the adopted development plan, which is the primary land use policy document for determining planning applications. The (structure and local) development plans, which have been adopted by WAG, permit renewable energy schemes including wind farms, but similarly the Deposit Version of the Local Development Plan is largely unsupportive of this revised proposal, largely due to its intended location. (8.2.1; 8.2.2; 8.2.3) .
The principal Welsh Assembly Government land use planning policy document (Planning Policy Wales) is concerned primarily with the protection of designated landscapes, including National Parks and habitats, emphasising that National Parks must be afforded the highest status of protection from inappropriate developments, stating that development control decisions should give great weight to conserving and enhancing these areas (8.14) .
The Welsh Assembly Government’s principal guidance on renewable energy, including wind farms, is Technical Advice Note 8 : Planning for Renewable Energy (8.3.2) . The main thrust of this guidance is that on shore wind farm development should be steered, so that large wind farms should be concentrated within Strategic Search Areas (SSAs); most areas outside SSAs should remain free of large wind power schemes unless they relate to small, community based schemes (of less than 5 MW) or schemes (of up to 25 MW) but contained within urban/industrial brownfield sites.
It emphasises that the integrity and quality of National Park landscape should be protected.
The report also addresses and gives appropriate weight to the various material planning considerations, most of which were raised by residents and others.
They include, in alphabetical order: alternatives to the submitted proposal, archaeological resources; common land; cumulative impact; danger/health impact; ecological impact; economic benefits; environmental benefits; highway safety and traffic generation; landscape and visual impact; noise; precedent; proximity; residential amenity; tourism and vibration. (9.1 – 9.3) .
The report concludes (10.1) that, for the reasons stated in the report, there is little to support the revised planning application and that for the reasons given (10.2) the application should be refused for distinct reasons.
N.B. Council will note that, on 14 th February 2007, the Planning and Regulatory Committee accepted my recommendation that this planning application should be referred to a Special Council, for the following reasons: 1. the proposal, by its nature, size and location, will have impacts beyond the locality within which the application site lies; 2. in the interests of consistency and transparency given that the previous planning application was considered and determined by a Special Council.
2.0 DESCRIPTION OF APPLICATION SITE AND REASONS FOR SITE SELECTION
2.1 Description of Application Site
Please read in conjunction with the aerial photograph and Non Technical Summary (Appendices 1 & 2 ).
The application site, as indicated in red, pecked line on the submitted plans, comprises a single parcel of land extending over 198 hectares/489 acres. The application site area remains the same as the previous wind farm planning application considered by Council (No. 0040361).
It stands within Merthyr/Gelligaer Common (CL38), approximately 4KM northeast of Merthyr Tydfil Town Centre, north of A465(T) Heads of Valleys Road. The southern application site boundary abuts St Merryn Meat Processing Plant and the Pengarnddu Business Site.
(Council will note that the site is often referred to as Merthyr Common, whereas the designation Gelligaer Common also applies.)
This section of the Common is clearly visible from the following areas:- Pant, Cilsanws (Cefn Coed); Gellideg/Swansea Road; Castle Park/Beacon Heights; Heolgerrig; A470(T) at Abercanaid/Rhydycar; A465(T) Heads of Valleys, at Baverstocks eastwards to the Rhymney Common.
The application site stands outside the settlement boundary as defined by the Local Plan Proposals Map. As such it lies in the defined countryside.
The western boundary of the application site lies 0.4KM from the nearest residential settlement (Caeracca, Pant) although the distance between the closest (SW) extremity and Caeracca is 0.27KM. (For these purposes, “settlement” is normally defined for town planning purposes as ten dwellings or more, forming a group).
The distances between the nearest settlements and the individual wind turbine positions (as revised) is greater. As measured from the line of the disused railway abutting the northern edge of the settlements, the distances to the nearest (southernmost) turbine are:-
Caeracca – 1.2KM; (0.7KM with previous scheme) Brecon Rise – 1.3KM; and (0.9KM with previous scheme) The Hawthorns – 1.5KM (1.2 KM with previous scheme).
Two individual dwellings stand much closer to the application site boundary: Blaen Morlais Farmhouse (and riding School) and Castle House, Pengarnddu at 120 metres to the west and 100 metres to the south respectively. As measured from the nearest wind turbine, Blaenmorlais Farmhouse stands approximately 0.76KM away (previously 0.4KM), whilst Castle House stands approximately 1.07KM away (previously 0.63KM).
The south western part of the application site stands on the 390 contour line (AOD), rising northwards in elevation to 530 metres at its north eastern extremity.
At the south western extremity of the application site stands an electricity sub- station, to which it is proposed to connect the wind farm infrastructure. The overhead lines run to and from the substation in an east-west direction.
Crossing the middle of the application site in an east-west direction is the “Garway” high pressure gas pipeline. Crossing the southern part of the application site from north-east to south-west are two further gas mains.
Vehicle access to the application site north from Pengarnddu is in proximity to the sub-station, running north and east along the former un-metalled quarry tramway which also serves as the primary access to Blaen Morlais Farmhouse.
The application site assumes a roughly rectangular shape with its long boundaries running in a north-south direction. The eastern boundary runs in a straight line north-south and forms the administrative boundary between this County Borough and Caerphilly County Borough. The northern boundary runs west at right angles to the eastern boundary. It is contiguous with the administrative boundary of this County Borough, Powys County Council and Brecon Beacons National Park. The western and southern boundaries also run at right angles and continue in a straight line for the main part, although the south western boundary deviates from the rigid geometric pattern where it follows the line of the former unmetalled tramway at this point.
The application site occupies a position on an exposed, elevated landscape. Within this sector of the Common it is part of a large exposed upland edge which runs north to the Brecon Beacons and east to the Rhymney Common and Rhymney Valley.
Its natural surface features comprise mainly upland heath and coarse grassland which is grazed by sheep and ponies. There are areas of wet, modified bog, scree, rock outcrops and standing open water.
This distinctive landscape is largely devoid of trees, shrubs and hedgerows. Vertical elements i.e. telegraph poles and electricity pylons are confined to the lower, southern parts of the application site.
A number of incised valleys run through the site with several water features, mainly two streams (Nant Tor Gwyn and Nant Mere) which run in a north-south direction. They converge to form the Nant Morlais to the south.
The geology of the area (coal measures, sandstone, millstone grit and limestone) rendered the site and surrounding area useful for commercial exploitation in the 19 th and early part of the 20 th centuries. This is evidenced by surface features such as quarrying coal and ironstone levels and tramways. Numerous “shake holes” appear on the application site. (Shake holes are surface depressions caused by the collapse of surface material into fissures in the limestone. They often appear in a recognisable linear chain and are noticeable features at this part of the Common and at Cilsanws, Cefn Coed to the west).
Further evidence of past industrial use is provided by the numerous man-made drainage features on site, largely a result of the Dowlais Free Drainage System.
The Dowlais Free Drainage System (DFDS) is an extensive surface and subterranean archaeological relic, comprising a complex interconnected network of water collection leats, canalised natural streams, ponds, reservoirs and sluice gates designed to provide a continuous supply of water from the Common to the Dowlais Ironworks. This homogeneous system was completed in 1868. In addition to the streams, ditches and leats on site the most noticeable features are the collection of reservoirs, the largest of which is Pitwellt Pond located in the lower third of the application site.
Whilst the approach to the site from the south is marked by the electricity sub-station and by a plethora of poorly constructed stables and ancillary structures, the area generally is characterised as upland moorland, the previous industrial scarring having largely blended into the overall landscape.
Thus the application site is assessed as greenfield land as defined in fig 2.1 of Planning Policy Wales.
A claimed right of way (bridleway) runs along the tramway on the western site boundary.
2.2 Reasons for Site Selection
The rationale for choosing the current site remains as with the previous planning application (No. 040361).
In their submission, the applicants state: “Merthyr Common was selected from hundreds of sites across the UK after a comprehensive and time consuming desk based study. This is an ongoing investigation conducted by Bheara to discover suitable sites across the UK. The process of identifying possible areas and planning a number of technical considerations to determine if building a wind farm would be economically and environmentally viable is long and detailed and suitable sites are rare. Merthyr Common is a site of high quality in that it meets all the requirements needed:-
• It has excellent wind resource; • There is good vehicular access to the site from the A465; • There is a nearby sub-station suitable for connection to the grid; • It is located away from residential homes; • The erection of turbines will not impede television nor mobile phone signals in the area; • It is acceptable to both the Ministry of Defence and Civil Aviation Authority whose permission is essential for any proposed site; and • The landscape is vast which allows the turbines to sit within scale.
It cannot be stressed strongly enough how rare it is that sites meet all the criteria above.” (The bold type insert is that of the applicants, not the writer of this report.)
The applicants also state that alternative sites were considered in Abertysswg, Ebbw Vale, Porth and at one other site at Merthyr Tydfil (Mynydd Gilfach-yr-Encil), but were discounted as they could not meet all of the above criteria.
2.3 Designations
The following statutory designations in the area, referred to in the adopted Local Plan (Sec 8.2.2 of this report) will be noted:
• Gelligaer (Urban) Common • Outstanding Historic Landscape • Brecon Beacons National Park, (the boundary of which abuts the northern boundary of the application site) • Landscape Protection Area • Geological SINC (Designated) (“SINC” is an acronym for Site of Interest for Nature Conservation).
In addition, part of the site is designated Open Access Land.
Also, the Local Development Plan (Deposit Version) identifies the area as a SINC.
3.0 PLANNING HISTORY OF APPLICATION SITE AND BACKGROUND TO CURRENT APPLICATION
3.1 The application site and surrounding area was used for quarrying and mining activities in the 19 th and early 20 th century and was used as an integral part of the Dowlais Free Drainage System. These activities predated current town planning law and procedure, the inception of which was in 1947 and so there is no recorded application.
3.2 App. No. 020305
Erection of 10 metre high (anemometer) mast for collection of windspeed and directional data.
Approved for a temporary period 4 th October 2002.
3.3 App.No. 030464
Retention of (anemometer) mast.
Approved for further temporary period 5 th November 2003
3.4 App. No. 040361
Erection of nine wind turbines, wind monitoring mast, switch station, access tracks and ancillary works.
This application was submitted by the same applicants on 12 th August 2004. It was subjected to extensive public and other consultation and scrutiny. Councillors and interested residents and other parties viewed the application site, in addition to other wind farm sites within Rhondda Cynon Taff and Carmarthenshire (Laugharne). The Chairman of the Planning & Regulatory Committee and officers of the Town Planning Division also that year visited a wind farm site in Llidiartywan, some 12 miles south of Aberystwyth. The Planning case officer who dealt with this original planning application also visited a site in County Durham.
Furthermore, two public meetings were convened in the locality and the originally submitted scheme was amended to take account of views expressed at those meetings.
At a Special Council meeting on 30 th November 2005, it was resolved to support the officer’s recommendation to refuse permission for this application for the following reasons:
“1. The erection/construction of a wind farm in this location would have an unacceptable adverse impact on the quality and character of the landscape within which it is situated and to the setting of the Brecon Beacons National Park, to the detriment of visual amenity. As such it is out of accord with policies EV4 and U1 of the Mid Glamorgan (Merthyr Tydfil County Borough) Replacement Structure Plan and NH1, NH7 and RU1 of the Merthyr Tydfil Borough Local Plan 1995-2006 and would be contrary to national planning guidance.
2. The erection/construction of turbines in the positions shown will have an unacceptable, adverse effect on the ecology of the area, to the detriment of the habitat (particularly the water environment) and, as such, is out of accord with policies NH1 and NH7 of the Merthyr Tydfil Borough Local Plan 1995- 2006 and would be contrary to national planning guidance.”
No appeal was lodged against this decision. The applicants resolved instead to revise the proposal to attempt to address the concerns and the above stated reasons for refusal. The scheme now before this Council meeting therefore reflects those changes: essentially the same application site, but reduction in numbers of turbines from nine to five (please refer to Section 4.0 of this report).
4.0 PROPOSALS SUBJECT OF PLANNING APPLICATION
4.1 Number of Turbines, Siting, Generating Capacity, Dimensions, Life Expectancy
The total number of turbines which comprise the proposed wind farm has been reduced since the previous planning application was submitted.
The original proposal subject of planning application 040361 envisaged ten turbines, subsequently reduced to nine during the assessment of that application, which included repositioning of three of those units during processing of that application and public consultation.
The current planning application seeks consent to erect five turbines, four fewer than the previously refused planning application.
It is now proposed to retain these turbine positions on the eastern extremity of the application site, further away from the National Park Boundary and the settlements described at Section 2.1 of this report. The four turbines removed from this application are those which were sited closest to the western and northern site boundaries. ( Appendices 1 & 2. )
The current plan indicates a line of four turbines running south to north, approximately 40 - 80 metres from the eastern site boundary, the southernmost of which will be sited some 500 metres from the southern site boundary.
The fifth turbine will be located further west, offset some 0.65KM from the western site boundary, edging towards the middle of the application site.
The turbines running along the eastern site boundary will be sited approximately 350m apart; the fifth unit will be sited approximately 500m from the other four units.
Each turbine will produce between 2.0 to 2.30 Megawatts (MW) of electricity, the output depending on the final choice of turbine (1 Megawatt = 1,000 Kilowatts).
The total installed capacity of the 5 turbine wind farm is therefore within the range of 10 – 11.5 MW.
[To put this proposal in perspective, over the past 10-15 years, some 300 MW installed capacity of wind turbines have been constructed on shore in Wales - Source: “Renewable Energy Route Map for Wales – 2008”; Sec 8.1.18 of this report refers.]
Government advice, as contained within Technical Advice Note 8 “Planning for Renewable energy” (Sec 8.3.2 of this report) indicates that wind farms generating less than 5MW constitute smaller developments; those generating more than 5MW are larger.
Each turbine will be finished in a semi-matt mid grey colour to minimise its visual impact on the open moorland and skyline.
The turbines will measure 100m (328 ft) at the highest from adjoining ground level. Turbines comprise two elements: the main cylindrical column which supports the mechanical apparatus and the turbine blades. The height to the blade hub containing the mechanical apparatus, (known as the nacelle) is 60m (197 ft) as measured from adjoining ground level; the radius of each blade will measure 40m (131 ft). Each turbine will comprise a three bladed rotor.
The nacelle contains, amongst other things, a service crane, generator, controller, gearbox, main shaft, rotor lock system and yaw gear.
The applicants request a 50m (164 ft) tolerance for the final siting of each turbine, to allow for any localised ground conditions or technical problems which may be found during construction work.
Each turbine will generate electricity when the wind speed reaches 4m per second. Maximum generating capacity will be reached at around 15m per second and each turbine will automatically shut down at 25m per second (55 miles per hour).
The average life expectancy of a turbine is estimated at between 20-25 years.
Regardless of which generating capacity of wind turbine is chosen (2.0 or 2.3 MW), the outward physical dimensions and characteristics described above will remain the same.
4.2 Windfarm Construction Details
If planning permission is granted, it is stated that the construction work should be completed within 3-5 months, depending on weather and conditions. The process for the erection of the turbines is described below.
Construction Programme
The following construction programme is proposed: prepare site compound; construct site tracks, cable trenches, livestock grids, fencing, excavate the foundations for the wind turbines and wind monitoring mast; construct wind turbine foundations and crane pads; construct the switch station and install electricity cabling; erect wind turbines, transformer units, wind monitoring mast; and reinstate the land.
Site Access
The proposed site access will be via the roundabout at A465(T) Heads of the Valleys Road and the single track road leading through Pengarnddu past the electricity sub station. The applicants consider it adequate for the purpose and there is no perceived need for any large scale upgrading.
On Site Access
It is anticipated approximately 4KM of new access track will be required to serve each of the five turbines. They will be constructed as follows: vegetation stripped and suitably stored for reinstatement; access track laid upon 300mm of crushed stone, depending on ground conditions.
A total of 5,400m3 crushed stone will be required for on site access roads.
The access track would be approximately 4.5m in width.
Hardstanding areas will be created for cranes and for large vehicles to turn around during construction of each of the turbines.
N.B. In this regard it will be noted that the plans accompanying the current application indicate the positions of both the original (9) turbines and the current (5) turbines, along with access tracks serving each. (Fig 1.2 of the Environmental Statement and Fig 3 of the Non Technical Summary refer). For the avoidance of doubt, the access tracks serving only the five turbines are the subject of the current proposal.
Vehicle Movements
It is estimated that, during the 3-5 months of construction work, approximately 72 daily movements would be generated, based on construction taking four months. The traffic movements (in and out of site) would comprise the following:-
• delivery of working plant and machinery; • daily transportation of site personnel (estimated at 30 persons per day); • steel and concrete deliveries; • delivery of electrical equipment and cabling; • delivery of wind turbines in sections; and • supervisory staff, consultants, engineers etc.
Temporary Works
Temporary works, including a compound, would be established on site to aid construction work and to provide shelter, which would be removed on completion of construction works.
Wind Turbines
The applicants state that: “The geological and hydrological survey discovered that the stratum is capable of bearing the pressures of wind turbines and base foundations.”
Reinforced concrete would be used to create the turbine foundations, which would typically be 13m 2 and 2.5m deep.
On Site Cabling and Grid Connection
All cabling will be laid in the form of underground trenches to a depth of approximately 1m, covered with warning tape. Marker signs will be used to alert their presence. The wind farm will be connected to the grid via the existing electricity sub station approximately 1KM south west of the site. Whilst it would not be necessary for any physical changes to the exterior of the sub station, interior changes will be necessary.
A “switch” station will be constructed on the south western sector of the site, measuring 16m in length, 7m in width, to a height of 5.8m. The structure would be in suitably solid (brick or block) construction with dual pitched roof.
During its operation the wind farm will be supervised by a team of two or three engineers, who will visit the site regularly to conduct routine maintenance.
Site Restoration and Wind farm Decommissioning.
The applicants state: “Bheara is committed to reinstating any damage caused while the wind farm is constructed, back to its original state as soon as possible. The turbine bases will be backfilled and covered with topsoil and the site compound will be cleared and the previously removed soil reinstated. It is likely these areas will be left to reseed naturally with temporary fencing being erected to prevent any livestock from grazing. The access tracks will be left in place with just 0.5m shoulders of the track having the topsoil replaced and allowed to regenerate naturally… …It is predicted that decommissioning will take approximately three months. The wind turbines will be removed entirely and attempts made to recycle them. The foundations will be decommissioned to below ground level and then covered over with topsoil and reseeded. Cabling will be left in situ to avoid unnecessary disruption to vegetation. They will be de-energised and marker signs will be removed. Access tracks will be considered on an individual basis. They can be left for agricultural use or covered over with topsoil and reseeded.”
