Glyn Rhonwy Pumped Storage Development Consent Order Appendix 2.7 Gwynedd Council Correspondence Adran Rheoleiddio / Regulatory Department Gwasanaeth Cynllunio / Planning Service Uwch Reolwr Gwasanaeth Cynllunio ac Amgylchedd Senior Manager Planning and Environment Service Gareth Jones DAVE HOLMES SNOWDONIA PUMPED HYDRO LIMITED Rhif Ymholiad / Enquiry No: Y14/003579 20-Maw-2015 Ymholiad / Enquiry: Glyn Rhonwy DCO Lleoliad / Location: GLYN RHONWY, LLANBERIS, GWYNEDD. Annwyl Syr/Madam / Dear Sir/Madam, The Glynrhonwy (Pumped Storage) Order Section 42 Planning Act 2008 The Infrastructure Planning (Applications: Prescribed Forms and Procedure) Regulations 2009 The Infrastructure Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2009 Please find this letter as a formal response to the statutory consultation exercise made by Snowdonia Pumped Hydro Limited in pursuant to section 42 of the Planning Act 2008. It is noted here that Gwynedd Council is also affected by way of it being the owner of land affected by the proposed development. This letter will also therefore include a consultation response under the requirements of section 44 of the Planning Act 2008. The proposed development is to build, operate and maintain a pumped hydro-electric storage scheme at Glynrhonwy, Llanberis, Gwynedd with a generating capacity of 99.9MW. As the generation capacity of the proposed development exceeds 50MW, an application for a Development Consent Order is required under the Planning Act 2008. Planning permission has been previously been granted in February 2014 under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (TCPA) by Gwynedd Council as the Local Planning Authority (ref. no. C12/1451/15/LL), for a 49.9MW pumped storage scheme at the development site. For the avoidance of doubt, the following comments are made in relation to an application for Development Consent Order as an identified statutory consultee under the Planning Act 2008. The following relevant representations contain an overview of the project and are given without prejudice to any further detailed representations that may be made by Gwynedd Council during the examination process. It is also noted that Gwynedd Council may seek to make further representations if supplementary information becomes available in relation to the project. Snowdonia Pumped Hydro has submitted a preliminary/draft Environmental Statement which “presents a preliminary assessment of the likely environmental effects of the proposed development, together with a non- technical summary of this information”. A review of the draft Environmental Statement and supporting documents dated 9th February 2015 and received on 12th February 2015 has been made by relevant officers within Gwynedd Council and the following are comments received in respect of this information. Visual Impact It is recognised that parts of the development site are in very prominent locations within the local landscape. It is therefore understandable that the previous application contained a number of objections based on concerns regarding the impact of the development on the local landscape and its long term effects on both the natural landscape and also on the historical/industrial landscape as well. The site lies within a Landscape Character Area and the Dinorwig Landscape of Outstanding Historical Interest as a consequence of the slate quarry workings dating back to the 19th and 20th century. The actual difference between the previously approved application and the DCO application is likely to be minimal if relevant at all. It is recognised that there will be no major or fundamental changes proposed to above ground structures or features. As a consequence, it is considered that the issue of visual impact is not likely to be greater than what was previously considered as part of the TCPA application. Previously attached conditions are considered to be relevant in terms of safeguarding the visual aspect. Effects of Construction As has been previously stated, the difference between the approved development and proposed DCO application is likely to be minimal. The consequence of the change in the position of the red line defining the development area from what has been approved to what is proposed needs to be given consideration as to whether the additional areas will increase the effect of the development on specific issues/land/residential properties which may not have been highlighted or given as much consideration previously due to the positioning of the red line. The actual difference in terms of the physical development of a 49.9MW scheme to a 99.9MW scheme is somewhat negligible due to the changes being in relation to having more powerful underground turbines and associated equipment. Notwithstanding the above, clear and informed assessments must be provided within the ES with a clear methodology set out in terms of the proposal. As referred to in the current information, a Code of Construction Practice (CoCP) will be developed into a finalized site specific version at the detailed design stage, as agreed