Inspector's Supplementary Report

An Bord Pleanála Inspector’s Supplementary Report PL 05E.244753 Development: 10 YEARS DURATION FOR A PROPOSED SINGLE WIND TURBINE DEVELOPMENT AT THIS SITE AT BAUVILLE, KEELOGS & CLONGLASH AND DRUMINDERRY UPPER & LOWER TOWNLANDS, BUNCRANA, INISHOWEN, COUNTY DONEGAL. THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WILL CONSIST OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF ONE WIND TURBINE COMPRISING TOWER, NACELLE AND COMPOSITE FIBRE ROTOR BLADES WITH A HUB HEIGHT OF UP TO 85 METRES, A ROTOR BLADE DIAMETER OF UP TO 82 METRES, AND THUS A BLADE TIP HEIGHT OF UP TO 126 METRES WITH A STEEL TOWER WITH CONCRETE SECTION. THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ALSO INCLUDES EXTERNAL WIND TURBINE TRANSFOMER, TURBINE FOUNDATION, HARDSTAND AND ASSEMBLY AREA; NEW ACCESS TRACK AND USE OF APPROVED ACCESS TRACK AND ACCESS PERMITTED UNDER PLANNING PERMISSION REFERENCE 14/51295 FOR AN ADJACENT WIND TURBINE; ASSOCIATED DRAINAGE WORKS; UNDERGROUND ELECTRICAL CABLE AND ASSOCIATED COMMUNICATION CABLE; WITH ALL ANCILLARY DEVELOPMENT AND ASSOCIATED SITE WORKS. File Reference PL 05E.244753 Planning Application Planning Authority: Donegal County Council Planning Authority Reg. Ref.: 15/50117 Applicant: Corvin Wind Ltd. Type of Application: Permission Planning Authority Decision: Grant Permission Planning Appeal Type of Appeal: Third Party – V - Grant Appellant: Norman Dixon Date of Site Inspection: 7th July 2015 Inspector Tom Rabbette PL 05E.244753 An Bord Pleanála 1.0 Background 1.1 A report dated 23rd July 2015, which included an assessment and recommendation, was submitted by the undersigned in relation to PL 05E.244753. Having regard to the issue raised by the appellant and the subsequent responses from the applicant and the planning authority, that report and recommendation confined itself to the specific issue that was raised by the appellant. It was recommended that the Board deal with the appeal pursuant to s.139 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) i.e. not treat it de novo. 1.2 However, having considered the matter, the Board issued a Direction dated 17th August 2015 and referred the file back to the Inspector to complete an assessment de novo. 1.3 This Assessment hereunder therefore complies with the above mentioned Board Direction. The following assessment should be read in conjunction with the Inspector’s Report on PL 05E.244753 dated 23rd July 2015. 2.0 De Novo Assessment 2.1 I have read all of the file documentation, I have had regard to the relevant sections of the statutory development plan for the area and I have also have had regard to the Wind Energy Development Guidelines 2006 (Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government). I have also carried out a site inspection. In my opinion the main issues to be addressed are as indicated hereunder. Principle of Development 2.2 Having regard to the planning histories for wind turbine developments in this area and also having regard to the existing wind turbine developments in proximity to the site, I am of the opinion that the principle of such developments in this area is well established. Given the existing number of operating turbines in the area, associated infrastructure for connection to the grid is substantially in place. In that regard, the applicant will be connecting, via an underground cable, into the existing underground power cables serving the existing turbines to the south-west of the site. 2.3 The site is located in an area where such wind energy developments are ‘open for consideration’ as indicated in Map 9 of the County Donegal Development Plan 2012-2018, the proposed development will also help deliver on a number of other policies and objectives that support wind energy developments in the county as contained within that CDP (see Inspector’s Report of the 23/07/15 under section 3.0). PL 05E.244753 An Bord Pleanála 2.4 I therefore consider that the proposed development is acceptable in principle. Landscape and Visual Impacts 2.5 The applicant submitted revised photomontages and wireframe visuals indicating the proposed turbine, as per the relocated position, with the response to the grounds of appeal. As indicated in my previous report of the 23/07/15 I consider the landscape and visual impacts, as indicated in those revised visuals and as assessed on site inspection, to be within acceptable limits. The addition of this turbine will not adversely impact on the landscape character nor will it adversely impact on the visual amenities of the area. Its location within an established cluster of turbines will assist with its visual integration and further mitigate the wider visual impacts. The relocated turbine would not introduce a new feature or element into the landscape. Its design and height is similar to the existing and granted turbines. Its relocation will marginally lessen the visual impact due to its relocation to lower ground. As indicated previously, the turbine connection will be via underground cable to the existing underground cable serving the existing turbines on the adjoining site to the south-west, thus mitigating visual impacts of the facilitating infrastructure. 