5.0 PLANNING APPLICATION DETAILS
5.1 This is a “full” planning application (building/engineering/other operations) for “five wind turbines and ancillary equipment”.
The planning application was accompanied by the following supporting documents:
• Volume 1 – Non Technical Summary; • Volume 2 – Environmental Statement; and • Volume 3 – Planning Appraisal
N.B
• Copies of these three volumes were placed in the Councillors’ Library on 8 th October 2008; and
• Each Councillor will have received a copy of Volume 1 (Non Technical Summary) along with the agenda report for this Council meeting.
The Environmental Statement and Non Technical Summary (Volumes 1 and 2) were submitted as a requirement of Schedule 2(3)(j) of the 1999 Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment)(England and Wales) Regulations.
In the preamble to the Environmental Statement, the applicants state: “This is a new application which is based on a previous application (361/04) that was refused in November 2005. In essence it is an identical application except that four turbines (three of them being those originally closest to the National Park) have been removed. As the earlier refusal was largely based on landscape and visual grounds, this application has sought to address these issues.
The bulk of the document” (the Environmental Statement) “has been left unchanged from the earlier version, but the Landscape and Visual Assessment has been re- written specifically for five turbines, with ZVIs and photo montages reworked accordingly. Other changes include data and statistics …”
In the above context, Council will note that ZVIs is an acronym which refers to “Zones of Visual Influence” and photo montages is the process of image editing software which produces photographs of the application site, as existing, with a subsequent photographic image of the same site illustrating the proposed development thereon.
Following discussions with the applicants and certain consultees, including CCW, in view of the initial concerns expressed by the Town Planning Division’s Countryside Officer (at 7.1.6 of this report), the applicants submitted the following further information on 3 rd December 2007:-
• Breeding Bird Survey (Wild Frontier Ecology Ltd Nov 2007); • Vantage Point Bird Survey (Nov 2007); and • Bat presence Survey (Just Mammals) (Nov 2007.
Also, on 17 th August 2008, the applicants submitted a drawing indicating access track construction and drainage. This drawing was not materially different from the one submitted with regard to the previous application and could not therefore be said to constitute further information.
5.2 Environmental Impact Assessment is the process by which information about the likely environmental effects of certain types of development is collected, assessed and taken into account, both by the developer as part of the project design and by the Local Planning Authority in assessing a planning application.
Amongst other matters, Environmental Statements are normally required to include and address the following:-
• a description of the physical characteristics of the whole development during its operational phase/phases; • the main characteristics of the proposal; • estimates of residues/emissions; • an outline of alternatives (where appropriate); • a description of those aspects of the environment likely to be significantly affected by the development; • a description of the likely significant effects of the development on the environment, including direct and indirect effects, together with any direct, secondary, cumulative, short, medium and long term, permanent and temporary, positive and negative effects of the development; and • a description of the mitigation measures envisaged to prevent, reduce or offset any significant adverse effects; and • a summary of the above in a non technical document (Non Technical Summary)
5.3 The Environmental Statement, as stated at Section 5.1 of this report, was revised as appropriate for the current planning application, although as indicated at 4.2 of this report, no alterations were made with regard to the access tracks.
Council will note:-
a) the contents of the submitted Environmental Statement attempt to address the issues set out below; and b) the paragraph/heading numbering up to Section 5.4 of this report relates to the numbering indicated within the Environmental Statement only (1.0 – 13.10); and c) to distinguish this extract of the ES from the text of this report, a smaller typeface is used.
The following is a synopsis of issues covered and is intended to give an overview.
1.0 Introduction (1.1 - The Proposal, 1.2 - The Purpose of the Environmental Statement, 1.3 - Structure of the Environmental Statement)
2.0 Project Development and Design (2.1 - Introduction, 2.2 - Site Selection Process, 2.3 - Merthyr Common, 2.4 - Wind farm Design, 2.5 - Wind farm Layout, 2.6 - Consultations, 2.7 - Conclusions)
3.0 Wind farm Construction (3.1 - Construction Programme, 3.2 - Site Access, 3.3 - On Site Access, 3.4 - Vehicle Movements, 3.5 - Temporary Works, 3.6 - Wind Turbines, 3.7 - On site Cabling and Grid Connection, 3.8 - Site Restoration and Wind farm Decommissioning)
4.0 Landscape and Visual Assessment (4.1 - Introduction and Scope of Assessment, 4.2 - Landscape and Visual Assessment Methodology, 4.3 - Baseline Landscape Environment, 4.4 - Visual Character, 4.5 - The Proposed Scheme, 4.6 - Landscape Effects, 4.7 - Visual Effects, 4.8 - Mitigation Measures, 4.9 - Summary and Conclusion) Figures
5.0 (Now part of Chapter 4 of the revised Environmental Statement).
6.0 Archaeology (6.1 - Introduction, 6.2 - Geographical Background, 6.3 - Methodology, 6.4 - Archaeological and Historic Background, 6.5 - Archaeological Interests, 6.6 - Predicted Impacts of the Proposal, 6.7 - Proposed Mitigation, 6.8 - Introduction to the Historic Landscape Study (ASIDOHL). ASIDOHL is an acronym which refers to “Assessment of the Significant Impact of Developments on the Historic Landscape”. It is a specialised methodology, the purpose of which is to assess the overall impact of developments upon Historic Landscape Character Areas and the effects upon the historic landscape, 6.9 - ASIDOHL Methodology, 6.10 - Measurements of Effects, 6.11 - Conclusions, 6.12 Sources Consulted)
7.0 Geology, Hydrology and Hydrogeology (7.1 - Geology, 7.2 - Hydrogeology, 7.3 - Hydrology, 7.4 - Conclusions)
8.0 Noise (8.1 - Introduction, 8.2 - Planning Policy, British Standards and Other Guidance, 8.3 - Assessment of Existing Noise Environment, 8.4 - Prediction of Wind Turbine Noise Levels, 8.5 - Assessment of Proposed Wind farm Extension, 8.6 - Conclusions)
9.0 Ecology (9.1 - Introduction, 9.2 - Planning Context, 9.3 - Potential Effects, 9.4 - Methodology, 9.5 - Baseline Ecological Information, 9.6 - Assessment of Impacts, 9.7 - Significance of Ecological Impacts, 9.8 - Mitigation and Monitoring, 9.9 - Residual Impacts, 9.10 - Summary and Conclusions, 9.11 - References)
10.0 Land Use, Public Safety and Amenity (10.1 - Existing Use, 10.2 - Commoners’ Usage and the Potential Effect, 10.3 - Public Usage and the Potential Effect, 10.4 - Safety to the Public, 10.5 - Contaminants, 10.6 - Shadow Flicker, 10.7 - Conclusion)
11.0 Electromagnetic Interference and Safeguarding (11.1 - Electromagnetic Interference, 11.2 - Air Safeguarding)
12.0 Economic and Environmental Benefits (12.1 - Economic Benefits, 12.2 - Environmental Benefits)
13.0 Conclusions
N.B. The conclusions of the Environmental Statement are repeated verbatim below:-
“13.0 Conclusions
13.1 Project Development and Design
Bheara has reviewed a range of sites in the UK. After a number of surveys and considerations it has found that Merthyr Common has huge potential as a suitable wind farm site.
The site has suitable available land resource and a high average wind speed. It is easily accessible from the A465 and the only proposed works to roads are to tracks within the site. There is a sub station nearby so the site can be easily attached to the grids. The nearest dwelling is over 500 metres away. Because of the vastness of the site it has been possible to site turbines away from roads and footpaths, well beyond the recommended distances. No problems with electromagnetic interference are expected and all the relevant authorities have been contacted. All the requirements for a satisfactory wind farm, in both an economically viable and environmentally friendly manner are met at Merthyr Common.
13.2 Construction
All necessary construction has been carefully planned to have the least adverse impact on the area. There will be no permanent fencing required and cables will run underground. A plus/minus 50m allowance is requested in the final positioning of turbines and tracks. This is to accommodate localised geographical positions and will be carried out in liaison with the relevant consultant to ensure no unforeseen damage is caused.
13.3 Landscape and Visual Assessment
The existing character of the landscape, coupled with its geographical extent and restricted palette of elements means that, except for those areas of landscape immediately surrounding the site, the significance of the landscape effects arising from the proposed wind farm are generally anticipated to be no more than Low, falling to Slight and then No change, with increasing distance from the site.
The wind turbines at Merthyr Common will have an obvious and directly functional relationship to the nature of the local landscape and the size of the development will respect the scale and composition of the landscape. The Assessment has found that the visual impact on the Common will be minimal in extent and reversible when the wind farm is decommissioned and thereby acceptable in landscape terms. Therefore, the substantial effects will be localised and the proposed development should be acceptable in this location.
13.4 Archaeology
There is a high probability that archaeological sites await discovery in this locality and may be impacted upon by the development. The nature and extent of such sites cannot be predicted with certainty, but the presence of a prehistoric settlement in the southern part of the development area does not make it seem likely that contemporary remains could be found. These in particular would be of high archaeological value and a contingency strategy for such discoveries is required. The development should ensure that adequate measures are put in place to allow a record of any such interests to be made prior to any disturbance, whilst minor redesign of the project, or preservation in situ through micrositing, should be considered as an alternative. Contingencies should be devised to allow for adequate post excavation analysis and publication of particularly important sites or finds.
It is considered that a tactful approach to these issues, combined with adherence to the mitigation strategy, will reduce the impact of the development as a whole to an acceptable minimal level.
13.5 Noise Amenity
The predicted levels and measured background noise levels indicate that for all dwellings neighbouring the proposed development, wind turbine noise will meet the Noise Criteria proposed within ETSU-R-97during the Amenity Daytime period and Night-time Period. Noise levels are predicted to meet the ETSU Criteria at Blaen Morlais for dwellings associated with the development.
13.6 Geology
This examination of the geology, hydrogeology and hydrology of the development site has indicated that the short term construction phase effects of the proposal will be minimal and the long term effects insignificant, conditional upon construction and operation of the development being carried out in accordance with best practice.
13.7 Ecology
Overall the proposed wind farm at Merthyr Tydfil will have only a minor impact on the ecology of the site.
On a global scale the proposed wind farm at Merthyr Tydfil will make a positive contribution to sustainable energy resources thereby helping to reduce the highly significant biodiversity impact associated with global warming.
A mitigation and monitoring strategy has been agreed with the developer, with some of the design stage mitigation already in place. All residual impacts after mitigation will be of a minor or, in the case of newts and reptiles, beneficial significance.
13.8 Land use, Public Safety and Amenity
Merthyr Common is not currently used to its full potential by members of the local community. During construction a maximum of 0.033% of the Common will be unavailable for the public or the Commoners to use, but, once built, access will be reinstated up to the turbine bases. It is hoped that the presence of the turbines will encourage people to visit the site and use the Common more.
13.9 EMI (Electro Magnetic Interference) and Safeguards
No problems with EMI are expected from the erection of the turbines on Merthyr Common. All relevant authorities have been contacted and have agreed the site is appropriate for a wind farm of this size. The MOD and the Civil Aviation Authority have all been contacted and neither objects to the proposals.
13.10 Environmental Benefits
The amount of electricity produced can be used to calculate how much CO 2 will be prevented from entering the atmosphere when compared with a coal power plant. Based on using 2.0 megawatt turbines for a wind farm lifespan of 25 years, this will equate to 560.014 tonnes of carbon dioxide, 6,570 tonnes of sulphur dioxide and 1,971 tonnes of hydrogen oxide. These are very large savings and if larger turbines are used they will be even greater. The effect these savings will have on global warming will be significant.”
Council will note that the Environmental Statement and the Non Technical Summary, as stated at Section 5.1 above, were made available as appropriate to consultees and to third parties.
5.4 Stated Environmental, Economic and other benefits of the proposals subject of Planning application 060573
The following benefits are stated at various sections of the Environmental Statement and are summarised and collated below for convenience.
Global
The applicants state that, if this proposal is allowed, it would contribute to the government’s goal of reducing emissions from fossil fuelled power (coal and gas), thereby reducing CO 2 emissions and global warming.
The Environmental Statement suggests, as stated above, that:-
“The amount of electricity produced can be used to calculate how much CO 2 will be prevented from entering the atmosphere when compared with a coal power plant. Based on using 2.0 megawatt turbines for a wind farm lifespan of 25 years, this will equate to 560.014 tonnes of carbon dioxide, 6,570 tonnes of sulphur dioxide and 1,971 tonnes of hydrogen oxide. These are very large savings and if larger turbines are used they will be even greater. The effect these savings will have on global warming will be significant.”
National
The applicant’s state that the introduction of a renewable energy scheme in the area would contribute to the UK and Wales’ stated aim of providing a suitable energy mix, a substantial part of which must rely in future on increasing amounts of electricity generated by off and on shore wind farms.
Local
This section of the Environmental Statement states:-
“12.1 Economic Benefits
12.1.1 Construction
…It is hoped that local haulage companies will be used to transport the steel and concrete required for the turbine foundations. Locally sourced materials will be used wherever possible.
12.1.2 Maintenance
The operation of the wind farm will provide employment for two full time engineers/fitters.
12.2.3 Local Context
The amount of electricity the turbines will produce can be calculated using a simple sum using the 2.0 megawatt machines as an example. Annually, turbines produce approximately 30% of their total possible output, this is due to changes in seasons throughout the year and the fact that wind is not constant. Therefore the actual output of the turbines will be 6 megawatts an hour. This can be multiplied by 24 to give the amount produced per day, thereby calculating the number of homes the wind farm can supply. Based on the average house using 12 KW a day, if we install 2.0 megawatt turbines it will supply 6,000 homes with electricity. If 12.3 megawatt machines are installed, 7,500 homes can be supplied with electricity.”
5.5 Community Benefits/Planning Gain Obligations
Part of the pre and post application negotiations with regard to this planning application centred on planning contributions and obligations, provision for which is set out in Sec 106 of the 1990 Town and Country Planning Act. The negotiations are intended to form the basis of a commitment (a Sec 106 Agreement) whereby the applicants undertook to make payments to the Council, details of which are set out below.
The applicants would pay the sum of £40,000 per annum (index linked) each year for 25 years. It would be distributed equally as follows:-
• half of the annual sum would be paid to the youth of the Borough (persons under 21 years for specific projects); • the other half would contribute to biodiversity/environmental projects e.g. practical recycling educational projects e.g. recycling; educational; habitat management, research and monitoring on bird deaths and strikes from wind turbines.
The money paid would be administered by a trust comprising 5 representatives, one from the applicant company, one from the Council and three from persons with relevant experience.
The parties to this Agreement would be entered into by the following:- the applicants, Dowlais Top Investments and the Council.
Council will note that:-
(a) these payments will follow the issue of any grant of planning permission;
(b) the issue of a planning permission will be contingent upon the completion and signing of the Sec 106 Agreement and the latter will only become fully binding when the permission is issued; and
(c) as advised by Planning Policy (Wales): “Planning obligations should only be sought where they are necessary to make a proposal acceptable in land use planning terms. Planning permission may not be bought nor sold and negotiations should be conducted in a way that is seen to be fair, open and reasonable. Unacceptable development should never be allowed because of unrelated benefits. Acceptable development should never be refused simply because an applicant is unwilling to offer such benefits…”.
In addition to the above, the applicants would be required to enter into separate agreements under Secs 38 and 278 of the Highways Act and consents under the 1925 Law of Property Act.
(Also refer to extracts from 7.9 to 7.10 of the Energy Routemap, quoted at Sec 8.1.18 of this report.)
6.0 PUBLICITY
6.1 Statutory Publicity
The following means of publicising this planning application were employed, which accord with the requirements of Article 8(4) of the 1995 Town and Country Planning General Development (Procedure) Order:
(a) Site Notices – 20 site notices were posted in the locality on the 10 th November 2006: ten notices were posted in Pant/Caeracca; five posted at Pengarnddu and the remaining five at Penywern, Dowlais and Caeharris.
(b) Local Press Advertisement. A statutory press notice appeared in the locally circulating newspaper on Thursday 16 th November 2006.
(c) On 19 th November 2006, a notification letter was sent to the owner/occupier of Blaenmorlais Farm.
Both site and local press notices described the proposal and the location and made reference to the fact that the application was accompanied by an Environmental Statement. It invited anyone interested to inspect copies of the application, the plans and other documents submitted at the Town Planning Division. Furthermore, it advised that interested parties could obtain copies of the Environmental Statement, while stocks last, at an agreed charge. Copies of the Non Technical Summary were available free of charge, on request.
6.1.1 Further Information
The further information, in the form of supplementary surveys and reports referred to at Sec 5.1 above, was publicised in accordance with the requirements of Reg 19 of the 1999 Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment)(England and Wales) Regulations, by means of a statutory notice in the local press on Thursday 31 st January 2008.
Also, the following consultees were sent copies of the further information:- RSPB; Environment Agency; CCW and the Wildlife Trust of South and West Wales. (Sec 7.2 of this report refers).
6.2 Third Party Responses
6.2.1 On 12 th December 2006 a petition against the proposal was received in the Town Planning Division, signed by 629 persons, four of whom (0.6%) live outside the Borough. The signatories were primarily resident within Pant and those areas closest to the application site.
Each signature/address was verified for authenticity; no “spoils” were noted.
The title on the petition read: “If you object to the location regarding the site of the wind farm, then please sign petition and give your reasons why”
The petition allowed for the signatory to enter a name, address, telephone number and reasons for objection. The “reasons” section allowed for only summary comments, the most repeated of which are quoted below:-
“devaluation of property”;
“too close to house/village”;
“visual impact (unsightly, eyesore, blot on landscape)”;
“health hazard”;
“noise”;
“not cost effective (not viable, no benefit, waste of money)”;
“vibrations”;
“spoil environment (impact on landscape)”;
“spoilt countryside”;
“don’t want it”.
6.2.2 Between 27 th November and 13 th December 2006, 24 individual written representations of objection were received, including e-mails. One, though addressed to the Brecon Beacons National Park Authority, was forwarded by that authority to this Council’s Town Planning Division.
Each letter/e-mail was acknowledged within three working days, except one, which whilst signed, did not include an address, although the writer referred to him/herself as a resident of Brecon Rise.
Thus of the 24 written representations, 21 were received from residents of Pant, primarily from Hawthorns and Brecon Rise, but also Pantyscallog, Pant Cad Ifor and Caeracca. One letter was received from the proprietor of a business in Pant, one from a resident of Brecon Road. Another was from a resident of Narberth, Pembrokeshire representing an Environmental Information Service. This writer referred to the objection letter from the Council for the Preservation of Rural Wales (CPRW), with regard to the previously refused application at this site (App. No. 040361) and enclosed an extract from an Inspector’s planning decision letter on an appeal for four turbines north of Pontardawe. The objector suggested similarities between the two proposals. (The appeal at Pontardawe was dismissed on 28 th September 2006.)
