PLANNING APPLICATION: 11/01034/APP

In the event that a recommendation on this planning application is overturned the Committee is reminded of the advice contained on the front page of the agenda for Reports on Applications

The Proposal

This application seeks planning approval for the erection of 1 no. 800 kW wind turbine, a temporary wind mast and associated works on forestry land at Bluehill Quarry, Craigellachie. The turbine would be a three bladed model, with a rotor diameter of 48m and a base to tip height of 99.6m. The wind mast would be 76m high.

Associated works include the construction of concrete foundations for the turbine mast, an associated hard standing, formation/upgrading of an access track and connection works to the grid (to be specified).

The Site The turbine would be sited on sloping forestry land (which has been cleared of trees) overlooking the A941 and the River Spey, 1km south of Craigellachie. Occupying an elevated position on the lower north facing slopes of Blue Hill it would be readily visible from the River Spey valley, surrounding countryside and the road network within the area.

The site is located within an Area of Great Landscape Value, but is not located within a Preferred Search Area as defined in the Moray Local Plan 2008. It lies within the catchment of the River Spey, which along with a number of its tributaries, has been designated as a Special Area of Conservation (SAC).

A number of residential properties lie within the general locality, the nearest being Moor Cottage 430m to the northeast and various dwellings along the southern edge of Craigellachie 850m to the north.

Policy / Objections-Representations / Consultations - See Appendix

History

For the site:

None.

For the area:

11/01330/APP – Planning refusal to erect 1 no. wind turbine (66.6m to tip) at Fearndearn, Craigellachie (refused on visual impact and landscape character grounds). The site lies approximately 1.4 km to the northeast of the current proposal. A subsequent appeal to the Scottish Ministers against this decision was recently dismissed in July 2012.

11/00310/APP - Planning approval to erect 1 no. wind turbine (20.9m to tip) at Viewfield Farm, Craigellachie. This lies approx. 1.6 km to the north of the current proposal.

10/01947/APP – Planning approval to construct 1 no. wind turbine (28m to tip) at Strathelen, Archiestown. This lies approx. 2.8 km to the northwest of the current proposal.

11/01268/APP – Planning approval to 2 no. wind turbines (27.1m to tip height) at Tombain, Boharm, Craigellachie. These lie approx. 4.8 km to the northeast of the current proposal.

12/00065/APP – Planning application to erect 2 no. wind turbines (45.5m to tip height) at land southeast of Tombain Farm, Boharm, Craigellachie, withdrawn July 2012. These lie approx. 4.9 km to the northeast of the current proposal.

10/00795/APP – Planning approval to erect 1 no. wind turbine (66.6m to tip) at Ardoch Farm, Mulben. This lies approx. 6.8 km to the northeast of the current proposal.

02/02099/EIA – Planning approval allowed on appeal for the erection 21 wind turbines (100m to tip) and 2 wind masts at Hills Of Towie, Knockan And McHattie's Cairn, Drummuir on 2 Feb 2005. These have been erected and are located 6 - 8 km northeast of the current proposal.

Advertisement

The application has been advertised under neighbour notification procedures and as a departure to the development plan.

Observations

Section 25 of the 1997 Act as amended requires applications to be determined in accordance with the development plan i.e. the approved Moray Structure Plan 2007 and the adopted Moray Local Plan 2008 unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In this case the main planning issues are considered below.

Main determining issues: Relevant development plan policies in this case include 2 (l) and (k) of Moray Structure Plan 2007 and ER1 Renewable Energy Proposals, E7 Areas of Great Landscape Value, IMP1 Development Requirements, EP8 Pollution and T2 Provision of Road Access of Moray Local Plan 2008. Associated guidance includes Wind Energy Policy Guidance 2005, Policy Interpretation Note and Safeguarding Guidance (approved by the Council April 2010 and June 2011), Moray Wind Energy Landscape Capacity Study (approved by the Council in July 2012), Scottish Planning Policy 2010 and Scottish Government web based renewables advice.

Landscape and visual impacts: Policy 2 (l) of the Moray Structure Plan promotes “sensitive” renewable energy developments. Policy ER1 of the Moray Local Plan states that commercial wind energy developments should be located within a Preferred Search Area identified in the council‟s Wind Energy Policy Guidance and should also meet specified criteria, including not resulting in unacceptable impacts on the visual appearance and the landscape character of the area, or any unacceptable cumulative impacts. Local Plan policy IMP1 requires new developments to be sensitively sited, designed and serviced appropriate to the amenity of the surrounding area. The site is located within the River Spey corridor, designated as an Area of Great Landscape Value within the local plan and as such is subject to policy E7 Areas of Great Landscape Value (AGLV). This states that proposals which would have an adverse effect on an Area of Great Landscape Value will be refused unless they incorporate the highest standards of siting and design for rural areas, will not have a significant adverse effect on the landscape character of the area, and are in general accordance with the guidance in the Moray and Nairn Landscape Character Assessment.