2.6 I therefore would not recommend refusal on the grounds of impact on the receiving landscape or visual amenities of the area. Impact on Residential Amenity 2.7 The application as originally submitted was accompanied by both a Noise Impact Assessment and Assessment of Potential Shadow Flicker. In relation to the proposal as amended, an updated Noise Impact Assessment and updated Assessment of Potential Shadow Flicker Effects were submitted by the applicant in the response to the grounds of appeal. The updated assessments indicate that the earlier findings on file are not materially altered i.e. the proposal meets the Wind Energy Development Guidelines 2006. It should be noted that the nearest dwelling is c. 700 m away from the proposed turbine as relocated. The Wind Energy Development Guidelines 2006 state on page 30, inter alia, the following: “In general, noise is unlikely to be a significant problem where the distance from the nearest turbine to any noise sensitive property is more than 500 metres”. In relation to shadow flicker the 2006 Guidelines state at page 33, inter alia, the following: “It is recommended that shadow flicker at neighbouring offices and dwellings within 500 m should not exceed 30 hours per year or 30 minutes per day”. In the worst case scenario as contained in the submitted assessments, no house in the area is predicted to exceed the guidelines and there is no house within 500 m of the proposed turbine. There were no objections on file addressed to the p.a. save PL 05E.244753 An Bord Pleanála the appellant’s and that objection did not raise concerns in relation to residential amenity impacts. 2.8 Given the contents of the Wind Energy Development Guidelines 2006, and having regard to the Noise Impact Assessments and Assessments of Potential Shadow Flicker Effects on file, and also having regard to the separation distance between the proposed turbine and the nearest dwellings, I am of the opinion that the residential amenities of the nearest dwellings to the site will not be adversely impacted upon by either noise generated or shadow flicker from the proposed turbine. Impacts on the Natural Heritage 2.9 The site is located in a rural area with one-off houses in the wider area and agricultural land-use and associated developments in the immediate area, as well as established wind turbine developments. The site appears to have been subject of draining in the past, sheep and cattle grazing appear to be the primary agricultural use at this location. There are no designated sites within the proposed development site. 2.10 The applicant submitted a document titled Ecological Impact Assessment with the application. There was no updated Ecological Impact Assessment submitted with the response to the grounds of appeal concerning the relocation of the turbine. However, as stated in the Inspector’s Report of the 23/07/15, the relocated turbine will still be located within the same ecological habitat as the original proposal i.e. Dry Heath / Acidic Grassland Mosaic as indicated on ‘Figure E1 – Ecological Habitats Map’ received by the p.a. on the 06/02/15. The access will still be as originally proposed for the most part i.e. the existing track on lands to the south west is to be used, however, the relocation of the turbine will require changes to part of the proposed track and also to the proposed hardstand area adjacent the turbine, this can be addressed by way of condition should the Board be disposed to a grant of permission. The Ecological Impact Assessment on file concluded that the habitats occurring in the area of the development were of low ecological value representing mainly degraded upland habitats that have been highly modified through grazing, drainage and historical turbary and burning. It goes on to state that the development will result in a small loss of existing habitats, however, the impact on the overall ecology of the site is considered to be insignificant. There is nothing on file to conflict with that conclusion. I would not recommend refusal on the grounds of ecological impacts. Impacts on the Built Heritage 2.11 I am not aware of any archaeological heritage sites in the immediate vicinity of the application site. I note the p.a. applied a condition relating to archaeological heritage protection. Should the Board be disposed to a grant PL 05E.244753 An Bord Pleanála of permission I would recommend a condition requiring archaeological monitoring of construction stage ground works on site. 2.12 There are no protected structures in the vicinity of the site and hence no potential impacts on architectural heritage. Traffic Impacts 2.13 The applicant submitted a document titled ‘Proposed Haul Route’ with the application.

Load more