The grounds of objection from residents are randomly summarised below.
Not surprisingly the concerns expressed below echo those of the petitioners cited at 6.2.1 above and those objections submitted with regard to the previously refused application (No. 040361).
• Noise (from turbine rotor blades, frequency vibration during operation and during construction work);
• Visual Impact (accentuated by the exposed open moorland location of the application site, alongside the Brecon Beacons National Park and in an area of landscape protection);
• Impact on Tourism Concern expressed that the proposal, if allowed, would adversely impact upon the tourism potential of the area. Reference is made to the 70,000 visitors to the Brecon Mountain Railway and the numerous other visitors attracted to the area for a variety of countryside pursuits, including walking, fishing, sailing, horseriding. The concern is that the impact on the local tourism economy at this important gateway location to the National Park will more than outweigh any perceived or stated economic benefit produced as the result of the current application.
• Proximity Residents are concerned that the proposal is still too close to settlements. Other objectors are concerned that the current proposal still lies too close to the Brecon Beacons National Park. (Whilst the proposals involve fewer turbines, the application site boundary remains as with the previously refused application.
• Devaluation of Property Residents expressed concern that the development would have a negative impact upon their house values.
• Residential Amenity . Residents are concerned that the proposal would adversely impact on their quality of life, largely because the application site stands within open moorland, currently enjoyed by walkers and their families, not only from outside the Borough or the adjoining settlements, but those living within them.
• Health Impact This is a repeated concern of objectors for a variety of reasons, who largely refer to the stress related impact from the development, if allowed.
• Danger Concern is expressed that the turbines, due to their height and location, could present a danger to low flying aircraft, as well as to horses at the nearby Blean Morlais Riding School, with a consequential impact on any riders.
• Efficiency Of Wind Turbines As An Alternative Energy Supply The purported environmental advantages of wind turbines to provide a renewable energy source are questioned by several objectors. In particular, objectors point to the relatively low electricity generated by wind turbines over a given period due to the variable wind speed and the high use of energy to produce, construct and erect the units, in particular the large amount of concrete used in their installation.
This variable amount of available wind power is known as the “load factor”, which is estimated at 30% and 40% (of potential or installed output) for on and off shore facilities respectively (WAG “Renewable Energy Route Map for Wales – 2008 – Sec 8.1.18 of this report refers).
The objectors state that these factors should be taken into account and weighed against the direct and indirect economic and other perceived disadvantages cited by the objectors against the planning application.
• Economic Benefits Objectors perceive little direct or indirect economic benefits deriving from this planning application, especially when assessed alongside the perceived opportunity costs i.e. loss of tourism revenue and environmental disbenefits.
• Ecological Impact Concerns are expressed by objectors regarding loss of flora/fauna and potential harm to birdlife.
• Comparison between previously refused and currently revised schemes Objectors perceive little gain as a consequence of the revised scheme, when compared with the perceived disadvantages. Objectors suggest that, whilst the number of units will be fewer, the environmental and other disadvantages would remain the same, with no real benefit to the scheme overall.
• Precedent Objectors are concerned that, if allowed, the development would be extended over time or surface area by an increased number of units.
• Cumulative Impact Objectors state that the impact of this scheme must also be viewed cumulatively, alongside the other developments in the vicinity with which they expressed concern: Ffos-y-Fran Land Reclamation/Opencast Scheme; Trecatti Landfill Site and St Merryn Meat Processing Plant. Some objectors also refer to the visual impact of the LNG tanks at the north western side of the valley (“Baverstocks”) in a similarly elevated position as the proposed wind farm.
• Alternatives Some objectors state that consideration has not been properly given to viable alternatives to wind farms e.g. tidal waves wave power, hydro-electric power, clean coal technology and nuclear power.
• Commoners’ Concerns As before with regard to the previously refused planning application the Commoners have expressed concerns.
As with the previous application, Council will note that the Commoners were consulted as a body and reference is made to this at the following section of this report. However, it is also acknowledged that the Commoners individually reside within the communities, the majority of whom by definition spend more time than most on the application site and surrounding upland moorland area.
The Commoners’ concerns are set out below in summary form. Concern is expressed that the wind farm will:-
• be detrimental to the amenities of the area; • represent an industrial encroachment into the countryside; • adversely affect visual amenity; • encourage fly tipping and increased use by off road vehicles and trial bikes as a result of the associated access roads leading to a degradation of grazing land; • disturb grazing stock with consequential effects on the livelihood of farmers; • cause disturbance to farm residents due to turbine noise and unauthorised use of service roads by motor vehicles; • affect the path of migrating birds; and • breach the EU Convention on Human Rights.
The specific comments of the written objections better express their concerns than the summary lists above. Set out below are a few examples, quoted verbatim.
“… The second rape of the fair country …”;
“… We respectfully suggest that the desecration of our landscape to provide an inefficient and unreliable source of energy will create only problems and not provide a solution to the Government’s targets regarding renewable resources ...”;
One writer described the turbines as: “… foreign bodies piercing the sky line …” and “… monstrous edifices ...”;
“… The objections we raised in respect of the initial planning application, particularly in respect of health, safety and welfare remain equally pertinent ...”;
One writer described the revised submission of the current planning application as: “… Demonstrably a determination to overlook the views and feelings of the vast majority of the local community ….”;
“… In the long term more revenue will be produced from taking advantage of our heritage and natural amenities than by desecrating our landscape with huge industrial monstrosities ...”;
“… What has changed? The reasons for refusal remain the same ...”; and
“… The removal of four turbines has not in my respectful opinion addressed the reasons for refusal of the previous planning application ...”.
6.2.3 By way of reference/comparison the objections submitted by residents and Commoners to the planning application previously refused by Council (040361) are summarised below:-
• property values; • visual impact (especially loss of natural beauty); • effect of tourism (as a consequence of the above); • noise; • loss of grazing rights on the Common; • loss of recreation rights on the Common; • disturbance to livestock; • industrialisation encroaching into countryside; • detrimental impact upon residential amenity; • danger to health; (“flashing” from rotor blades, ice, distraction to road users, pony trekkers and low flying aircraft); • detrimental to wildlife/ecology especially migrating birds; • the development and especially the creation of interconnected access roads to service the turbines would encourage and allow off-road vehicles, trial bikes and fly tippers into the area to the detriment of livestock and the farming community; • inefficient energy production (low output outweighed by loss of natural beauty, more CO 2 produced in the construction of the project than would be saved; CO 2 reduction is significant in the global context); • concern at cash payment to Commoners; objection based on sections of Human Rights Act; and • application should have been refused or repositioned further away from present location to a more distant one, possibly within the Caerphilly County Borough Council area.
Council will also note that two further objection letters were submitted on 21 st and 26 th September 2007. These objections raised no additional issues than those raised above.
6.2.4 With regard to the previous planning application (040361), 25 pro forma letters of support were received. They referred to the effect of climate change and the need for a clean energy future and specifically referred to potential savings of 46,201 tonnes of carbon dioxide from entering the atmosphere each year of the life of the wind farm, if allowed.
Council will note that this calculation was based on nine turbines, not five as currently proposed. Accordingly, Council is reminded that it is the current application which falls for determination.
6.2.5 In response to publication of the further information in January 2008 (Secs 5.1 and 6.1.1 of this report refers), 13 further letters of objection were received, from residents of: The Hawthorns and Brecon Rise (8); Pant (2); Pant-cad-Ivor (1); Caeharris (1) and The Walk (1).
No new issues were raised; most objectors reiterated the concerns set out at Secs 6.2.1 – 4 of this report.
The letters were written between 4 th and 19 th February 2008.
6.2.6 On 3 rd September 2008, a letter of support was received from a resident of Ebbw Vale.
The writer registered her support for the application, stating she did not consider the proposal to be an eyesore nor adversely affecting the National Park.
The writer stated that wind generated power was preferable to nuclear and the proposal would provide capital investment and would assist in meeting national and international renewable energy obligations.
6.2.7 Council will record that, on 13 th November 2008, two further letters of objection were received from two residents of Pant, again reiterating the above stated causes of concern.
6.2.8 The submitted representations at Secs 6.2.1 to 6.2.7 above are assessed at Section 9 of this report.
7.0 CONSULTATIONS AND RESPONSES
The following were consulted in accordance with the provisions of Article 10 of the Town and Country Planning General Development (Procedure) Order and Annex B of Circular 25/95. Each consultee received a copy of the application form and Non- Technical Summary; several consultees, where considered appropriate, were given copies of the full Environmental Statement.
The consultee responses are summarised below.
7.1 Internal Consultees
7.1.1 Head of Engineering – no objections . The following “Informatives” were attached to the initial consultation response:
a) Every attempt should be made to ensure that stream catchment areas are not altered.
b) A permanent maintenance schedule should be instigated to ensure all water courses are cleaned and repaired.
The Head of Engineering was also consulted on the access track details submitted by the applicant in August 2008.
Whilst offering no objection in principle to the proposed turbines and access tracks, he indicated more information was required, including points of discharge to watercourses within the same catchment areas, in order to additional/accelerated surface water run off to surrounding areas. He indicated that, in the event that planning permission is granted, suitably worded conditions would need to be imposed to address his comments adequately.
7.1.2 Head of Public Health – offered detailed comments . “The Noise Assessment indicates that, during the night time period of 11 p.m. – 7 a.m., some locations when downwind of the site, wind farm noise may be clearly audible outside the property. However, saying this predicted internal noise levels are such that the noise from the turbines should not cause sleep disturbance.
Therefore, I would recommend the following conditions be applied to any consent granted to minimise the effects of noise on the community.
1. Wind generators shall not commence productive operation at a wind speed of less than 3 metres per second at hub height, unless otherwise agreed by the Local Planning Authority (LPA).
2. The noise emitted from the wind turbine generators as heard at any dwelling shall not be irregular enough to attract attention, contain distinguishable, discrete, continuous notes or distinct impulses, such as to cause a nuisance to the occupiers of any dwellings beyond a distance of 400 metres from any of the wind turbine generators.
3. All best practicable means shall be employed to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority in order to prevent and minimise the creation of any nuisance by noise emission during the erection, operation and use of the wind turbine generators. (Practicable means shall have the meaning given to it by the Environmental Protection Act 1990).
4. The level of noise emissions resulting from the combined effect of the wind turbine generators as measured at any dwelling existing at the date of this permission beyond the distance of 700 metres from any of the turbines shall not exceed 5dBL(A)90 above background sound pressure levels.
Existing LA90 10 minute day time noise levels with the on-site measured wind speed of 3-4m/sec at hub height.
Taff Fechan Cottages 40dBA Pant Cad Ivor 32dBA Nant Morlais 37dBA Blaen Morlais 35dBA Twyn yr Arain 32.dBA
Existing LA90 10 minute night time noise levels with the on-site measured wind speed of 3-4m/sec at hub height
Taff Fechan Cottages 40dBA Pant Cad Ivor 27dBA Nant Morlais 31dBA Blaen Morlais 32dBA Twyn yr Arain 32.5dBA
5. The level of noise emissions referred to at 4 above shall be measured in accordance with a method to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority and as follows.
6. The noise level shall be measured 1.2 metres above ground level, 3.6 metres from any wall, hedge or reflective surface using a precision grade sound level meter of type 1 with a ½” microphone.
7. The noise measurement may be carried out only when all wind turbine generators are operating.
8. The level of noise emitted by the combined effect of the wind generators shall be demonstrated at the request of the Local Planning Authority on commissioning and thereafter on the request of the Local Planning Authority.
9. If the noise emissions resulting from the wind farm as measured at residential property referred to in Condition 4 contains a distinguishable tonal character, the noise limit specified in Conditions 4 and 5 shall be reduced by 5dB. Tonal noise shall be measured for audibility using the methodology described in BS7135. Part 1 Annex D.”
7.1.3 Head of Estates – no comment .
7.1.4 Head of Legal Services – The Town Planning Solicitor offered specific advice in connection with Section 106 Agreement (at Sec 5.5 of this report).
7.1.5 Town Planning Division Team Leader (Policy & Implementation) – offered policy advice .
The Team Leader advised on the adopted development and emerging plans and other policies relevant to the consideration of this planning application. The comments are considered at Section 8 of this report.
7.1.6 Town Planning Division Countryside Officer – objects .
The Division’s Countryside Officer, a principal internal consultee with regard to this application, offered the following comments, largely quoted verbatim below.
“Summary
I object to the revised Bheara Wind farm (Pengarnddu, Dowlais) planning application on the basis that the original concerns regarding the impact of the development on the hydrology have not been adequately met and that the requested wildlife surveys do not sufficiently alleviate the original concerns on the scale of the impact of the development on local wildlife.
Detail
• Floating track designs and case examples where such designs have been used successfully elsewhere have not been received as agreed at a meeting on the 27 th February 2007 and confirmed in writing on 13 th March 2007. Change in the local hydrological regime is of greatest significance to wildlife due to the ecological sensitivity of the site and is the matter which could have the most long- lasting and significant effects of any impact on local habitats and species. This is confirmed by The Breeding Bird Survey (November 2007), by Wild Frontier Ecology which states that alterations to the hydrology could, and likely would, negatively impact watercourses, wet modified bog, wet acid grassland and acid flush. Unmitigated, there could be significant site or local impacts to habitats and their dependent breeding bird communities.
• No other information regarding the hydrological impact of the development on the site has been provided since the original application, despite the issue having been identified as a reason for refusal of permission.
[Council will note, as stated at Sec 5.1 of this report that, on 17 th August 2008, the applicants submitted a drawing indicating access track construction and drainage details. It was considered this detail did not amount to significant additional information, further than that submitted with the previous application.]
• Further ecological information on reptiles has not been provided as agreed at a meeting on the 27 th February 2007 and confirmed in writing on 13 th March 2007.
• With regard to the Survey for the Presence of Bats (November 2007), it is accepted that there will be an acceptable, minimal, direct impact upon bats as a result of the proposed development. There is a potential significant indirect impact upon bats relating to changes in hydrology (not addressed satisfactorily to date).
• With regard to the Breeding Birds Survey (November 2007), it is accepted that there will be slight negative direct impacts to breeding birds within proximity of the turbines and access routes, assuming that mitigation measures, particularly those relating to construction timing, are accepted. There is a strong likelihood of significant indirect impacts upon a wide number of breeding birds of conservation concern and their habitats as a result of changes in hydrology (not addressed satisfactorily to date).
• With regard to the Vantage Point Bird Survey (November 2007) the guidance, as agreed at a meeting on the 27 th February 2007 and confirmed in writing on 13 th March 2007, was not adhered to. The Best Practice Guidance (Onshore Wind Farm Avian Impact Assessment; Scottish Natural Heritage 2005) was quoted but not adhered to in the following ways:
Section 6.3; Duration Of Survey, Point 49 “The recommended minimum is that 36 hours of watches should be conducted at each VP for each season (breeding, non- breeding, migratory)”.
Only the summer, breeding season was surveyed. The 33 hours of surveillance undertaken is deemed acceptable, despite being below the recommended minimum in the document quoted. No winter (non-breeding, migratory) season was surveyed. It is a distinct possibility that birds do use the area during other seasons for migration (and stop over) and feeding, particularly as there are wet areas in the immediate vicinity.
Conclusion: Concerns regarding the impacts of the proposed wind farm on flying birds cannot be alleviated. Advice: Follow the Guidelines quoted, focusing on the above issues and including Section 6.10: Wintering and Migratory Waterfowl, notably Geese and Swans. Justify any deviations from the Guidance or options taken.
6.5.3; VP Watches, Point 63 “Observations should be spread throughout the day, between dawn and dusk”.
A reasonable spread was achieved with the exception of dusk. No surveys even approaching dusk were recorded, the closest being 1700hrs on 12 th June 2007 which is several hours off dusk. There is a distinct possibility that some bird species not recorded may use the area at dusk.
Conclusion: Concerns regarding the impacts of the proposed wind farm on flying birds cannot be alleviated.
Advice: Follow the Guidelines quoted, focussing on the above issues, notably carry out a minimum 1, preferably 2, dusk surveys in each season.”
The Countryside Officer also commented that, if planning consent is granted, the following should be the subject of specific planning conditions:-
• Hydrological Monitoring Scheme; during & post construction; • Wildlife Monitoring Scheme; post construction; and • Habitat Management Plan; post construction for the duration of the scheme with associated costs (possibly part of a Section 106 Agreement).
7.1.7 Town Planning Division Landscape Architect – objects .
The Division’s Landscape Architect, a principal internal consultee with regard to the application, expressed the following concerns regarding the Environmental Statement accompanying the current planning application.
The officer’s comments are largely quoted verbatim below.
“This application follows an earlier submission (P/04/361) for nine wind turbines situated on Merthyr Common. The current proposal is to erect five turbines. The principal changes in the accompanying Environmental Statement are the reworking of the Landscape and Visual Assessment particularly in relation to the Zones of Visual Influence. Observations are therefore based on the revised Environmental Statement.
Primary Areas Of Concern
The principal areas of concern are the effect of the development on
• Landscape resource • Perception of the landscape • Visual amenity
The Zone of Visual Influence (ZVI) for the purpose of the assessment is a 15km area around the site.
The European Landscape Convention, which the UK signed in February 2006 came into force on 3 rd March 2007 requires Governments to conserve and enhance all landscapes, not just special or designated landscapes.
Landscape And Visual Assessment
The Study Area
• The Environmental Statement describes the development site in the context of urban fringe; however 95% of the site is undeveloped and has no ‘urban fringe’ character. • Reference is made to vertical elements (telegraph poles and electricity pylons) as providing visual impact and impact upon perceived landscape character; however these are concentrated towards the lower (southern) parts of the site and are not visible from the bulk of the site. • The description of development site plays down the quality of the landscape as defined by the development boundary and refers to past extractive industries as a negative influence on the site: however these features are of significant historical importance as evidenced through landscape characterization expressed through Landmap.
Landmap
The Environmental Statement makes use of the Landscape Character Guidance 2002 in the assessment of the impact of the development on the landscape. This methodology is a generally accepted means to assess the impact of development on landscape character. However Landmap methodology …. gives an opportunity to examine the landscape in a more objective manner.” (Refer also to Sec 8.4.1 of this report).
The WAG acknowledges Landmap is an important information resource upon which local planning authorities can draw in making the landscape assessments needed to inform decision making in this field.
“Each method offers a different approach to placing a value on the quality of the landscape. In the Environmental Statement only limited reference is made to LANDMAP methodology and there is generally a failure to fully comprehend local significance.