In accordance with the Policy Interpretation approved by the Planning and Regulatory Services Committee on 6 April 2010 to reflect Scottish Government guidance on renewable development (SPP 2010), proposals involving up to three turbines can be considered on merit, depending upon impact on landscape, environmental criteria and any other material considerations (including those detailed within ER1 and IMP1). The interpretation also confirms that cumulative Impact will be a prime consideration. In June 2011, the Council agreed an additional interpretation where a safeguarding distance of 10 x the rotor diameter be applied between residential property and commercial wind turbines to cover issues including noise, shadow flicker, safety, and electromagnetic interference outwith preferred search areas.

The Moray Wind Energy Landscape Capacity Study, recently approved by the Council in July 2012, is also a material consideration and provides further guidance for assessing turbines. This divides Moray into a number of Landscape Character types and considers the capacity of each for 4 typologies of turbine (i.e. small, small/medium, medium and large), using a range of sensitivity criteria. The current proposal falls within the category of large typology/turbine (i.e. between 80-130m) and lies within Landscape Character Type 7: Broad Farmed Valley. This encompasses the valleys of the Spey, the Fiddich and the narrower tributaries of Glen Rinnes, Glen Livet and the River Avon and has a varied landscape of steep sided valleys that are well settled, diverse vegetation patterns, broad undulating terraces with side slopes and the landmark hill of Ben Aigen. The landscape type is identified as having a „high‟ sensitivity to large typologies due to their likely significant effects on landscape scale, the setting of settlement and because of cumulative landscape and visual effects that would arise with existing wind farm developments at Hill of Towie, Rothes and Pauls Hill. Given these factors, the guidance indicates that there is no scope to accommodate turbines of this scale within this particular landscape without detracting from its character.

Against this policy and guidance background, the main determining issues in this case are the landscape and visual impacts of the proposed turbine, including cumulative impacts, having regard to the site‟s location in an Area of Great Landscape Value (AGLV).

The proposed wind turbine, by virtue of its height and elevated position within an attractive sweeping valley and open setting, would appear as a dominant feature within the landscape, particularly when viewed from the surrounding countryside to the north, west and east (as demonstrated by the Zone of Theoretical Visibility Map submitted with the application). Any visual impact in this regard would be exacerbated further by its prominent skyline location at a point along the River Spey corridor where several valleys converge, which is overlooked by numerous properties and to those travelling along the A941 and A95 roads. As such the turbine would appear as an unduly prominent structure that would fail to integrate sensitively with the landscape, the scenic qualities of which are recognised by its designation as a strategically important Area of Great Landscape Value. The resultant significant impact would detrimentally affect the rural character of this part of the countryside to an unacceptable degree and accordingly the application attracts a recommendation of refusal on the grounds of being contrary to policies 2 (l), ER1, E7 and IMP1 and associated guidance, as contained within the Moray Wind Energy Landscape Capacity Study (Approved July 2012).

In relation to cumulative impact, operational wind farms in this part of district include the Hill of Towie wind farm (21 x 100 m to tip) 6 – 8 km to the northeast, and the Rothes and Pauls Hill wind farms further afield 12.5 km to the northwest and 16 km to the west. In addition permission has been granted for a single 66.6m high turbine at Ardoch Farm along with numerous smaller turbines at various sites along the A95 corridor to the northeast (some of which are now operational).

The proposed turbine taken together with these operational and approved turbines would lead to unacceptable cumulative impacts both sequentially for those travelling along the nearby A95 (and other routes within the wider area) and statically from various vantage points within the surrounding area (to the northeast and northwest). The cumulative landscape and visual effects resulting from this inter-visibility between these proposed, approved and consented turbine developments would in turn result in a detrimental loss of rural character, contrary to policies 2 (l), ER1, E7 and IMP1 and associated guidance, as contained within the Moray Wind Energy Landscape Capacity Study (Approved July 2012).

Ecology/Hydrology: The works to construct the turbine, access track, hard standing, and cabling would be on forestry land which has low bio diversity value. These are considered to be acceptable and can be accommodated without significant adverse impact on the environment or local ecology. Had the application been recommended for approval conditions requiring submission and approval of a construction method statement to safeguard against pollution of any water courses and informative advice in relation to protected species would have been attached to the consent. This would be in line with standing advice from SEPA and SNH.