with Gwynedd Council. It is considered that the information provided to date indicates that the methodology is acceptable and the subsequent conclusions and mitigation is also acceptable. This advice is obviously given without prejudice to any further detailed representations that may be made by Gwynedd Council, it is considered that an opportunity to agree upon the final version will be achieved at a later stage. It is recognised that the issue of traffic management and any other related traffic issues, are consistently referred to in various aspects not necessarily formal assessments such as a Traffic Management Plan. This is inevitable as this issue does cross into various aspects of the development, but as has been indicated throughout various stages. The Transportation Unit has taken the view that what will be the DCO application, is unlikely to differ from what has already been considered and agreed upon in terms of highway matters. Furthermore, agreements are required regarding various elements which affect the local highway network by way of other legislative requirements such as a s278 agreement to include an extraordinary traffic agreement. It is considered that although current details which refer to highway matters are acceptable in principle, the opportunity to provide further representations can be made at the adoption stage of agreements such as the s278. The following comments are given by the Public Protection Unit: x The methods set out in the noise and air draft ES are considered adequate and appropriate. We also accept that the applicant has made reference to the correct guidance and standards. The conclusions drawn at this stage are inevitably fairly broad but we offer no challenge. With regard to the proposed measure of pollution and mitigation, again we see no real problem at this stage. Please confirm code of Construction practice if you wish to obtain our views on this element. We consider this development to be one scheme, however, cumulative impact would be assessed under each Environmental aspect (noise, air quality, lighting etc). In terms of cumulative impact on local residents, there is an option of undertaking a Health impact assessment which could incorporate all these different aspects. x Statement with respect to statutory nuisance – No comment x Noise – Draft ES chapter 12, paragraph 3.3.4 – it is stated that a period of 4 years is temporary, whilst this may be true in terms of the project’s lifetime, local residents may not consider such a period to be temporary. Table 12-17 – highlight the different elements of works that need to be carried out at the same time if the project is to be completed within 4 years. It is also advisable that an attempt is made to show a timetable of works during the development period ( unless this is shown separately in another document ). A clearer understanding of the likely noise impact will be gained if the likely noise levels arising from the intended works is shown in terms of previously identified noise sensitive properties adjoining the site. Paragraph 12:10:2 – reference is made to section 61 of the Control of Pollution Act 1974 in terms of controlling and managing works outside normal working hours. The authority is keen to avoid any duplication in terms of implementing noise control procedures, the use of more than one method in order to control noise has the potential of one not corresponding with the other ( relevant TCPA application conditions ). Attention is drawn to condition 25 attached to the TCPA application approval. It is noted that due to the proposed amendment to the approved development boundary, some advisory documents contained within the existing permission are also likely to be amended such as SB4142:1997 into SB4142:2014. x Summary of mitigation – Draft ES chapter 17 – paragraph 17.1.2 of this chapter states, “ the relevance of the planning conditions set out in the planning approval for the 49.9MW T&CPA application has also been provided to demonstrate that the principles of these conditions will be incorporated into the DCO requirements”. If the developer is able to confirm its continued acceptance of the environmental conditions attached to the previous approval, C12/1451/11/LL, within a 4 year construction timetable, the service will have no objection to the proposed development. Although it is recognised that this may be difficult to achieve in terms of timing, the service is not aware of any reason why this cannot be achieved. It is suggested that Quarry Battery Company Ltd provides clear reference to documents containing details as referred to above, if this has not already been done in another elsewhere. Ecology The following comments are given by Gwynedd Council’s Biodiversity Unit: The new proposals are similar in nearly all respect to that which was approved for planning application ref. no. C12/1451/15/LL. The main differences are the increased turbine size and the fact that the boundary of the development has been extended to accommodate any possible changes that may occur during the works.