Landmap methodology scores the quality of the landscape based on five layers:- Visual and Sensory; Geology / Earth Science; Biodiversity; History/Archaeology and Cultural Associations.
For the purpose of assessment the application site scores as follows:
Visual and Sensory - Moderate (Locally important ) Geology / Earth Science - Moderate (Locally important) Biodiversity - High History and Archaeology - Moderate and High Cultural Associations - Outstanding and High
From the above score criteria it is clear that the application site is of significant cultural importance while also scoring high in biodiversity and historical areas. Even the moderate score given to the visual and sensory layer indicates that it is a landscape valued by local people.
The Environmental Statement fails to acknowledge the significance of the local landscape as expressed through Landmap.
Direct Physical Impact On The Landscape
Construction will involve:
• several kilometres of access track; • importation of 1267 cubic metres of concrete (spread over 300 square metres; • 23.5 tonnes of steelwork, • the construction of a switch station building; and • culverts beneath access roads as integral permanent features for the life of the site (25 years). Of particular concern is the integrity of the natural water courses that feed the historical landscape which will be disrupted by access roads and culverts The developers have failed to clarify the impact of the development on the integrity of the natural watercourses.
There is a lack of evidence of the method of disposal of excavated materials and the effect of the mass concrete on the pH balance of the soil.
Visual Impact Of The Development Through Viewpoints
Conclusions cannot be drawn between the visual impact of this reduced scheme submitted in the 2006 (application (06/0573) and the earlier application 2004 (04/0361).
Primarily; this is due to the presentation of the assessment which differs substantially between the two Environmental Statements.
It can however be determined that a further single viewpoint has been added at Baverstocks Hotel (VPX4).
Assessment of the qualitative visual effects of the development on principal residential areas of Pant (VP1) Gellideg (VP4 ) Heolgerrig (VP5) Galon Uchaf (VPX2) and Dowlais Top (VPX3) are revealing:
Pant (VP1) Slightly adverse Gellideg (VP4) Slightly adverse Heolgerrig (VP5) Neutral Galon Uchaf (VPX2) Neutral Dowlais Top (VPX3) Sightly adverse
An additional (Rhymney)VP7, which falls outside the LPA boundary, scores slightly adverse.
Viewpoints scoring slightly adverse illustrate those areas visually affected adversely by the proposed development. The viewpoints of Pant, Gellideg and Dowlais Top are most significantly affected. It can be concluded that these areas would receive the highest visual impact from the proposed development within the County Borough are notably all residential.
Context Of The Site In The Historic Landscape
The key historic landscape characteristics contained within the site boundary are common land; water management features and minor industrial extractive industries.
The application site falls within Merthyr Tydfil Landscape of Outstanding Historic Interest”.
[“The Register of Landscapes” comprises a series of publications produced between January 1998 and February 2001, by CCW, CADW and ICOMOS, the International Council on Monuments and Sites.
It covers the following:-
PART 1.0 – Historic Parks and Gardens in Wales PART 2.1 - Landscapes of Outstanding Historic Interest in Wales PART 2.2 – Landscapes of Special Historic Interest in Wales
It is Volume 2.1 which is of relevance in this report. This volume, as with the remaining volumes has no statutory designation. The authors of the Register emphasized that it does not impose statutory controls nor are the areas on it “designated”. Their role is an advisory one. The Register provides authoritative information which may be used by organizations, land owners, farmers, educationalists and any one with an interest in the Welsh Landscape.
It is widely used to raise awareness of the historic significance and importance of the Welsh environment, allowing consideration of the historic landscape to be given equal weight alongside the more traditional and long established issues of nature conservation, wildlife protection and scenic amenities. Planning authorities are asked to take information on the Register into account in preparing development plans and in considering the implications of developments which are of such a scale that they have a more than local impact of an area on the Register.
The status and role of the Register and information therein is considered to be a material planning consideration.
Part 2.1 of the Register of Landscapes provides awareness of the initial selection of the most important historic areas in Wales to aid their protection and conservation. The northern half of the Borough is included in the Register, in a line running in a NE to SW direction, crossing the valley floor at a point between the division of Pentrebach and Troedyrhiw. It includes some 4,850 hectares, some 43% of the surface area of the Borough.
Of the 36 Welsh landscapes of outstanding historic interest within the Register, only two are of the industrial coalfield communities – Merthyr Tydfil and Bleanavon.]
“Being an upland development; Gelli-gaer Common (Landscape of Special Historic Interest) (XVP1) despite receiving a Neutral Visual Impact Score receives cumulative visual intrusions with the existing pylon structures. The collective visual assessment fails to acknowledge the relationship between Merthyr Common and the Gelli-gaer Common both of which are Landscapes of Historic Interest In Wales.
Part 2 of the Register of Landscapes, Parks and Gardens of Special Historic Interest in Wales lists Cyfarthfa Castle and Park as being of importance although the potential visible impact has not been fully explored and it is unclear the visual effect the development will have on this particular landscape if any.
Brecon Beacons National Park
The application site forms part of the southern backdrop to the Park. Interruption of the continuous view exhibited by VPs 2, 11, 12 particularly illustrate this point. The case is put forward for the diminishing effect of the turbines from the distant viewpoints; however in the context of the wider landscape these would continue to register as man made intrusions, particularly owing to the rotating nature of the blades.
Objections
The following are the principal objections to this development:
1. The development site falls within the Register of Landscapes of Outstanding Historic Interest in Wales. The site formed a part of the hinterland of industrial raw materials (predominantly water resources) which fed that industrial landscape. As such the net impact of the development will be to make a permanent incursion that will impinge upon the availability of the landscape for interpretation.
2. The development affects the perception of landscape character as viewed from within the Brecon Beacons National Park and interrupts an otherwise contiguous view across the mountain tops far beyond the National Park Boundary.
3. The development physically affects the availability of interpretative potential and sense of place of the adjacent associated historic landscape of Gelligaer Common.
4. The Environmental Assessment has failed to recognise the local significance of the site as expressed through the Landmap assessment.
5. The development adversely impacts on the views of the residential areas of Pant, Gellideg and Dowlais Top.”
The Town Planning Division’s Landscape Architect has also expressed the following concerns regarding the submitted Environmental Statement.
• “The Environmental Statement understates the importance of the site falling within the register of Landscapes of Historic Interest in Wales and the impact the development will have on this landscape register together with that of adjacent historic landscapes. • The reference to Landmap assessment within the Environmental Statement is selective. The aspect layers having been separated out; the interpretation fails to recognize the cumulative effect of consistently high scoring criteria across the site. • The Environmental Statement fails to demonstrate the material change to the physical landscape; particularly watercourses, Ph values and flora as a result of access construction and culverts. The Environmental Statement requires clarification over the number of access roads that are to be constructed. Turbines T6, T7, and T8 continue to be referred to in the statement. • The Environmental statement fails to include Cyfarthfa Park (Register of Historic Parks and Gardens in Wales) among the Historic Parks or Gardens in Fig 4.1 which falls within the 5km radius of the site. The visual impact of the development on Cyfarthfa Park has not been specifically assessed. • The Environmental Statement contains proposals for the switch station which do not reflect the local vernacular of upland location or take account of the underlying geology or topography”.
7.2 External Consultees
7.2.1 Cadw (Welsh Historic Monuments) – does not object .
Cadw, the Welsh Assembly Government’s executive agency, has responsibility for protecting, conserving and promoting an appreciation of the historic environment of Wales.
Amongst other things Cadw offered the following comments, quoted verbatim below.
“This resubmitted proposal reduces the number of turbines included in the earlier application. As identified in Cadw’s response to the earlier application the principal issue here is the siting of this development within the registered landscape of Merthyr Tydfil. An ASIDOHL has been carried out as part of the Environmental Statement for this new proposal and has concluded that the impact of the development would be slight. Alongside this process there is also a table of predicted impacts on individual components of the historic landscape, notably elements of the Dowlais Free Drainage System and transport systems are also associated with the industrial history of the area. Though these all contribute to the network of features which give character to the historic landscape, Cadw accepts the conclusions of this assessment that the proposal is limited in its impact. We welcome that this assessment of impact has also been used to inform a mitigation strategy. Cadw therefore does not consider that this application raises any significant new concerns.
These views are provided without prejudice to the Welsh Assembly Government’s consideration of the matter should it come before it formally for determination.”
7.2.2 Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) – no response .
7.2.3 Campaign for the Protection of Rural Wales (CPRW) – no response .
7.2.4 Countryside Council for Wales (CCW) – objects .
In discharging its functions under Section 13 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, CCW champions the environment and landscapes of Wales and its coastal waters as sources of natural and cultural riches, as a foundation for economic and social activity and as a place for learning and leisure opportunities. CCW aims to make the environment a valued part of everyone’s life in Wales.
CCW is the Welsh Assembly Government’s independent advisor on countryside and wildlife issues in Wales. It has responsibilities for wildlife conservation, for landscape and conservation for promoting enjoyment of the countryside and for encouraging public understanding.
7.2.4.1 CCW offered the following detailed comments in its initial response on 4 th April 2007:-
“CCW objects to the proposed development and its associated infrastructure and recommends that the application should be refused because:
1. It will have a significant adverse impact on the landscape quality and visual amenity of the area and the views into and out of the Brecon Beacons National Park. 2. The proposed medium sized wind farm is sited in an area of open countryside contrary to the guidance contained in the Ministerial Interim Planning Policy Statement 01 2000 and TAN 8 “Planning for Renewable Energy” which state that medium sized wind farms may be appropriate at urban brownfield sites. 3. It will have an adverse impact on the views from Gelligaer Common Landscape of Special Historic Interest, particularly when considered in the context of the Bronze Age Summit Cairn at Cairn Penbugail. 4. The proposal is therefore contrary to Structure Plan Policies EV4, EV10 and U1, Local Plan Policies NH1 and RU1, Planning Policy Wales (2002) and the Ministerial Interim Planning Statement on Renewable Energy (July 2005).
Currently the information provided in the Environmental Statement is inadequate to fully assess the impact of the proposed development on birds, bats and reptiles. Therefore, if your Authority is minded to approve this scheme and grant planning permission, in order that all impacts can be fully assessed, further details and survey work on birds, bats and reptiles will be required prior to the formal determination of the application. Detailed requirements are set out in Annex 1” (of the CCW response letter). “Additionally consideration should also be given to securing a Section 106 Agreement with the applicant requiring a contribution towards research and monitoring on bird deaths and strikes from wind turbines that is proposed to be undertaken by the Welsh Kite Trust. …”
[It will be noted from Section 7.1.6 of this report that this additional information was formally requested by the Countryside Officer of the Town Planning Division.]
7.2.4.2 CCW were consulted with regard to the further information (ecological studies) referred to at Secs 5.1 and 6.1.1 of this report and issued a further response on 18 th March 2008.
In summary, CCW expressed concerns regarding the survey work undertaken to date and the conclusions drawn with regard to the impacts of the scheme upon breeding birds. Whilst CCW agreed with the conclusions of the report that the proposals would not have a significant impact on bats, it questioned the validity of the results of the Breeding Birds Survey and CCW disagreed that the Vantage Point Bird Survey had been appropriately conducted.
Therefore, CCW maintained its objection to the proposal until or unless the applicants submitted information to assuage their concerns.
7.2.4.3 On 25 th September 2008 CCW responded to the further consultation with regard to the access track construction and drainage plan referred to at Sec 5.1. CCW’s objection remains.
7.2.5 Department of Trade & Industry – no response .
7.2.6 Environment Agency, – does not object , (but has specific comments on the hydrology and the potential impact of the development upon habitats.)
7.2.6.1 The Environment Agency commented initially on 8 th December 2006 on the following: flood risk; ground water; biodiversity. In connection with biodiversity, the Environment Agency commented that turbine and crane pads may impact on the hydrology of the site and in particular cause the destruction and/or desiccation of the marshy grasslands, acid grasslands and wet modified bogs. It advised that the applicant should ensure that hydrological impacts on these habitats are avoided or minimised. Any unavoidable impacts must be mitigated. It recommended that, if consent is granted, a condition be imposed requiring submission of a detailed Habitat Management Plan prior to permission being granted to ensure that the site is managed appropriately to maximise its value for wildlife post construction and that adequate funding should be in place to secure this can be implemented.
7.2.6.2 The Environment Agency were consulted with regard to the further information (ecological studies) referred to at Secs 5.1 and 6.1.1 of this report.
The Environment Agency on 23 rd January 2008 deemed itself satisfied with the reports and offered no objection to the proposal, though reiterated its previous recommendations with regard to the hydrological impact of the access tracks and the need to reduce the potential impact of the proposals upon the habitats.
7.2.6.3 On 30 th September 2008 the EA responded to the further consultation with regard to the access track construction and drainage plan referred to at Sec 5.1 of this report and reiterated its recommendations.
7.2.7 Friends of the Earth – no response .
7.2.8 Gelligaer Commoners – objects [for the reasons set out at Sec. 6.2.3 of this report].
7.2.9 Glamorgan Gwent Archaeological Trust (GGAT) – does not object .
GGAT (Curatorial Division) provides archaeological advice to the 12 unitary planning authorities in South East Wales.
The Trust offered the following comments: • Information on the archaeological resource was obtained before the layout of the wind farm proposed in the original planning application was finalised. This led to the turbine bases being sited outside the three identified archaeological areas and consequently there is no direct impact on any known archaeological site. • Further work to assess the impact of the development on the historic landscape concluded that the impact on the Merthyr Tydfil Landscape of Outstanding Historic Importance was slight, whilst the impact on the Gelligaer Common Landscape of Special Historic Importance and the East Fforest Fawr Landscape of Special Historic Importance would be very slight. • The submission of a previous application for a wind farm indicates that a number of the turbines have since been removed. The positions of the remaining turbines are not located on any known archaeological site.
The Trust recommends that the following condition should be imposed in the event that planning consent is granted, in accordance with advice contained in Welsh Office Circular 60/96 “Planning and the Historic Environment – Archaeology”. “No development should take place until the applicant or their agents or successors in title have` secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted by the applicant and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: to identify and record any features of archaeological interest discovered during the works, in order to mitigate the impact of the works on the archaeological resource.”
7.2.10 Health & Safety Executive – no adverse comment . HSE referred to the need to consult with other agencies e.g. Transco.
7.2.11 Ministry of Defence – no response .
7.2.12 OFcom – responded on numerous licensed operator links within the vicinity and commented that some links may be affected, others may not.
7.2.13 O2 – no immediate concerns .
7.2.14 Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments – no comment .
7.2.15 RSPB Cymru – objects .
7.2.15.1 Whilst RSPB Cymru did not comment in relation to the initial consultation, it offered specific comments on 10 th March 2008 upon the further information (ecological studies) referred to at Secs 5.1 and 6.1.1 of this report.
RSPB Cymru objects to the proposals contained in the current planning application for both policy and ecological reasons. The RSPB Cymru policy objections largely reflect those of other consultees, as stated at Sec 7 of this report.
With regard to the ecological objections, the following comments are made by RSPB Cymru.
1. RSPB Cymru considers the further information submitted, referred to at Sec 5.1 of this report, to be deficient, both with regard to the Breeding Bird survey and the Vantage Point Bird Survey. It is suggested that standard Scottish National heritage (SNH) guidance was not followed. Concerns are also expressed at the date the surveys were undertaken (2004), thereby challenging the relevance of the information.
2. RSPB Cymru also expressed concerns at the potential impact of the proposals upon the wetland habitats as a result of the engineering works associated with the access tracks and requested a full mitigation plan.
7.2.15.2 RSPB (Cymru) were further consulted with regard to the access track construction and drainage plan referred to at Sec 5.1 of this report, but have not responded.
7.2.16 Secretary of State for Energy – no comment .
7.2.17 South Wales Fire and Rescue Services – commented that, at the appropriate stage, the Service should be further consulted with regard to:
a) adequate water supplies at the site for fire fighting purposes; and
b) access for emergency fire fighting appliances.
7.2.18 South Wales Police – no comment .
However, a response was received from PITO (Police Information Technology Organisation) stating that, whilst the current proposal was not of direct relevance to that organisation, it advised that the local Police Force should be consulted together with the responsible telecom authority in order to ensure no interference with the Police radio service.
7.2.19 Transco – no response .
Whilst no response was received in connection with the current planning application, both Transco and National Grid Transco gave specific advice on the relative positions of their apparatus in connection with the previously refused planning application.
7.2.20 Trinity Lighthouse Service – no response .
7.2.21 Welsh Assembly Government (Department for Environment, Sustainability and Housing) – no comment .
Copies of the planning application documents and the Environmental Statement were forwarded to the Welsh Assembly Government Planning Division in accordance with the requirements of the 1999 Town and Country Planning Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations.
7.2.22 Welsh Assembly Government (Technical Services Division) – no views to express .
The Regional Planning Advisor was consulted on the planning application and asked to advise in terms of its potential impact on the agricultural resources.
7.2.23 Welsh Water – no response .
Welsh Water previously advised on the position of water apparatus in and around the application site. No objection was offered to the previous proposal.
7.2.24 Western Power Distribution – no response .
7.2.25 The Wildlife Trust of South West Wales – no response .
7.3 Adjoining Authorities
7.3.1 Brecon Beacons National Park – objects.
The aim of national parks, which were designated under the 1949 National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act, is to conserve and enhance the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage they contain and to promote opportunities and enjoyment by the public of the areas which they cover, through planning and other controls.
The national parks, along with other areas of important landscape and habitat e.g. Areas of Outstanding Natural beauty (AONB) or Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) are known as “Designated Areas”.
BBNP objected to the previously refused planning application (040361).
The site boundary of the previous application abutted the Brecon Beacons National Park Authority boundary and the nearest turbine stood within 150 metres of that boundary. With the current application, the nearest turbine is 580 metres distant from the boundary and the furthest 1.6km away; however, the application site boundary remains as before and abuts the National Park Boundary.
The Park Authority is of the opinion that, due to its proximity to the National Park, the proposed wind farm would have a significantly detrimental effect upon and would compromise the special qualities of the National Park, especially those qualities relating to landscape and natural beauty, peace and tranquillity, open spaces and qualities of remoteness.
In view of the proximity of this “Designated Area” to the application site and the significance of the Parks Officer’s comments on the current, revised proposals, the Officer’s comments are largely, though not completely, quoted verbatim below.
“The Proposal
The construction and operation of a 5 turbine (2.3MW machines) wind farm (blade tip 100m), wind monitoring mast, switch station, access track and ancillary works on Merthyr Common. The site is not located within a Strategic Search Area as identified in Planning Policy Wales Technical Advice Note 8: Planning for Renewable Energy.