Heritage and Archeaology: The proposal would not affect any historical or archaeological interests.

Noise: During initial assessment of the application, it was established that noise levels for the proposed turbine were predicted to exceed the L A 90 35 dB criteria for absolute limits at 10m/s wind speed. The applicant was advised that they could pursue an application on the grounds that background noise levels may mask some of the turbine noise and the Environmental Health Section understood that a noise consultant was being engaged to undertake a detailed background noise survey to determine if appropriate mitigation could be achieved. No such assessment has been submitted to date and the applicant has requested that the application be determined as it stands. This lack of information and the failure to properly demonstrate that the turbine will not cause to unacceptable noise disturbance in accordance with policy ER1, IMP1 and EP8 requirements shall form the basis of a further reason of refusal.

Shadow flicker i.e. the optical effect caused by the intermittent obstruction of a light source by moving object: Scottish Government Renewables advice and safeguarding guidance approved by the Council in June 2011 recommends that a turbine be no nearer to neighbouring property that ten times the rotor diameter. In the present case this distance would be 480 m. The nearest house, Moor Cottage located 430m to the northeast is within this distance indicating that there may be some impact which requires further assessment. As no information has been submitted in this regard and the applicant has requested that the application be determined as it stands, this shall form the basis of a further refusal reason.

Tourism/recreation interests: As already stated, the proposed turbine would occupy a prominent location within the Spey Valley corridor, close to the village of Craigellachie, and which is popular for its tourism and recreation interests. The abovementioned adverse impacts upon the character of this designated landscape and its associated visual effects upon the valley and surrounding area in such close proximity would therefore have a negative impact upon tourism and recreation interests.

Electromagnetic interference: Consultation with the relevant bodies including Ofcom and associated radio operators in the area has confirmed no likely impact on services. Use of the BBC Wind Farm/TV Reception tool has identified possible interference to the TV reception of a number of homes in the area. Had the application been recommended for approval, this issue would have been addressed by a condition requiring investigation and installation of an alternative digital or satellite service, if interference were to occur.

Aircraft Activity: The National Air Traffic Service (NATS) and Ministry of Defence have been consulted on the proposal and have confirmed that there will no safety risks to aircraft as a result of the development. The MOD has requested that it be notified of start of works, the maximum height of construction equipment and turbine location information if permission is granted.

Access: Delivery of the turbine components is likely to be via the A95, A96, A941, and U102H roads, the later of which is constrained in terms of being of single track width, having limited passing places and horizontal/vertical constraints on road alignment.

In relation to the A95 and A96 trunk road elements, Transport Scotland has raised no objection to planning permission being given, subject to conditions covering delivery of the construction elements (abnormal loads) to the site and submission of a Route Access Report.

With regard to the A941 and U102H roads under the control of the Moray Council, the Transportation Section has confirmed the requirement for evidence from the applicant that manoeuvres at the junctions required to deliver the turbine components can be accommodated on the public road network, in particular at the A941/U102H junction where there may be the requirement to use third party land. This should also include swept path analyses for the abnormal load deliveries to the site. The Transportation Section notes that no such information has been submitted to date and therefore recommends refusal for this development. This lack of information and failure to properly demonstrate that delivery of the turbine will not adversely road safety in accordance with policy T2 requirements shall form the basis of a further reason of refusal.

Recommendation: Based on the above conclusions, the proposal is considered to be contrary to the provisions of the development plan and is recommendation for refusal.

Author/Contact Officer: Richard Smith Ext: 01343 563256 Planning Officer

Jim Grant Head of Development Services

APPENDIX

POLICY

Moray Structure Plan 2007 and/or Moray Local Plan 2008

Policy EP8: Pollution

Planning applications that are subject to significant pollution such as noise, including RAF aircraft noise, air, water and light will only be approved where a detailed assessment report on the levels, character and transmission of the potential pollution is provided by the applicant to show how the pollution can be appropriately mitigated. Where the Council applies conditions to the consent to deal with pollution matters these may include subsequent independent monitoring of pollution levels.

Policy T2: Provision of Road Access

The Council will require that a suitable and safe road access from the public highway is provided to serve new development and where appropriate any necessary modifications to the existing road network to mitigate the impact of development traffic, and the provision of appropriate facilities for public transport, cycling, and pedestrians. Access proposals that have a significant adverse impact on the surrounding landscape and environment that cannot be mitigated will be refused.

SPP17 details that there will be a presumption against new accesses onto a trunk road, and that the Scottish Executive will consider the case for such junctions where nationally significant economic growth or regeneration benefits can be demonstrated.