Environment Act 1995
The statutory purposes of National Parks have been redefined by Section 61 of the Environment Act 1995, these purposes are:
a) conserving and enhancing the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the parks;
b) providing opportunities for the understanding and enjoyment of the special qualities of those areas by the public.
Policy Context
Planning Policy Wales (PPW) (2002) recognises that natural heritage issues are not confined by administrative boundaries and that the duty to have regard to National Park purposes applies to activities affecting these areas, whether those activities lie within or outside the designated area. ….
The National Park is not a self-contained landscape unit. The wider landscape of this part in Merthyr Borough Council area is an important back-cloth to this section of the National Park, making an essential contribution to the public enjoyment of the Park’s special qualities. People walking within the immediate vicinity of the application site will have no real sense of where the National Park boundary lies. There is no clear physical distinction between land within and outside the park and has only been identified along a political boundary. The landscape does not suddenly or markedly change at the Park boundary.
The Brecon Beacons National Park (BBNP) Management Plan defines the special qualities of the Park as:-
• The landscape and natural beauty;
• Peace and tranquillity;
• Opportunities for walking and access to open country;
• Open spaces and qualities of remoteness;
• Traditionally managed farmland;, and
• Wildlife”
Paragraph 2.22 of the BBNP Adopted Local Plan (1999) states:-
“If the special qualities of the National Park are to be protected, careful control needs to be exercised over development that straddles the Park boundary or is conspicuous from within the Park. The National Park Authority is consulted by neighbouring planning authorities on applications likely to affect the Park. The National Park Authority is also consulted by neighbouring planning authorities in the production of their development plans. In responding to these consultations, the National Park Authority will try to ensure that the integrity of the Park is not compromised, the visual amenity of residents and visitors within it are not spoilt, and that unacceptable additions to air and noise pollution are not created.”
Paragraph 2.2 of the Unitary Development Plan Proposed Modifications (September 2006) states:-
“If the special qualities of the National Park are to be protected, careful control needs to be exercised over development that straddles the Park boundary or is conspicuous from within the Park. The National Park Authority is consulted by neighbouring planning authorities on applications likely to affect the Park. The National Park Authority is also consulted by neighbouring planning authorities in the production of their development plans. In responding to these consultations the National Park Authority will seek to ensure that such proposals or policies are in accordance with this UDP and will therefore use this document to formulate consultation responses.”
The BBNP response continues:-
“The National Park Authority’s own local plan policies on wind and other renewable energy policies, PU3 and PU4 (Local Plan 1999), and S12 (UDP 2006) have been framed in the context of wider policies which seek to ensure that all development is compatible with the statutory purposes of National Park designation (Policy G3 Local Plan and UDP). They seek to support proposals providing they do not have a significant adverse effect on the National Park purposes: thus conservation of the natural beauty of the National Park should be given great weight, as should enjoyment of the special qualities of the Park. While these policies do not form part of the development plan for the purposes of considering this proposal, they are material to the consideration of proposals adjacent to the Park, providing a framework for the national Park authority, Merthyr Tydfil Borough Council and other agencies to consider the proposals in relation to their responsibilities under the 1995 Environment Act.
The Ministerial Interim Planning Policy Statement 01/2005: Planning for Renewable Energy acknowledges, in paragraph 12.8.6 that, renewable energy projects should generally be supported by local planning authorities provided environmental impacts are avoided or minimised, and nationally and internationally designated areas are not compromised.
Further policy guidance relating to renewable energy is provided in Technical Advice Note 8: Planning for Renewable Energy (TAN 8). The importance of national parks is recognised in paragraph 2.7 of TAN 8 and paragraph 6.4 of Annex D describes National Parks as visual sensitive receptors and paragraph 8.4 states there is an implicit objective in TAN 8 to maintain the integrity and quality of the landscape within National Parks i.e. no change in landscape character from wind turbine development.” Impact of Proposal Upon National Park
“ …. The Non-Technical summary states that the site is on an area of open land and is “an exposed undulating plateau landscape” (page 10). It is also stated that on a local level changes to the countryside will be significant. The Planning Appraisal (Volume 3 – September 2006) notes that the Brecon Beacons National Park is where the landscape is to be judged as most sensitive, although it is stated views from the National Park are minimal due to the distances involved. The Environmental Statement (ES) (Volume 2 – September 2006) expands upon the Non-Technical Summary and the Planning Appraisal. The quality and sensitivity to change of landscapes are defined in accordance with the Landscape Institute’s guidelines. The ES defines ‘Landscape Character Types’ in the Brecon Beacons National Park as Upland Hills and Valleys, Broad wooded Reservoir Valleys and Broad River Valley flood Plain. With reference to Upland Hills and Valleys, this character type occurs across much of the Brecon Beacons … There is a strong unity and cohesiveness in the character of the Upland Hills and Valleys (Brecon Beacons) with a recognised valued scenic quality … Given these attributes this type of landscape is undoubtedly ‘High’ with a similar ‘high’ level of sensitivity to change given its distinctive character.” ….
Attributes of a ‘high’ landscape quality include strong, positive character, particularly important to conserve and susceptible to relatively small change. Highly sensitive receptor types refer to areas with views from recreational routes, public rights of way and beauty spots, where the viewer’s attention is focused on the landscape.
A total of 5 viewpoints from within the National Park are considered. These are: ……Pant-y-Waun; Cefn Cil Sarnws; Cefn Pwll-coch; Carn Du; Craig-y-Fan Ddu ….……”
“Effects on Designated Landscapes
The ES refers generally to the effect of the proposal upon the Brecon Beacons National Park …. Whilst it considers the effects on the National Park as a whole to be negligible, it does refer to significant effects upon the more elevated areas of the park.
Cumulative
The National Park Authority also has concerns over the cumulative effects of a number of wind farm proposals in the area visible from the Park, the closest proposals being Hirwaun Common, Maerdy and Pendragon. Paragraph 2.13 of TAN 8 refers to the cumulative effects of schemes outside SSAs, however this does not appear to be discussed in the ES.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the authority is of the opinion that due to its proximity to the National Park the proposed Merthyr Common Wind Farm would have a significantly detrimental effect upon and compromise the special qualities of the National Park, especially those qualities relating to landscape and natural beauty, peace and tranquillity and open spaces and qualities of remoteness. In light of paragraph 2.2 of the Unitary Development Plan Proposed Modifications (September 2006), the Authority view the proposal as contrary to policies G3(i) and S12 of the Plan. The turbines represent a major new element in the landscape, and that the scale is not comparable to any other existing landscape elements. The proposal would also be contrary to the national guidance as detailed in the ‘Policy context’ section above that seek to protect designated areas. Information provided within the Environmental Statement clearly shows the scheme to be visible from numerous parts of the National Park. The scheme would compromise the integrity of the National Park and spoil the amenity of residents and visitors of the Park. Therefore the Authority objects to the proposal.
If the determining planning authority are minded to permit the application, the Brecon Beacons National Park Authority would request a condition be placed on any consent that requires all evidence of development be removed after the operational life of the wind farm in order to protect the special qualities of the National Park.”
7.3.2 Caerphilly County Borough Council – no response .
Whilst the final reply has not yet been forwarded from Caerphilly County Borough Council, an initial response from the Council’s Development Control Manager records that consent has been granted for 2 No. turbines and an anemometry mast on land north of Fochriw.
7.3.3 Powys County Council - no response .
8.0 PLANNING POLICIES AND PLANNING GUIDANCE
8.1 INTERNATIONAL, EU, UK AND WAG POLICIES, PROTOCOLS AND STRATEGIES
Over the past two decades, there has been a succession of international (including EU), national and WAG derived policies, directives, protocols, obligations, strategies and white papers. Each has acknowledged, to varying degrees, the impact of global warming, the need for less reliance upon fossil fuel energy sources and a positive move to renewable energy sources, including wind power.
The common aim of each has been the adoption of a sustainable approach to development proposals.
They are summarised below.
8.1.1 The Brundtland Report (1987)
In 1987 the Brundtland Report, (also known as Our Common Future) , alerted the world to the urgency of making progress toward economic development which could be sustained without depleting natural resources or harming the environment. The report provided a definition of sustainable development, as: “…. development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”
8.1.2 Earth (Rio) Summit (1992)
The objectives of the conference were to build upon the aspirations and achievements of the Brundtland Report, in order to respond to pressing global environmental problems and to agree major treaties on biodiversity, climate change and forest management.
8.1.3 Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change (1997) The Kyoto Protocol (the International Framework Convention on Climate Change) is a legal agreement, monitored by the United Nations, with the objective of reducing greenhouse gases that cause climate change. It came into force on 16 February 2005. The UK’s commitment under the Kyoto Protocol is to reduce total greenhouse gas emissions to 12.5 per cent below 1990 levels between 2008 and 2012.
8.1.4 The European Commission (EC) White Paper on Renewable Energy Source (1997) The White Paper sets out a comprehensive strategy and action plan to double the “renewables” share of the European Union’s total energy supply, from 6% to 12%, by 2010.
8.1.5 EU Renewable Energy Directive 2003/54/EC (2001) Under this Directive, member states are required to adopt national targets for renewables consistent with reaching the Commission target of 22 per cent of electricity from renewables by 2010. The indicative target set for the UK is 10% of electricity by that date.
8.1.6 A Better Quality of Life: A Strategy for Sustainable Development for the UK (1999)
This Strategy has four main aims.
• social progress which recognises the needs of everyone; • effective protection of the environment; • prudent use of natural resources; and • maintenance of high and stable levels of economic growth and employment. This policy is supported by ten guiding principles.
8.1.7 Climate Change: The UK Programme (2000) A target is set to cut UK Carbon Dioxide emissions by 60% by 2050. The stated strategies of the 2000 Programme are to: • Improve business’ use of energy, stimulate investment and cut costs; • Stimulate new, more efficient sources of power generation; • Cut emissions from the transport sector; • Promote better energy efficiency in the domestic sector, saving householders money; • Improve the energy efficiency requirements of the building regulations; • Continue cutting emissions from agriculture; • Ensure the public sector took a leading role.
8.1.8 The Renewables Obligation (2002) This Obligation encourages new renewables generation in the UK. It places a requirement on UK electricity suppliers to source a growing percentage of electricity from eligible renewable generation capacity (increasing to 15% by 2015, with the obligation continuing at this level until 2027).
8.1.9 Our Energy Future: Creating a Low Carbon Economy (2003) This Energy White Paper sets a target of generating 10% of UK energy by renewable technologies by 2010 and 15% by 2020. It aims to create an energy system that ensures security of supply and affordable warmth, as well an aspirational
target of a 60% reduction in CO 2 emissions by 2050.
8.1.10 Securing the Future: UK Sustainable Development Strategy (2005) This Strategy sets out five principles for sustainable development with a focus on environmental limits. It also identifies four priority areas: sustainable consumption and production, climate change, natural resources protection and sustainable communities.
8.1.11 Meeting the Energy Challenge: A White Paper on Energy (2007), Department of Trade and Industry This White Paper sets out the Government’s international and domestic energy strategy to respond and address the long term energy challenges the UK is facing and deliver four energy policy goals: - to cut CO 2 emissions by some 60% by about 2050, with real progress by 2020; - to maintain the reliability of energy supplies; - to promote competitive markets in the UK and beyond; and - to ensure that every home is adequately and affordably heated.
8.1.12 Climate Change Bill (2007) The draft Climate Change Bill aims to put in place a framework to achieve a mandatory 60% cut in the UK’s carbon emissions by 2050 (compare to 1990 levels), with an intermediate target of between 26% and 32% by 2020.
8.1.13 Environment Strategy for Wales (2006) Objectives • Recognising and living within environmental limits, locally and globally; • Ensuring that all policies take the environment into account, in accordance with the statutory Sustainable Development Duty; • Stimulating and enabling collaboration across the Welsh public sector; • Working with business and voluntary sector partners; • Encouraging individual citizens and communities in an environmentally sustainable way; and • Providing leadership by acting now for the future.
Priorities • Minimise greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to the impacts of climate change; • Conserve and enhance biodiversity, whilst respecting the dynamics of nature; • Monitor and regulate known and emerging environmental hazards; • Tackle unsustainable practices, e.g. waste production and disposal; and to • Conserve and enhance land and sea, built environment, natural resources and heritage, developing and using them in a sustainable and equitable way and for the long term benefit of the people of Wales.
8.1.14 Planning Policy Wales (March 2002)
Planning Policy Wales (PPW) sets out the Welsh Assembly Government’s land use planning policy. It is a key planning policy document. It includes policies on sustainable development, renewable energy, conservation and improvement of the natural heritage and the historic environment.
PPW, in its introduction, sets out the purpose of the planning system. It states:-
“The planning system regulates the development and use of land in the public interest. It should reconcile the needs of development and conservation, securing economy, efficiency and amenity in the use of land, and protecting natural resources and the historic environment, thereby contributing to sustainable development.” (Para 1.2.1).
PPW advises: “The planning system has a fundamental role in delivering sustainable development in Wales. It must help the process of balancing and integrating these objectives in order to meet current development needs while safeguarding those of the future. In particular the planning system, through both UDPs and the development control process, must provide for homes, infrastructure, investment and jobs in a way which is consistent with sustainability principles.” (Para 2.1.5).
PPW advises that Local Planning Authorities should ensure that development control decisions are consistent with national and international climate change objectives, including a contribution to renewable energy targets, having regard to emerging national and international policy on the levels of renewable energy required and on appropriate technology, whilst recognising the environmental, economic and social opportunities which the use of renewable energy resources can make to wider planning goals and objectives and the delivery of renewable energy targets.
PPW states: “Common land is a finite resource and should not be developed unnecessarily. Access to it should not be prevented nor impeded unnecessarily and its proper management should be encouraged.” (Para 5.2.10)
PPW also advises that Local Planning Authorities should ensure that international and national statutory obligations to protect designated areas, species and habitats and the historic environment are protected from inappropriate development and to ensure that environmental effects on local communities are minimised.
“Many of the most important areas of landscape quality and nature conservation have been statutorily designated. These statutorily designated sites make a vital contribution to protecting landscape and biodiversity and can also be important in providing opportunities for sustainable economic and social development.” (Para 5.3.1)
“Local planning authorities should have regard to the relative significance of international, national and local designations in considering the weight to be attached to nature conservation interests and should take care to avoid placing unnecessary constraints on development.” (Para 5.3.2)
“The Statutory Landscape Designations which apply in Wales are National parks and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONBs)”. (Para 5.3.3) [The bold typeface is contained in PPW.]
PPW emphasises the requirements of the 1995 Environment Act with regard to the statutory purposes of National Parks, which are:
a) conserving and enhancing the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the Park; and
b) providing opportunities for the understanding and enjoyment of the special qualities of those areas by the public.
PPW states that, where it appears that there is a conflict between those purposes, greater weight should be given to the purpose of conserving and enhancing the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the designated area. “National Park authorities have been set up to pursue these purposes and often public bodies and other relevant authorities have a statutory duty to have regard to these purposes.” (Para 5.3.4)
It states that: “National Parks … must be afforded the highest status of protection from inappropriate developments … Policies and development control decisions should give great weight to conserving and enhancing the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of these areas.” (Para 5.3.6)
It further states that: “The duty to have regard to National Park … purposes applies to activities affecting these areas, whether those activities lie within or outside designated areas. ” (Para 5.3.7).
8.1.15 Ministerial Interim Planning Policy Statement 01/2005: “Planning for Renewable Energy” (July 2005) (MIPPS)
This Ministerial Statement (MIPPS) represents the current national (Welsh Assembly Government) planning policy relating to renewable energy. It amends and cancels Secs 12.8 – 12.10 of Planning Policy (Wales).
The following extracts from MIPPS are of relevance.
“The Assembly Government’s aim is to secure an appropriate mix of energy provision in Wales, whilst minimising the impact on the environment. This will be achieved in part by strengthening renewable energy production and through a greater focus on energy efficiency and conservation.” (Para 12.8.4)
“Renewable energy projects should generally be supported by Local Planning Authorities, provided environmental impacts are avoided or minimised and nationally and internationally designated areas are not compromised. In order to meet the 2010 renewable energy target the Assembly Government’s energy policy is that 800MW of renewables capacity should be provided from strategic onshore wind energy development – mostly in the form of a small number of large windfarms.” (Para 12.8.6)
“In the short term, wind power offers the greatest potential for an increase in the generation of electricity from renewable energy. The Assembly Government accepts that the introduction of new, often very large, structures in the open countryside needs careful consideration to minimise the impact on the environment and landscape. However the need for wind turbines is established through a global environmental imperative and international treaty and as a key part of meeting the Assembly Government’s targets for renewable energy production. Therefore, the land use planning system should actively steer developments to the most appropriate locations. Development of a few large scale (over 25MW) windfarms in carefully located areas offers the best opportunity to meet the national renewable energy target.” (Para 12.8.9).
“Whilst landscape and conservation constraints and electricity distribution issues are vital inputs, other technical and economic issues are critical to the provision of wind power. The most appropriate scale at which to identify areas for on-shore wind energy development is at an all Wales level. Technical Advice Note 8: Planning for Renewable Energy identifies areas in Wales which, on the basis of substantial empirical research, are considered to be the most appropriate locations for large scale windfarm developments; these areas are referred to as Strategic Search Areas (SSAs) … Development of a limited number of large scale windfarms in these areas will be required to achieve the Assembly Government’s energy target for 2010.” (Para 12.8.10)
“…The development of windfarms or other large scale renewable energy schemes will not generally be appropriate in internationally or nationally designated areas. Smaller (less than 5MW) domestic or community based wind turbine developments may be suitable within and without SSAs, subject to material planning considerations. On urban/industrial brownfield sites, small or medium sized (up to 25MW) developments may be appropriate.” (Para 12.8.11)
“…where justified,” (Local Development Plan) “policies which restrict onshore wind energy developments outside SSAs to those up to 25MW in urban/industrial brownfield sites and less than 5MW elsewhere, are acceptable.” (Para 12.9.3)
“Local Planning Authorities should consider the effects of any scheme and its associated infrastructure in relation to sustainable development criteria relating to economic, social and environmental impact including the need to meet national renewable energy targets. Where a development is likely to cause demonstrable harm to a designated area by virtue of having a significant adverse impact on the qualities for which the site was designated, consideration should be given to refusing the development if such effects cannot be overcome by mitigation measures, planning conditions or obligations. Conditions should also be attached to any planning permission specifying requirements for removal of the turbines and all associated infrastructure and remediation of the site as soon as their use ceases.” (Para 12.10.1)
(Council will note that nationally designated areas include National Parks.)
“Whilst having regard to the contribution of renewable energy use to wider planning goals such as the diversification of the rural economy, Local Planning Authorities should ensure that any potential detrimental environmental effects on local communities are minimised to safeguard the quality of life for existing and future generations.” (Para 12.10.3)
In summary, the thrust of planning policy as contained in the Ministerial Interim Planning Policy Statement is that wind farm development should be steered to concentrate larger wind farms within a few carefully selected areas (Strategic Search Areas or SSAs), allow smaller ones (up to 25MW) within urban/industrial brownfield sites and elsewhere, allow community based wind farms (of less than 5MW) in order to minimise the impact upon the environment and landscape.
8.1.16 Ministerial Interim Planning Policy Statement on Climate Change (Consultation Draft) (December 2006) (MIPPS)
This Consultation Draft amends/updates in part, sections of Planning Policy Wales (Secs. 1.4, 2.1-3).
This Ministerial Interim Planning Policy Statement (MIPPS) states, at 1.4.12
“(i) Climate change is one of the most serious challenges facing the world. Climate change has profound environmental, economic and social implications and failure to address it will make delivering sustainable development impossible. In response to this challenge we must:
• Reduce emissions of the greenhouse gases that cause climate change; and • Plan for, and respond effectively to, the changes already underway.
This twin approach of tackling the causes (mitigation) and dealing with the consequences (adaptation) is vital because current evidence suggests that we will face 30-40 years of climate change as result of the emissions that have already occurred. If we do not take decisive action to reduce emissions now, we will face even more serious consequences in years to come.”
and, at 2.2.1:
“Contributing to the reduction of the predicted CO 2 emissions towards the long term UK aim of a 60% reduction from the 1990 Kyoto baseline by 2050, which should be facilitated by applying the following staged approach to development allocations and proposals: • Maximising design and location opportunities to reduce energy demand; • Considering the use of energy efficient supply measures to meet the reduced demand; and • Incorporating a proportion of on site renewable energy generation.”
8.1.17 One Wales – a Progressive Agenda for the Government of Wales (An Agreement Between the Labour and Plaid Cymru Groups In The National Assembly) (June 2007)
This Agenda represents a joint political agreement for the government over the current Assembly term.
It sets out (at Chapter 8) the political commitment to:- • tackling climate change; • supporting rural development; • achieving sustainable energy production and consumption; and • improving local environment.
In its policy for addressing climate change, the Agenda has a stated ambition to achieve an annual carbon reduction equivalent emissions reductions of 3% per year by 2011 ( “in areas of devolved competence”)
In its policy for achieving sustainable energy production and consumption, it aims to provide renewable energy generation, an Energy Route Map (refer to Sec 8.1.18 of this report below) and a review of TAN 8 (Secs 8.1.18 and 8.3.2 of this report refer).
8.1.18 Renewable Energy Routemap for Wales (Consultation Draft) (February 2008)
This consultation document reaffirms the WAG commitment to increasing renewable energy generation in Wales.
This consultation forms part of a series of proposals which will lead to the production of comprehensive climate change and energy strategies for Wales by the end of 2008.
It acknowledges that Wales is exceptionally well placed to lead the transition to low carbon economies, in which energy is used efficiently, is produced as near to the consumer as possible and emits the minimum of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions.
The following renewable energy sources are identified:- biomass; marine (tides and waves); hydro electricity; waste; wind (both on and off shore).
It is anticipated that 50% of the renewable energy would derive from marine sources, 35% from wind and the rest mainly from sustainable biomass.
The consultation document states Wales has the potential to generate all its electricity needs by 2025. It could even become a net exporter of electricity generated by renewable means.
Secs 7.1 – 7.17 of the document address on/off shore wind energy potential.
Sec 10.5 states: “Whilst the policy and technical advice consider all types of renewable energy, on shore wind offers the greatest potential for an increase in the generation of low cost electricity from renewable energy in the short to medium term…. Government continues to believe that the seven Strategic Search Areas (SSAs)”… [where on shore wind developments over 25 MW should be concentrated]… “… remain the most suitable locations for large, on shore wind farms….”
Sec 10.5 states: “Small wind farms of up to 5MW, if carefully sited, can have minimal environmental impact and therefore TAN 8 guidance places no geographical restriction on he location of such wind farms.
Similarly, on brownfield sites, wind farms of up to 25 MW might be accommodated.”
The document confirms at Sec 7.5: “The Forestry commission is now undertaking the process of leasing the land which it manages within the TAN Strategic Search Areas for major wind farm developments on a competitive basis.”
Of further relevance to the consideration of the current application are the following extracts from the (consultation) Route Map.
“Supporting the environment
7.7 Wind farms mean changes to landscape or seascape and can have localised impact on habitat and soils in the construction phase. For on-shore developments, TAN 8 considered the issue of landscape impact and designated areas in order to ensure that National parks and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, amongst other areas, would not be included as strategic search areas.
…Community engagement
7.9 Large schemes should always include community benefit as part of the proposal: for example the Wales Forestry commission wind farm leasing proposals include a premium for community benefit as part of the lease terms.
7.10 Community benefit is not a basis for awarding permission to be given to a proposal that otherwise would be unacceptable in planning terms but there is a high priority on the active engagement of local communities in these proposals. We would want to see developers discussing with communities as wide a range of community dividends as possible, including where appropriate energy voucher schemes.
7.11 As yet there have been few community-owned wind energy developments in Wales. …”
8.2 DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICIES
In determining planning applications, Local Planning Authorities are obliged to consider the provisions of Section 54A of the 1990 Town and Country Planning Act, as amended by the 1991 Planning and Compensation Act, further amended by Section 38(6) of the 2004 Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act.
Local Planning Authorities are advised that:- “If regard is to be had to the Development Plan, for the purpose of any determination to be made under the Planning Acts, the determination must be made in accordance with the Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.”
The relevant policies of the Adopted Brecon Beacons National Park Development Plans (1999 Local Plan and 2006 Unitary Development – proposed Modifications) are referred to at Sec 7.3.1 above.
The relevant policies of the Adopted Development Plans are set out at Sections 8.2.1 and 8.2.2 below.
8.2.1 The Adopted Mid Glamorgan (Merthyr Tydfil County Borough) Council Replacement Structure Plan 1991-2006 (adopted August 1996).
Notwithstanding the date contained within its title, this document will retain its adopted Development Plan status until superseded by Council’s Local Development Plan (LDP) as and when that plan is adopted.
The adopted Structure Plan sets out the strategic planning context for the Borough.
The Adopted Structure Plan recognises the application site and surrounding area as worthy of Special Landscape Area designation. The following policies, amongst others, are designed to protect open countryside are relevant for the purposes of this planning application.
Policy EV1 states: “Development in the countryside will not be permitted except in the interests of, agriculture and forestry, countryside leisure, the provision of housing for special needs, the conversion of rural buildings, conversions/redevelopment of sites used for institutional purposes, minerals, land reclamation, transportation or utility services.”
Policy EV4 states: “Development in areas of high landscape value will be considered as follows;-
1. Development which would result in unacceptable levels of visual intrusion on the natural beauty of the National Park and the Glamorgan Heritage Coast will not be permitted.
2. Development which would lead to visual intrusion on the landscape of special landscape areas - will only be permitted where suitable measures can be taken to reduce such effects to acceptable levels. Special landscape areas will include areas of strategic importance (namely the coal field plateau and valley sides, and the Caerphilly mountain area), and other areas of local landscape importance and will be defined in local plans.”
The following policy is designed to protect the historic landscape.
Policy EV10 states: “Development on or within major sites or features of the built and historic environment will be considered as follows;-
1. Development which is likely to destroy or damage the existing character of archaeological sites or ancient monuments of national importance and single or groups of buildings designated as being of special architectural or historic interest (including listed buildings) - will not be permitted.
2. Development which fails to preserve maintain or enhance where possible, the existing character of other single or groups of buildings, conservation areas or other features recognised as being of local architectural or historic interest in local plans (such as other identified buildings, historic routes and historic parks, gardens landscapes) - will not normally be permitted.
3. Development which is likely to destroy or damage the existing character of other archaeological sites or ancient monuments - will not normally be permitted.”
Chapter 12 of the adopted Structure Plan refers to utility services and the need to ensure that such services can be developed whilst taking due account of the need to conserve the environment. At para 12.3.1 it states: “…The NFFO (Non Fossil Fuel Order of the 1989 Electricity Act) scheme encourages wind farms to seek locations where wind speeds are in excess of 7.5 m/sec. Much of the western part of the UK, including some of Mid Glamorgan is consistently above this level. However, many of these locations coincide with areas of high landscape value, such as National Parks. The guidance contained in PPG 22 stresses that special considerations apply to applications in National Parks and AONBs in view of the very high landscape quality that warranted the designation.”
The following two policies of the Structure Plan encourage renewable energy schemes provided they would not result in unacceptable environmental harm.
Policy U1 states: “The development of renewable energy facilities, including wind power, will not be permitted where such development would result in:-
- Unacceptable levels of visual intrusion on the natural beauty of the National Park or the Heritage Coast.
- Unacceptable levels of damage or disturbance to sites and their settings recognised as having national or international nature conservation, archaeological, architectural or historic importance.”
Policy U2 states: “Proposals for the development of renewable energy facilities and associated development, including those for wind power, in areas other than those referred to in U1, will be permitted where:-
The proposal can be located to reduce damage or disturbance to the environment to acceptable levels, particularly the level of visual intrusion likely to result from the proposal taking into account the cumulative effects arising from other existing and approved schemes in the area.
Conflicts with surrounding land uses can be reduced to acceptable levels, where the amenity of residential areas in the locality is likely to be affected adversely.
Provisions for the reinstatement of the site when it ceases to operate are considered adequate.
The availability of identified mineral resources or reserves is not sterilised.”
8.2.2 The Adopted Merthyr Tydfil Borough Local Plan (1996-2006)(adopted May 1999)
As with the adopted Structure Plan, notwithstanding the relevant date indicated in the plan title above, this adopted development plan will remain extant until or unless Council’s Local Development Plan (LDP) has been adopted.
The application site lies outside the settlement boundary as identified on the Local Plan Proposals Map and is within an area designated as landscape protection. The Local Plan Proposals Map indicates it lies in proximity to the Brecon Beacons National Park boundary and Merthyr/Gelligaer (Urban) Common. It is also designated as falling within the Landscape of Outstanding Historic Interest and, more recently, Access Land, within the definition of the 2000 Countryside and Rights of Way Act.
Para 4.3 of the adopted Local Plan states: “The main emphasis of national planning policy is the need to identify a balance between the protection of the environment and development pressures related to social welfare, transportation or economic needs. Policy NH1 is a general policy which is designed to set out the main criteria by which development in the open countryside can be assessed. For the purposes of the Local Plan, the term countryside is taken to mean all areas outside the identified settlement boundaries shown on the Local Plan Proposals Map.”
Policy NH1 states: “Proposals for new development in the countryside outside identified settlement boundaries will be permitted subject to consideration against the following criteria:-
1. The merits of the development should clearly outweigh the value of protecting the countryside for its own sake particularly in landscape protection areas: appropriate forms of development may include tourism, leisure, reclamation, renewable energy, health and amenity, transport links and utilities. 2. The proposal does not have an unacceptable impact on the character, amenity and landscape quality of the area. 3. The proposals are in accord with other development specific policies contained within the local plan. 4. The siting of the development is acceptable in relation to the design, scale, materials and setting of the proposal. 5. The development does not pose an unacceptable risk to sites of nature conservation interests, which include habitat, species and sites of geological and geomorphological interest. 6. The proposal does not conflict with transportation considerations including parking, traffic generation, access and accessibility to public transport. 7. The proposal does not compromise the enjoyment of public rights of way and other forms of public access to the countryside. 8. The proposal has regard to the provisions of Policy NH7 regarding the water environment.
Policy NH7 states: “Development proposals which affect the water environment will be permitted where:-
1) It can be clearly demonstrated that adequate water, sewerage treatment and land drainage services are available or can readily and economically be provided to serve the development without detriment of the environment. 2) The development will not have an adverse impact upon the quality and quantity of groundwater resources, surface waters, other waterbodies or the flora and fauna dependant upon such water features. 3) The development will not result in an increased risk of flooding due to additional surface water run off. 4) If the development involves areas of land liable to fluvial flood risk, adequate mitigation works can be undertaken to reduce the risk of flooding both of the proposed site & elsewhere, prior to any development proceeding.”
The following policy of the Local Plan encourages renewable energy schemes provided they would not result in unacceptable environmental harm.
Policy RU1 states: “Development proposals for renewable energy schemes including wind power will be permitted subject to consideration against the criteria in Policy NH1 together with specific criteria as follows:-
In the case of wind turbines:
1. The siting and orientation of any wind turbines is acceptable having regard to technical requirements and to avoid, where reasonable and practical any detrimental impact on birds, particularly raptors. 2. The cumulative effect arising from other existing and approved schemes in the area will be taken into consideration.
In all cases:
1. The siting of the development is acceptable having regard to dust, odour and noise emissions. 2. The proposal does not have an unacceptable impact on the character and amenity of the immediate neighbourhood.”
8.2.3 Merthyr Tydfil County Borough Council Local Development Plan 2006-2021
Following Council’s decision on 15 th October 2008, the Local Development Plan (LDP) and all supporting documentation were made available for public consultation, commencing 30 th October, ending 12 th December 2008.
The LDP is now on Deposit.
The following policies apply.
“Development outside settlement boundaries
Policy TB1 “Proposals for new development outside defined settlement boundaries considered to be acceptable in principle under Policy BW4 should also fulfil the following criteria:-
1) The merits of the development must outweigh the value of protecting the countryside from new developments. 2) The proposal must be acceptable in terms of its siting, scale, design, and materials. 3) The proposal must not have an unacceptable impact on the character, amenity and landscape quality of the area including any historical features present. 4) The development must not pose an unacceptable risk to nature conservation interests including habitats and species present. 5) The development must not pose an unacceptable risk to the water environment including watercourses, groundwater catchment areas and river quality. 6) The proposal must nor conflict with transportation considerations including access, parking, traffic generation, accessibility to public transport and the enjoyment of public rights of way. 7) If necessary, the proposal must be capable of being provided with the relevant utility services and infrastructure.”
“Renewable Energy
Policy TB7 : “Development proposals that contribute to meeting national and local renewable energy targets will be favourably considered providing: - • In the case of wind turbine developments, their capacity does not exceed 25 MW on urban and industrial brownfield sites, and 5 MW elsewhere in the County Borough; • They do not have an unacceptable impact on biodiversity and landscape including the setting of the Brecon Beacons National Park; • They do not have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of residential areas.”
“Local Nature Conservation Designations
Policy AS6 : Using published scientific criteria, Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation have been designated as shown on the LDP Proposals Map. Applications for development affecting these sites and/or the Cwm Taff Fechan Local Nature Reserve, will not be permitted unless full account has been taken of the relevant features so as to prevent unacceptable damage to their conservation value. Where planning permission is contemplated, planning conditions or the seeking of a planning agreement may be necessary to safeguard features or to provide appropriate compensatory measures.”
The LDP Proposals Map identifies the application site and surrounding area as a SINC.
“Settlement Boundaries
Policy BW4 : “Proposals for new development (including changes of use) outside defined settlement limits, will not normally be permitted. Where a proposal is considered acceptable in principle, the criteria of Policy TB1 must also be fulfilled.”
8.3 PLANNING GUIDANCE
Government planning guidance is contained in a series of relevant Technical Advice Notes, issued by the Welsh Assembly Government (TANs). Technical Advice Notes should be read in conjunction with Planning Policy Wales and the Ministerial Interim Planning Policy Statements referred to at 8.1.14 and 8.1.16 above.
8.3.1 Technical Advice Note 5 : Nature Conservation and Planning (November 1996)
“Nature Conservation Outside Statutorily Designated Sites
“Statutory sites and non-statutory sites, together with features which provide wildlife corridors, links or stepping stones from one habitat to another, all contribute to the network necessary to ensure the maintenance of the current range and diversity of our flora, fauna, geological and landform features and the survival of important species. Sensitive landscaping and planting, the creation, maintenance and management of landscape features important to wildlife and the skilled adaption of derelict areas can provide extended habitats.” ( Para 28)
“Protection of Species
“Certain plants and animals, including all wild birds, are protected. Protected species are not confined to designated sites. Schedule 5 and 8 of the 1981 Act (relating to protected animals and plant species respectively) are reviewed every 5 years and local authorities notified of any amendments. Some other animals are protected under their own legislation. It is an offence to kill, injure, sell or take protected species or intentionally to damage, destroy or obstruct their places of shelter. Bats enjoy additional protection; it is an offence to kill, injure or disturb bats found in the non-living areas of a dwelling (i.e. a loft) or in any other place without first notifying CCW.” (Para 30)
“It is an offence deliberately to kill, injure, take or disturb listed animal species or destroy their resting places or breeding sites; or deliberately to pick, collect, cut, uproot or otherwise destroy listed plant species. Animal and plant species in need of strict protection are listed in Annex IV of the Habitats Directive.” (Para 31)
“CCW are responsible for issuing licences to permit, in the course of development, interference with a badger sett. Although consideration of the case for granting a licence is separate from the process of applying for planning permission, a local authority should advise anyone submitting an application for development in an area where there are badger setts that they must comply with the provisions of the Act. Local authorities and all other public bodies also need a licence in respect of any development which they themselves carry out in any areas where there are setts.” (Para 32)
“Common and Greens
“Much common land is important ecologically. The Secretary of State is committed to maintaining the status of common land, protecting the rights of commoners and encouraging the proper management of commons. The placing of buildings, fencing or works on Common Land normally require the consent of the Secretary of State, or may be prohibited under common land legislation. Town and village greens are also generally protected against enclosures.” (Para 33)
• Council will note that the replacement TAN 5, issued in 2005, remains in draft form.
8.3.2 Technical Advice Note 8 : Planning for Renewable Energy (July 2005)
The TAN is written in 2 parts comprising the main report advice and a series of 7 annexes. Annex A includes the WAG Policy Statement on Renewable Energy which states that: “…. on shore wind will be the main large-scale technology capable of achieving our 2010 target. In the longer term, the Severn Barrage with its tremendous renewable energy potential could also be of significant interest.” Annex B refers to “Community Benefits”, Annex C includes a description of “Renewable Energy Technologies”, Annex D relates to a “Potential Methodology for Local Planning Authorities with Strategic Search Areas”, Annexes E and F contain a “Glossary of Terms” and a list of “Contacts” respectively.