E7: Areas of Great Landscape Value (AGLV)

Development proposals which would have an adverse effect on an Area of Great Landscape Value will be refused unless: a. they incorporate the highest standards of siting and design for rural areas, b. they will not have a significant adverse effect on the landscape character of the area, c. they are in general accordance with the guidance in the Moray and Nairn Landscape Character Assessment.

The Council will require full detailed planning applications covering site layout, landscaping, boundary treatment, building design and material finishes for all proposals within AGLVs.

EP9: Contaminated Land

Development proposals on potentially contaminated land will be approved if: a. site specific risk assessments are undertaken by the applicant to identify any actual or possible significant risk to human health or safety, or to the environment and that any previous historic uses are not continuing to cause significant pollution to the water environment, and b. effective remediation measures are agreed to ensure the site is made suitable for any new use granted consent, and c. appropriate measures for the disposal of any contaminated material is agreed with the Council.

The Council will consult SEPA in respect of pollution of controlled waters and licensing issues arising from remediation works.

ER1: Renewable Energy Proposals

Renewable energy proposals will be considered favourably where they meet the following criteria: a. they are compatible with policies to safeguard and enhance the built and natural environment b. they do not lead to the permanent loss or permanent damage to, prime agricultural land, c. they are compatible with tourism/recreational interest and facilities, they do not interfere with aircraft activity, d. they do not result in an unacceptable impact in terms of visual appearance, landscape character, noise, electro-magnetic disturbance, watercourse engineering, peat land hydrological impacts, pollution, traffic generation or damage to the local ecology, and e. they do not result in an unacceptable cumulative impact.

Proposals are required to provide “decommissioning arrangements” to illustrate how the site will be reinstated if and when the plant ceases to operate. This may be enforced through a section 75 agreement.

Commercial wind energy developments should be located within a Preferred Search area identified in the Wind Energy Policy Guidance and meet the above criteria.

IMP1: Development Requirements

New development will require to be sensitively sited, designed and serviced appropriate to the amenity of the surrounding area. It must meet the following criteria: a. the scale, density and character must be appropriate to the surrounding area, b. the development must be integrated into the surrounding landscape, c. adequate roads, public transport, and cycling and footpath provision must be available, at a level appropriate to the development, d. adequate water, drainage and power provision must be made, e. sustainable urban drainage systems should be used where appropriate, in all new developments f. there must be adequate availability of social, educational, healthcare and community facilities, g. the development should, where appropriate, demonstrate how it will incorporate renewable energy systems and sustainable design and construction. Supplementary Guidance will be produced to expand upon some of these criteria, h. provision for the long term maintenance of public landscape and amenity areas must be made, i. conservation of natural and built environment resources must be demonstrated, j. appropriate provision to deal with flood related issues must be made, including the possibility of coastal flooding from rising sea levels and coastal erosion, k. pollution, including ground water must be avoided, l. appropriate provision to deal with contamination issues must be made, and m. the development must not sterilise significant workable reserves of minerals, prime quality agricultural land, or preferred areas for forestry planting. n. where appropriate, arrangements for waste management should be provided.

Policy IMP3: Developer Contributions

Contributions will be sought from developers in cases where, in the Council‟s view, a development would have a measurable adverse or negative impact on existing infrastructure, community facilities or amenity, and those contributions would have to be appropriate to reduce, eliminate or compensate for that impact.

Where the necessary contributions can be secured satisfactorily by means of planning conditions attached to a planning permission, this should be done, and only where this cannot be achieved, for whatever reason, the required contributions should be secured through a planning agreement.

OBJECTIONS-REPRESENTATIONS

Fifteen letters of objection:

Mr Alistair Irwin, Drumuaine, Craigellachie, Aberlour, Banffshire, AB38 9Q Ms Joyce Lorimer, Craighurst, Hill Street, Craigellachie, AB38 9TB Mr Robin Hassall, Laverock Brae, Craigellachie, Aberlour, AB389QX TJ Alexander, Belnagarrow, Boharm, Craigellachie, Aberlour, AB38 9RL Mrs C D Donaghy, Strathspey House, Victoria Street, Craigellachie, Aberlour, AB38 9SR Miss Jane Milne, 38 Provost Christie Drive, Rothes, Aberlour, AB38 7BX J Mulligan Windyridge, Craigellachie, Aberlour, AB38 9QX Ms Ariane Vilaseca, Arndilly Estate, Craigellachie, AB38 9QS Mr George Cordiner The Pines, Craigellachie, Aberlour, AB38 9QX Mr Ali Erginsoy, Ardchattan, Fife Street, Craigellachie, AB38 9SZ Dr Angus Findlay, Muirton, Craigellachie, Aberlour, AB38 9ST Mrs Shirley Milne, Alcudia Boarding Kennels & Cattery, Elchies, Aberlour, AB38 9SD Francesca And Gareth Bex, Glengower House, John Street, Craigellachie, Banffshire, AB38 9SW Mrs Rosemary Garrity, Windyhillock, Craigellachie, Aberlour, Banffshire, AB38 9RJ Mr Christopher, Berry Green Rothes House, Manse Brae, Rothes, AB38 7AF