The following extracts from this key TAN on renewable energy are set out below. This TAN provides technical advice to supplement the policies set out in Planning Policy (Wales) and the Ministerial Interim Planning Policy Statement (MIPPS) on renewable energy, which amend and partly replace relevant sections of PPW and should be read in conjunction with both documents.
The renewable electricity targets, as set out in TAN 8 are:- • 4 TW hr. by 2010; and • 7 TW hr. by 2020. (TW hr = Terawatt over 1 hour, where 1 TW = 1000 Giggawatt (GW) and 1 GW = 1,000 Megawatts (MW)
“On Shore Wind
As noted above and in the Ministerial Interim Planning Policy Statement on renewable energy 2005, on shore wind power offers the greatest potential for an increase in the generation of electricity from renewable energy in the short to medium term. In order to try to meet the target for on shore wind production the Assembly Government has commissioned extensive technical work which has led to the conclusion that, for efficiency and environmental reasons amongst others, large scale (over 25MW) on shore wind developments should be concentrated into particular areas defined as Strategic Surge Areas (SSAs).” (Para 2.2)
“Strategic Search Areas (SSAs)
The seven strategic search area (SSA) … boundaries are set at a broad brush scale. Not all of the land within the SSAs may be technically economically and/or environmentally suitable for major wind power proposals; however the boundaries are seen as encompassing sufficient suitable land, in one or more sites, to deliver the Assembly Government’s energy policy aspirations. It is a matter for the Local Planning Authorities to undertake local refinement within each of the SSAs in order to guide and optimise development within each of these areas. …”
The nearest Strategic Search Area to Merthyr Tydfil County Borough, as indicated on TAN 8 (Map 7) is Area F: Coed Morgannwg.
Its northern boundary runs in a line south of A465(T) Heads of Valleys road between Neath and Hirwaun and west of B4275 Aberdare – Mountain Ash road.
It occupies the upland areas of Resolven, Hirwaun Common and St Gwynno and Margam part of which is afforested.
Table 1 of TAN 8 suggests an indicative capacity for this SSA of 290MW. There are indicative targets of installed capacity for each of the SSAs. Table 1 indicates that the potential installed capacity of all the SSAs could combine to approximately 1120MV of additional capacity, compared with the 800MV target by 2010.
“Large areas of Wales were excluded from consideration as SSAs by features that militate against larger wind power developments. In particular, large wind power proposals within a National Park or designated area of outstanding natural beauty would be contrary to well established planning policy and thus SSAs have not been considered for these areas.” (Para 2.7)
“SSAs display all of the following characteristics. They are: • extensive areas with a good wind resource typically in excess of 7 metres per second; • upland areas (typically over 300 metres above ordnance datum) which contain a dominant land form that is flat (plateau) rather than a series of ridges; • generally sparsely populated; • dominated by conifer plantation and/or improved/impoverished moorland; • has a general absence of major conservation or historic landscape designations; • of sufficient area to accommodate developments over 25MW to achieve at least 70MW installed capacity and to meet the target capacity; • largely unaffected by broadcast transmission, radar, MOD Mid-Wales Tactical Training Areas (TTA) and other constraints.” (Para 2.9)
“On Shore Wind in Other Areas
The potential for developers of wind power within urban/industrial brownfield sites is so far largely untapped. …” (Para 2.11)
“The Assembly Government expects Local Planning Authorities to encourage via their development plan policies and when considering individual planning applications smaller based windfarm schemes (generally less than 5MW) …” (Para 2.12)
“Most areas outside SSAs should remain free of large wind power schemes. Local Planning Authorities may wish to consider the cumulative impact of small schemes in areas outside of the SSAs and establish suitable criteria for separation distances from each other and from the perimeter of existing wind power schemes or the SSAs. In these areas there is a balance to be stuck between the desirability of renewable energy and landscape protection. Also that balance should not result in severe restriction on the development of wind power capacity, there is a case for avoiding a situation where wind turbines are spread across the whole of the County. As a result the Assembly Government would support Local Planning Authorities in introducing local policies in their development plans that restrict almost all wind energy developments larger than 5MW to within SSAs and urban/industrial brownfield sites. It is acceptable in such circumstances that planning permission for development over 5MW outside SSAs and urban/industrial brownfield sites may be refused.” (Para 2.13)
“Supplemental Information On Cumulative Landscape And Visual Impact.
There is an implicit objective in TAN 8 to maintain the integrity and quality of the landscape within the National Parks/AONBs of Wales i.e. no change in landscape character from wind turbine developments.
In the rest of Wales outside the SSAs the implicit objective is to maintain the landscape character i.e. no significant change in landscape character from wind turbine development.
Within (and immediately adjacent to) the SSAs the implicit objective is to accept landscape change i.e. a significant change in landscape character from wind turbine development.” (Para 8.4 to Annex D)
“TAN 8 (and the work on which it is based) therefore considered cumulative landscape and visual impacts at the all-Wales level. … The strategy adopted is a means of concentrating the impact of wind turbines in a relatively small proportion of the country in areas that are, on balance, technically, practically and environmentally better able to accommodate such impacts than other parts of Wales.” (Para 8.5 to Annex D)
8.3.3 Technical Advice Note 11 – Noise (1997)
This TAN provides advice on how the planning system can be used to minimise the adverse impact of noise without placing unreasonable restrictions on development or adding unduly to the costs and administrative burdens of businesses. (Para 3).
It advises that local authorities should adopt a corporate approach and ensure close co-operation between planning and environmental health departments when considering noise and noise generating developments. (Para 4)
8.4 OTHER STRATEGIES
8.4.1 Landmap (Landscape Character Guidance) 2002
Landmap is the process of gathering, understanding and interpreting information about the landscape. The methodology has been developed by the Countryside Council for Wales (CCW) in conjunction with the Wales Landscape Partnership Group. Landmap is a nationally consistent data set which removes the subjectivity of assessing the impacts of development on landscapes. PPW recommends the use of Landmap, stating: “…methodology is an important information resource upon which local planning authorities can draw in making the landscape assessments needed to inform local policy, guidance and decision making in this field. Landmap describes and evaluates aspects of the landscape and provides the basis of a consistent Wales-wide approach to landscape assessment. …”
8.4.2 The Merthyr Tydfil Local Agenda 21, Actions Now – Quality of Life (August 2001) This is a strategy for ensuring Council facilitates and delivers sustainable development through its services and actions:
“Merthyr Tydfil County Borough Council, will as far as is reasonably practicable; via the principle of shared responsibilities arrange to strike the right balance between human economic development and environmental integrity and will ensure that Sustainable Development is at the heart of all decision making.” (Statement of Intent, page 8 of LA21 Strategy)
8.5 Thus, in summary, the main thrust of national planning policy, interim planning policy, the technical advice notes and the “Renewable Energy Routemap” state that wind farm development is to be concentrated within SSAs; most areas outside SSAs should remain free of large wind power schemes unless they relate to small community based schemes (of less than 5MW) or schemes (of up to 25MW) contained within urban/industrial brownfield sites.
The integrity and quality of National Park landscape should be protected from wind farm development.
Furthermore, Local Planning Authorities should consider the cumulative impact of small schemes in areas outside the SSAs and establish suitable criteria for separation distances from each other and from the perimeter of existing wind power schemes or the SSAs.
9.0 MATERIAL PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS
9.1 Material planning considerations are not defined in planning law, but government advice suggests that, amongst other things:- • material considerations could include current circumstances, policies of the Local Planning Authority, national policies; • factors to be taken into account in making planning decisions must be genuine planning matters, i.e. they must be relevant to the regulation of the development and use of land in the public interest towards the goal of sustainability; • material planning considerations must fairly and reasonably relate to the development concerned; • whilst the planning system does not exist to protect the private interests of one person against the activities of another, proposals should be considered in terms of their effect on the amenity and existing use of land (and buildings) in the public interest; • when determining planning applications, local planning authorities must take into account any relevant view on planning matters expressed by neighbouring occupiers, local residents and any other third parties. Whilst the substance of local views must be considered, it is the duty of the local planning authority to decide each case on its respective planning merits; and • local opposition or support for a proposal is not, on its own, a reasonable ground for refusing or granting a planning permission. Objections to or support of a planning application must be based upon valid planning considerations.
9.2 Set out below are those issues which the case officer for this report, the Head of Town Planning, considers material to the assessment of this current planning application. They are not cited in any order of relative importance, but are based upon those issues raised by third parties (at Sec 6 of this report) and consultees (Sec 7) and are set out in alphabetical order, by topic.
Before considering the material planning considerations, Council will note that the concern on devaluation of residential and other properties as a consequence of the development, if allowed, is often cited as a common ground of objection to this as it is to other large schemes.
Such objections are not held to be material planning considerations. As stated above, the planning system does not exist to protect the private interests of individuals, nor to protect commercial interests. Planning applications should be considered in terms of their effect on the amenity and existing use of land and buildings in the public interest.
9.2.1 Alternative To The Submitted Proposals
Some objectors state that proper consideration has not been given to viable alternatives to the submitted scheme e.g. tidal wave power, hydro-electric power, clean coal technology and nuclear power.
This is a material planning consideration.
The 1999 Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment)(England and Wales) Regulations (at Schedule 4, Part 1, 2) require that Environmental Statements consider an outline of alternative studies by the applicants and the reasons for the choice of development subject of the planning application, taking into account the respective environmental effects of each alternative.
Whilst reference is made in the submitted Environmental Statement to alternative sites for wind farms, it would appear that no such consideration has been given to alternatives to the submitted proposal.
This apparent lack of consideration of alternatives is not itself a reason to oppose the current planning application.
9.2.2 Archaeological Resources And The Historic Landscape
This is a significant material planning consideration which must be accorded appropriate weight in the determination process.
In this regard Planning Policy Wales (Chapter 6) states the government’s objective is to preserve and enhance the historic environment, including archaeology, ancient monuments and the historic landscape. As stated at Sections 2.1, 7 and 8 of this report, the application site lies within the Merthyr Tydfil Landscape of Outstanding Historic Interest.
The Environmental Statement acknowledges that undiscovered archaeological remains could exist and be revealed by the development. Any disturbed sites would be recorded prior to disturbance in accordance with accepted methods, in agreement with the local planning authority and the relevant conservation authorities. Cadw, the Welsh Assembly Government Executive Agency with responsibility in such matters does not object to the proposal and does not consider the proposal raises any new concerns. It also accepts the findings of the ASIDOHL study, that the impact of the development would be slight on the Register of Landscape as a whole, or, its individual components.
Therefore, the impact of the current proposal on the archaeological resource and historic landscape is not reason of itself to oppose this planning application.
9.2.3 Common Land, Rights of Way, Open Access Land
These are material planning considerations.
Both residents and the Commoners expressed concern at the impact of the proposed development on the urban common, rights of way and open access land. Residents were particularly concerned about potential loss of access to a public amenity, particularly as an informal recreation resource. Unsurprisingly, the Commoners were concerned about the direct and indirect impacts of the development upon livestock grazing.
At the time of writing this report there is little evidence to support such concerns, though the perception of loss is understandable. It will be noted that there is little actual loss of the surface area of the overall Common to the proposed development.
Council will appreciate that if planning consent is granted for the proposal, separate consents/procedures will be required under the 1925 Law of Property Act from the Welsh Assembly Government.
Whilst the potential exists to facilitate access to the open moorland for nefarious purposes (as occurs now to an extent), this is not of itself a reason to oppose this planning application.
9.2.4 Cumulative Impact Of The Proposal And Other Developments In The Locality
Objectors expressed the concern that the current planning application should be viewed alongside other major developments in the vicinity. They cite examples: Ffos-y-Fran; St Merryn Meat Processing Plant; Trecatti Landfill Site and the LNG Tanks at Baverstocks to the west, all of which, objectors state, affect the skyline.
The issue of the cumulative impact of further wind farms in the locality is also a material planning consideration.
Technical Advice Note No. 8 (at Section 2.13) states that most areas outside Strategic Search Areas (SSAs) should remain free of large wind power schemes and that local planning authorities may wish to consider the cumulative impact of small schemes in their areas outside the SSAs and establish suitable criteria for separation distances from each other and from the perimeter of existing wind power schemes or the SSAs. Whilst no criteria currently exist, it will be noted that planning consent has been granted by the adjoining authority (Caerphilly Borough Council) for two wind turbines at Pontlottyn, some 2.5 kilometres south east of the application site.
Also in the adjoining authority (Rhondda Cynon Taff), a wind farm is operational at Taff Ely Wind Farm, Gilfach Goch (22 No.) whilst planning application decisions are awaited on a further 4 planning applications within the SSA. They are at Hirwaun Common (12 No.); Tŷ Newydd, north of Treherbert; south of Clydach Vale (8 No.) and north of Brynna (extension of Taff Ely Wind Farm) (11 No.).
At the time of finalizing this report (October 2008), the application at Hirwaun Common is subject of a Public Inquiry to consider a non-determination appeal.
Council will also note the concerns which the Brecon Beacons National Park Officer has expressed regarding the cumulative impact of such developments on the landscape (Section 7.3.1 of this report refers).
The cumulative impact of this and other wind farms in the locality will be accorded some weight.
9.2.5 Danger/Health Impact Of The Submitted Proposal
These are regarded as material planning considerations.
Both residents and the Commoners collectively cited the following as concerns: danger to horse riders; distraction caused to road users by the appearance of the moving turbine blades; danger to low flying aircraft; electro-magnetic effects, shadow flicker and reflected light.
Technical Advice Note (TAN) 8, which is the principal guide to the assessment of wind farm planning applications, suggests there is no evidence that motor vehicle accidents have been caused as a result of drivers being distracted by the movement of wind turbine blades and that wind turbines should not be treated any differently from other potential distractions faced by a vehicle driver.
It states that the British Horse Society, following internal consultations, has suggested a 200 metre exclusion zone either side of a public bridleway in order to avoid wind turbines frightening horses. This is not a statutory requirement and the circumstances pertaining at any particular site should be taken into account.
It suggests that experience indicated that properly designed, erected and maintained wind turbines are a “safe technology” and that few accidents have occurred involving injury to humans and no examples of injury to members of the Public.
It further suggests that the minimum desirable distance between wind turbines and occupied buildings calculated on the basis of expected noise level and visual impact will usually be greater than any distance required to meet safety requirements. (500m – see “Noise” at Sec. 9.2.11 below).
With regard to electro magnetic interference, TAN 8 suggests that “… the turbine itself poses no greater threat to health than to most domestic appliances.” (Para 2.29 refers).
On the issue of shadow flicker and reflected light, it is acknowledged that both issues could be disturbing for affected residents or even have a potential of being a health problem for people who are photo-sensitive epileptics. As with the other issues raised above, it is the particular circumstances and relative distances which are key considerations.
Whilst the above are important issues, relatively little weight may be attached to them, given the particular circumstances and distances involved, coupled with the advice contained within the government guidance. For these reasons, it is suggested that danger/health hazard may not be used as a single reason to oppose this application.
9.2.6 Ecological Impact of the Proposed Development
The Welsh Assembly Government (Planning Policy Wales and Technical Advice Note No. 5) emphasise that the effect of a development on the wildlife or landscape of any area can be a material planning consideration.
There are two principal ecological concerns regarding wind farms generally: the direct impact of the turbines and infrastructure on habitats and species; the longer term, indirect effects of an operational wind farm on adjacent habitats and spaces in the locality of the wind farm.
The major ecological impacts are more likely to be associated with site infrastructure than the turbines themselves, although bird “strikes” against the turbine blades are a possibility.
As stated at Section 7.1.6 of this report, the Town Planning Division’s (and therefore the Council’s) principal consultee on countryside and wildlife matters is the Countryside Officer. This officer offers clear objection to the proposed development on the following grounds: • the concerns originally stated with regard to the previously submitted planning application have not been adequately addressed in the current submission; • concern is again expressed that the habitat and therefore species, particularly breeding birds, may be adversely affected by the alterations to the hydrology on the site as a consequence of the access track construction. The officer considers that the applicants have not submitted sufficient information to address this concern fully. • also, concern is expressed that the methodology of the bird surveys, referred to at Section 5.1 of this report, did not follow best practice guidance.
These concerns are shared by the main statutory consultees, CCW, Environment Agency and RSPB Cymru (at 7.2.4, 7.2.6 and 7.2.15 of this report). It is appreciated however that the Environment Agency does not actually object to the proposal, but has made recommendations with regard to the access tracks and their potential effect upon the hydrology and therefore the habitat of the area.
These consultees were given copies of the further information referred to at Section 5.1 of this report.
Therefore the ecological impact of the current proposal remains a concern and therefore a substantive reason to oppose the development.
9.2.7 Economic Benefits Of The Proposed Development
This is a material planning consideration.
The stated economic benefits of the proposal, if allowed, are clearly set out by the applicants in their Environmental Statement (at Section 12; repeated at Section 5.4 of this report).
The applicants state that in addition to the overall benefits of using renewable energy as opposed to fossil fuels, economic benefits will derive from the construction process in terms of employment, from maintenance requirements in terms of employment, and from the potential to produce electricity locally equivalent to serving the needs of between six and seven and a half thousand homes. Against this of course are the stated objections of the residents who indicate that the efficiency and production statements of the wind farm electricity producers are generally overstated.
Other benefits will derive from the community benefits indicated at Section 5.5 of this report.
These stated economic benefits will be accorded appropriate weight in consideration of the application, and will be assessed against all the other material issues.
9.2.8 Environmental Benefits Of The Proposed Development
The environmental benefits deriving from this proposal are set out by the applicants in the submitted Environmental Statement and are summarised at 13.10 of that Statement and at Section 5.3 and 5.4 of this report. They include:-
• contribution to the government’s goal of reducing CO2 emissions globally and nationally; and • contribution to the national renewable energy scheme towards the government’s goal of providing a sustainable energy mix.
This contribution must be accorded weight in the consideration of this and other renewable energy projects.
9.2.9 Highway Safety/Traffic Generation Resulting From The Proposed Development
This material consideration should be considered in addition to the perceived danger/health hazard issues considered above.
Whilst this is a material planning consideration, the submitted details and the comments of the Head of Engineering do not suggest that the proposal, if allowed, will be a major highway safety issue.
The construction phase will produce movements of large vehicles, but it will be noted that the site is accessed from the nearby strategic A465 (T) Heads of the Valleys Road. Whilst the road system is poor immediately south of the application site, this in itself would not constitute a highway safety issue but more of a logistical inconvenience, which would need to be addressed by the applicants at the appropriate time.
This may not be offered as a reason to oppose this planning application.
9.2.10 Landscape And Visual Impact Of The Proposed Development
This is a significant material consideration.
The need to avoid or minimise the impacts on the landscape and the wider environment is enshrined in planning policy (Sec. 8 of this report refers).