Two letters of representation:

Mrs B Secretary, Craigellachie Village Council, 1 John Street, Craigellachie, AB38 9SW Brenda Cooper, 1 John Street, Craigellachie, Aberlour, Banffshire, AB38 9SW

Visual Impact/Impact Upon Landscape The turbine at nearly 100m high will be massive, and will affect the small village of Craigellachie. Proposal totally out of keeping with scenic beauty of Speyside, view of Ben Rinnes from the whole of Gaulwell and beyond will be totally spoiled. Proposal would seriously harm the visual character of this Area of Great Landscape Value. The proposed site is inappropriate for a structure of this size and visual obtrusiveness. It would be seen from several directions and in particular mar the spectacular vista of Speyside as you come into Rothes from Elgin. Comment: This issue is addressed within the observations section above.

Contrary to Development Plan Development is contrary to development plan policies, E7, ED8, ER1 and IMP1 and this should be sufficient to turn the application down. Comment: This issue is addressed within the observations section above.

Impact upon amenity Turbine will affect the amenity of surrounding residential properties in terms of noise and affect human health. Comment: The issue of noise is covered within the observations section above.

Loss of Property Value Proposed turbine will affect property values in area. Comment: Impact upon property value is not a planning consideration and therefore cannot be taken into account as part of the consideration of the application.

Impact upon Tourism The turbine will have a major impact on tourism in the area, which is vital to the economy of Speyside. The turbine should be in less obtrusive locations, not in the centre of the whisky trail and next to the award winning cooperage attraction. Proposal would be contrary to the Council‟s strategy to promote tourism. Comment: This issue is addressed within the observations section above.

Community Benefit Proposal includes no community benefit. Only the applicant will gain financially. Comment: Financial considerations associated with wind turbine development are not a planning matter and therefore cannot be taken into account in the consideration of this application. Although the applicant has indicated that some form of contribution could be made, this would not override the landscape and visual impact objections to the proposal, which are primary material considerations in this case.

Lack of Publicity/Local Consultation Concerns regarding lack of local consultation about proposed development. Comment: The application is a „local‟ development as defined in the Development Management Regulations and as such is not subject to pre-application consultation procedures. Neighbour notification procedures have been followed, which has involved statutory advertisement in the local press in accordance with the Development Management Regulations.

Precedent Approval of the application would create a precedent for more wind turbine applications to be submitted in this area. Comment: The application is being recommended for refusal.

CONSULTATIONS

Environmental Health Section - Objection on the grounds that insufficient information has been submitted to adequately demonstrate that the proposals will not cause unacceptable noise disturbance to surrounding residential properties.

Transportation Section - Objection on grounds that insufficient information has been submitted to adequately demonstrate that the proposal will not have a detrimental impact upon road safety or that the public road network is capable of safely accommodating delivery of the turbine components.

Contaminated Land Section - No objection.

Planning Gain Unit – The proposal attracts no developer contributions.

Regional Archaeologist – No objection.

National Roads Directorate - No objection subject to conditions requiring prior approval of a Route Access Report for any abnormal loads and associated accommodation measures, and use of recognised Quality Assured traffic management consultant approved by Transport Scotland during delivery of wind turbine construction materials.

National Air Traffic Systems Limited - No objection. Proposal does not conflict with safeguarding criteria.

Ministry of Defence Safeguarding & Byelaws Section – No objection. Standard comments requiring notification of date of start/end of works, maximum height of construction equipment and turbine location information.

Strathisla Community Council – Objection. Strathisla Community Council are concerned that our area has already reached its saturation point with regards to turbines and applications for more single turbines in this area will only detract from the surrounding aesthetics of the countryside. There are now many large obtrusive developments seen in our area but single turbines are perceived by local people to have no community benefits and an eyesore on our beautiful landscape.

Ofcom – Provides system operator fixed link details. (No objections received from operators).

Scottish Natural Heritage – No objection. Also advise that protected species i.e. bats are unlikely to be affected by the proposal.

RSPB – No objection, but comments/advice re impact upon birds.

Health and Safety Executive (Quarries) – No comments received.