The previous decision considered a proposal for nine wind turbines. Whilst the current application site boundary remains as before, the number of units proposed is four fewer. One of the issues therefore is whether the reduced number of units is now acceptable.
Key to this aspect of the assessment are the exposed nature of the landscape and the dynamic, moving nature of the turbines. Except for certain periods, they will be constantly moving.
The application site lies in an exposed upland landscape. It forms a visual backdrop to the northern part of the Borough, overlooked by the valley settlements. The proposal lies alongside the Brecon Beacons National Park, a designated site. The landscape is also identified as worthy of protection in both the Merthyr Tydfil and Caerphilly CBC Local Plans. The Town Planning Division Landscape Architect has expressed his concerns (at Section 7.1.7 of this report) pointing out that viewpoints from Pant, Gellideg and Dowlais Top are most significantly affected by the proposed development, each of which is primarily a residential area.
The officer also set out his concerns at various aspects of the Environmental Statement.
The Countryside Council for Wales (at 7.2.4 of this report) objected to the wind farm and associated infrastructure because of, amongst other things, its adverse impact on the landscape quality and visual amenity of the area and the views into and out of the Brecon Beacons National Park, as well as adversely impacting upon the views from Gelligaer Common.
Similarly, the Brecon Beacons National Park (at 7.3.1 of this report) expressed the opinion that, due to its proximity to the National Park, the proposed wind farm would have a significantly detrimental effect upon and would compromise the special qualities of the National Park, particularly those qualities relating to landscape and natural beauty, peace and tranquillity, open spaces and qualities of remoteness.
In his comments, the Parks Officer points out that such designated areas are visual sensitive receptors and that the integrity and quality of the landscape within the National Park should not be changed. Furthermore, that the landscape has a high sensitivity to change, given its distinctive character and that this landscape is susceptible to relatively small changes.
The Parks Officer also expressed concern at the cumulative impact of this and other wind farms in the locality.
He concludes, amongst other things, that the proposed turbines represent a major new element in the landscape and that their scale is not comparable with any other existing landscape elements.
Land use planning policy presumes against development impacting adversely upon the intrinsic landscape quality of designated sites (including National Parks), whether the development lies within or outside those designated areas.
Thus, planning policy and guidance (at Sections 8.1.14, 8.1.15, 8.1.18 8.2 and 8.3.2 of this report) attempts to steer the locational choice of wind farm development. Thus it supports the establishment of larger scale wind farms (more than 25 MW) within Strategic Search Areas, whilst limiting development up to 25 MW within urban industrial/brownfield sites. Community based wind farms of up to 5 MW are also encouraged. However, there would appear to be no provision to support wind farms subject of the current proposal in the current location. Policy and guidance militates against this proposal.
Council will note that the adopted development plans do not support proposals of this kind within landscape protection areas, nor does the Local Development Plan (Deposit Version) take a different stance.
To paraphrase Technical Advice Note 8 which is quoted extensively at Section 8.3.2 of this report:
• most areas outside SSAs should remain free of large on shore wind power schemes; • outside SSAs the cumulative impact of SSAs should be taken into account; and • planning permission for development of more than 5 MW outside SSAs and outside urban industrial/brownfield sites may be refused (Section 2.13 refers).
Reference to Annex D of Technical Advice Note 8 at Sec. 8.3.2 of this report emphasises the following propositions:- • the integrity and quality of the landscape should be maintained within designated areas, including National Parks, i.e. a presumption against change; • the Strategic Search Areas (SSAs) are identified as the optimum sites for larger wind farms. The final choice of location for SSAs considered the cumulative landscape and visual impact at an all Wales level. Thus it is implicitly accepted landscape will change within SSAs and areas immediately adjacent thereto; and • in the rest of Wales, outside both SSAs and designated areas, the implicit objective is to maintain the landscape character i.e. no significant change.
To assist in the determination of the preceding planning application (No. 040361), the Town Planning Division commissioned an independent assessment of the anticipated landscape and visual impact of the proposal for nine turbines. The work was undertaken by John Campion Associates (Chartered Landscape Architects and Environmental Management Consultants), Shropshire.
Notwithstanding the fact that there are four fewer wind turbines now proposed than before, it is considered that the report’s conclusions remain valid. They are quoted below.
“…6.1 The proposed development site lies in an exposed upland landscape which forms the visual backdrop for the northern areas of Merthyr Tydfil, many of which are residential. The proposed development site is adjacent to the BBNP and lies within the local landscape designations intended to protect the landscape identified by two adjacent local authorities – MTCBC and Caerphilly CBC.
6.2 The landscape impacts of the proposed development would be experienced to a considerable degree within the Merthyr North Flank landscape character type and there would be further significant effects on the nearby landscape of the Pontsticill Valley, as a result of some of the turbines being visible on the skyline of what is presently an open ridge with no detracting landscape elements. Thus the proposals would have landscape effects both on the landscape of the town of Merthyr Tydfil itself and on a well-used recreation attraction within the BBNP, with a high degree of public accessibility.
6.3 The significant visual impacts of the proposed development are noted in many of the close and middle distance viewpoints examined. Many of these involve local residents who would experience those views all year round from within and around their properties. Others are from important regional roads and trunk roads, notably the A465 and A470. The effects on recreational users on the Taff Trail and around the Pontsticill and Pentwyn Reservoirs have not been assessed in the ES.
6.4 The omission of potentially significant viewpoints from the assessment leads us to conclude that the landscape and visual impacts have been somewhat understated. We acknowledge that personal perceptions of wind turbines can be positive, neutral and negative. Nevertheless the large number of potential receptors – especially residential and recreational – which may be directly affected gives cause for concern.
6.5 There is a need to accommodate wind energy developments in locations which would not cause unacceptably adverse impacts on landscape and visual amenity. We believe that the proposed development does not fall within” - - - the Strategic Search Area. Accordingly it falls to the Local Planning Authority to encourage proposals for relatively small, possibly community-based proposals for wind turbines to come forward.
“6.6 This location is in our opinion too close to the BBNP boundary and would have an unacceptable adverse effect on the landscape character of the Merthyr North Flank landscape character type and the wider landscape, including the southern extremity of the Brecon Beacons National Park. It would have unacceptable detrimental effects on the Landscape Protection Area in which it would be located and upon the contiguous Special Landscape Area within Caerphilly CBC boundary to the east. As a consequence of these observations, we believe that there are cogent landscape grounds for refusal of planning consents. …”
The inevitable conclusion from the above comments, planning policies and guidance is that the benefit of the reduced number of wind turbines (from 9 to 5) is a nugatory one and that the landscape and visual impact of the current proposal remains a substantive reason to oppose this development.
9.2.11 Noise Impact Of The Proposed Development
The potential of the proposed development to generate noise and its impacts upon the amenity of residents is clearly a material planning consideration. This is acknowledged in Planning Policy Wales (at 13.15.1) and Technical Advice Note 11. Whilst government policy and advice indicate that this is an issue which needs to be considered carefully in the assessment of any planning application, it also indicates that local planning authorities may attach conditions, where appropriate, to planning permissions for new development.
This proposal, as with other wind farm proposals, has the potential to generate both aerodynamic and mechanical noise. The potential for noise generation and its impact has been factored into the Environmental Statement (at Section 8). It concluded that the predicted levels and measured background noise levels indicate that, for all dwellings neighbouring the proposed development, wind turbine noise will meet the accepted criteria for day time and night time periods.
The Council’s professional advisor in this regard, the Head of Environmental Protection and Public Health, was more cautious in his assessment, but nonetheless offered no objection to the proposal, subject to the imposition of specific planning conditions in the event that consent is granted for the development (Section 7.1.12 of this report refers).
Technical Advice Note 8, at Annex C, indicates that wind generated background noise increases with wind speed and at a faster rate than the turbine noise increases. The noise of the wind farm is therefore more likely to be noticeable at low wind speeds. Varying the speed of the turbines in such conditions can, if necessary, reduce the sound output from modern turbines.
Furthermore, TAN 8 (at Appendix D) suggests that 500m is considered an appropriate separation distance between a wind turbine and a residential property to avoid unacceptable noise impacts.
Council will note that the wind turbines subject of the current planning application are at a greater distance from the nearest residential dwellings and settlements than the previously submitted application, which itself met the criteria of TAN 8 (Section 2.1 of this report refers).
Therefore this application may not be opposed on the grounds of potential noise generation.
9.2.12 Precedent Set by Approving The Submitted Application
Objectors expressed concern that approval of this proposal could make it more difficult to oppose future extensions to a permitted scheme or other similar schemes in the vicinity.
Each planning application falls to be determined on its respective planning merits, in relation to the site circumstances, planning policies, guidance and material planning considerations at the time.
Therefore the planning application may not be opposed for reason of precedent alone.
9.2.13 Proximity Of Proposed Development
Objectors expressed concern that the current application, with its reduced number of wind turbines, is still too close to settlements and to the Brecon Beacons National Park.
Whilst this is considered material to determination of the planning application, it is not considered that the wind turbines are too close to individual residential properties or to settlements as the wind turbines as described at 2.1, are much further away than originally proposed.
This application may not be opposed on this reason alone.
However, it is acknowledged that the application site boundary remains as before and that in the overall landscape context, as considered at Sec. 9.2.10 above, is not too different from its predecessor.
9.2.14 Residential Amenity Impact Of Proposed Development
Although the planning process does not protect private interests e.g. the loss of view or devaluation of property, there is a public interest in protecting the amenity of residents. As such, residential amenity is a material planning consideration in the determination of this application. Residential amenity and the residents’ enjoyment of their dwellings has a direct impact on the quality of life of those residents and their ability to enjoy and relax within and around their homes for day to day living and recreation.
However, residential amenity is a very subjective issue and, to a large extent, a vague concept. In 1920 the Courts attempted a definition of residential amenity which could include:- “…. pleasant circumstances, features, advantages.”
Many of the stated concerns of residents have been addressed in this section of the report under the specific topics (danger, health, noise, proximity etc.) and have not been offered as reasons for opposing the proposal of themselves, due to the relative distance between the settlements and the turbine positions.
TAN 8 acknowledges that 500m is currently considered a typical separation distance between a wind turbine and residential properties in order to avoid unacceptable noise impacts. The distances between wind turbines and settlements as indicated at Section 2.1 of this report vary between 1.2 and 1.5 km, a much greater linear distance.
It is likely however that the real amenity issue centres around that of perception: the residents’ perception that their amenity would somehow be diminished by the introduction of the wind farm. It is acknowledged that residents enjoy the application site which is currently open moorland and that many of them use it for informal recreational purposes.
That said, taking into account the issues cited above, which might have otherwise impacted upon the amenity of residents, it is not considered that the amenity will be adversely affected, though the perception might and that itself is of relevance. Nonetheless it is not proposed to offer this as a reason to oppose the current proposal.
9.2.15 Tourism Impact Of Proposed Development
Objectors expressed concern that the wind farm could deter tourism to this part of the Borough which is a key gateway to the Brecon Beacons National Park and that the main impact would fall upon the Brecon Mountain Railway which currently attracts more than 70,000 visitors per annum, providing benefit to the local economy.
Whilst the perception of the impact on tourism is understandable, at the time of writing this report there is little specific empirical evidence to support such a claim.
For that reason, this planning application may not be opposed for this reason alone.
9.2.16 Vibrations Caused By Proposed Development
This concern was expressed by some objectors and whilst in other circumstances it may be regarded as material to determination of a planning application, in view of the increased relative distance of the turbines to the nearest residential dwellings and settlements generally it is concluded that this may not be used as a valid reason for refusing the planning application. As stated above, Tan 8 indicates that properly designed, erected and maintained wind turbines are safe technologies.
Therefore this application may not be opposed for this reason alone.
9.3 The advice contained within the following documents must also be accorded considerable weight as material planning considerations:- Technical Advice Notes 5, 8 and Landmap (Secs. 8.3.1, 8.3.2 and 8.4.1 of this report refers).
10.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION
10.1 CONCLUSION
The basic tenet of the post war town planning system is the control of development on and use of land in the public interest. It aims to protect the amenity and environment of towns, cities and the countryside, whilst promoting high quality sustainable development.
In determining planning applications, local planning authorities are obliged to consider the provisions of Section 54A of the 1990 Town and Country Planning Act, as amended by the 1991 Planning and Compensation Act, further amended by Section 38(6) of the 2004 Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act.
In essence, this legislation requires that: “If regard is to be had to the Development Plan for the purpose of any determination to be made under the planning Acts, the determination must be made in accordance with the Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.” (Section 38 (6) of the 2004 Act refers).
The relevant policies of the adopted development plans and other policy documents and guidance notes are set out at Section 8 of this report.
The relevant policies of the adopted development plans must, where relevant, take primacy in planning decisions.
Those considerations which are held to be material to the determination of this application are set out at Section 9 of this report, along with a brief summary of which factors constitute material considerations.
My Head of Town Planning has assessed this application on its respective planning merits. In so doing he has paid due regard to the information submitted by the applicants, the relevant planning policies and guidance; he has also taken into account and given appropriate weight to the material planning considerations and the views expressed by statutory consultees and by third parties. Whilst the revised application has merit in a general renewable energy context, it is concluded the proposal is inappropriate in relation to this site, for the reasons set out below.
10.2 RECOMMENDATION
The application BE REFUSED for the following REASONS: (1) The erection of a wind farm in this location would have an adverse impact on the quality and character of the landscape within which it is situated and to the setting of the Brecon Beacons National Park, to the detriment of visual amenity. As such, the proposal is out of accord with Policies EV4 and U1 of the adopted Mid Glamorgan (Merthyr Tydfil County Borough) Replacement Structure Plan, Policies NH1, NH7 and RU1 of the adopted Merthyr Tydfil Borough Local Plan and is contrary to national planning policy and guidance, in particular Planning Policy Wales, Ministerial Interim Planning Policy Statement 01/2005 (Planning for Renewable Energy) and Technical Advice Note No. 8: Planning for Renewable Energy.
(2) The construction of access tracks associated with the erection and maintenance of the wind turbines will have an unacceptable, adverse effect upon the hydrology of the application site, to the detriment of the immediate habitat and associated species. As such, the proposal is out of accord with Policies NH1 and NH7 of the adopted Merthyr Tydfil Borough Local Plan, is contrary to national planning policy and guidance and policies TB1, TB7, AS6 and BW4 of the Deposit Version of the Local Development Plan.
G W CHAPMAN DEPUTY CHIEF EXECUTIVE AND DIRECTOR CUSTOMER CORPORATE SERVICES
BACKGROUND PAPERS:
Title of Document(s) Document(s) Date Document Location
Merthyr Common Wind Farm Non September 2006 Town Planning Division, Tŷ Keir Technical Summary Volume 1 Hardie (Bheara)
Merthyr Common Wind Farm September 2006 Town Planning Division, Tŷ Keir Environmental Statement (Re- Hardie submission) Volume 2 (Bheara)
Planning Appraisal Volume 3 Town Planning Division, Tŷ Keir (Bheara) Hardie
The Brundtland Report 1987 Town Planning Division, Tŷ Keir Hardie
Earth (Rio) Summit 1992 Town Planning Division, Tŷ Keir Hardie
The Environment Act 1995 Town Planning Division, Tŷ Keir Hardie
Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change 1997 Town Planning Division, Tŷ Keir Hardie
The European Commission (EC) 1997 Town Planning Division, Tŷ Keir White Paper on Renewable Hardie Energy Source
EU Renewable Energy Directive 2001 Town Planning Division, Tŷ Keir 2003/54/EC Hardie
A Better Quality of Life: A Strategy 1999 Town Planning Division, Tŷ Keir for Sustainable Development for Hardie the UK
Climate Change: The UK 2000 Town Planning Division, Tŷ Keir Programme Hardie
The Renewables Obligation 2002 Town Planning Division, Tŷ Keir Hardie
Our Energy Future: Creating a Low 2003 Town Planning Division, Tŷ Keir Carbon Economy Hardie
Securing the Future: UK 2005 Town Planning Division, Tŷ Keir Sustainable Development Strategy Hardie
Meeting the Energy Challenge: A 2007 Town Planning Division, Tŷ Keir White Paper on Energy, Hardie Department of Trade and Industry
Climate Change Bill 2007 Town Planning Division, Tŷ Keir Hardie
Environment Strategy for Wales 2006 Town Planning Division, Tŷ Keir Hardie
Planning Policy Wales March 2002 Town Planning Division, Tŷ Keir Hardie
Ministerial Interim Planning Policy July 2005 Town Planning Division, Tŷ Keir Statement 01/2005: “Planning for Hardie Renewable Energy” (MIPPS)
Ministerial Interim Planning Policy December 2006 Town Planning Division, Tŷ Keir Statement on Climate Change Hardie (Consultation Draft) (MIPPS)
One Wales – a Progressive June 2007 Town Planning Division, Tŷ Keir Agenda for the Government of Hardie Wales (An Agreement Between the Labour and Plaid Cymru Groups In The National Assembly)
Renewable Energy Routemap for February 2008 Town Planning Division, Tŷ Keir Wales (Consultation Draft) Hardie
The Adopted Mid Glamorgan Adopted August 1996 Town Planning Division, Tŷ Keir (Merthyr Tydfil County Borough) Hardie Council Replacement Structure Plan 1991-2006
The Adopted Merthyr Tydfil Adopted May 1999 Town Planning Division, Tŷ Keir Borough Local Plan (1996-2006) Hardie
Merthyr Tydfil County Borough Consultation 30/10/08 – 12/12/08 Town Planning Division, Tŷ Keir Council Local Development Plan Hardie 2006-2021
The Brecon Beacons National Park 2005 BBNP Offices Management Plan
The Brecon Beacons National Park 1999 Town Planning Division, Tŷ Keir Adopted Local Plan Hardie
The Brecon Beacons National Park 2004 (Deposit Version) Town Planning Division, Tŷ Keir Unitary Development Plan 2001-16 Hardie
Town and Country Planning 1999 Town Planning Division, Tŷ Keir (Environmental Impact Hardie Assessment) Regulations (England & Wales)
Technical Advice Note 5: Nature November 1996 Town Planning Division, Tŷ Keir Conservation and Planning Hardie
Technical Advice Note 8: Planning July 2005 Town Planning Division, Tŷ Keir for Renewable Energy Hardie
Technical Advice Note 11 – Noise 1997 Town Planning Division, Tŷ Keir Hardie
Landmap (Landscape Character 2002 Town Planning Division, Tŷ Keir Guidance) Hardie
The Merthyr Tydfil Local Agenda August 2001 Town Planning Division, Tŷ Keir 21, Actions Now – Quality of Life Hardie