Argyll and Bute Council Development Services Delegated or Committee Planning Application Report and Report of handling as required by Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2008 relative to applications for Planning Permission or Planning Permission in Principle Reference No : 10/00160/PP Planning Hierarchy : Local application Applicant : Allt Dearg Windfarmers LLP Proposal : Erection of 12 wind turbines, meteorological mast, control building ancillary infrastructure and ground works. Site Address : Land south-west of Stronchullin Farm, Cruach a Phubill, Ardrishaig DECISION ROUTE Local Government Scotland Act 1973 (A) THE APPLICATION (i) Development Requiring Express Planning Permission • Erection of 12 No. 0.9MW wind turbines with tubular towers and three blades and associated transformer enclosure (44 metre rotor diameter, 55 metres to hub height and 77 metres to blade tip height); • Formation of site access from A83(T) and on-site tracks (8.4 km. in total); • Installation of on-site 33 kv underground cabling; • Construction of control building (72 sq metres and 5.5 metres high) and associated transformer compound enclosed by a security fence; • Erection of wind monitoring mast (60m) • Formation of temporary construction storage compound.(50m x 100m); (ii) Other specified operations • Formation of on-site borrow pit to provide 26,000m 3 of construction stone (to be subject of a separate mineral extraction application); • Underground connection to an existing 132kv transmission line to the east of the site. (B) RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that: i) the application be refused for the reasons set out in the report, ii) a discretionary hearing be held in advance of determination of the application in view of the number of representations received. (C) CONSULTATIONS: Scottish Government (18.03.10) – no adverse comments in respect of adequacy of Environmental Statement. Transport Scotland (17.03.10 and 18.03.10) – no objection subject to conditions requiring a Route Access Report including swept path analysis and identification of temporary signing or traffic control to facilitate delivery of abnormal loads. Area Environmental Health Manager (15.03.10) – no objection. Scottish Environment Protection Agency (17.03.10) – No objection subject to conditions requiring the submission of additional information about private water supplies and risk assessment in respect of any private abstractions identified which could be affected by construction activities, (a water feature survey of 1.2km radius form the development is recommended), and the requirement for a Construction Method Statement to address surface water run-off, timing of works, pollution risk, waste management and sensitive operations/activities. Regulatory advice for the applicant is supplied. Historic Scotland (17.03.10) – no objection. Scottish Water (23.02.10) – no objection. Health and Safety Executive (19.02.10 - no objection. West of Scotland Archaeology (11.03.10) – no objection subject to condition requiring a programme of archaeological works. Council Biodiversity Officer (19.03.10) – no objection, but would wish to be able to comment on the proposed Landscape and Habitat Enhancement Plan. Ofcom (23.02.10) – identifies telecommunications which may be affected by the proposal but does not raise objection. Joint Radio Company (17.03.10) – no objection. Civil Aviation Authority (19.02.10) – no site specific comments, but generic advice provided. National Air Traffic Services (03.03.10) – no objection. Prestwick Airport (24.02.10) – no objection. Defence Estates (05.03.10) – no objection. Scottish Natural Heritage (07.04.10) – does not object to the proposal on the basis that the development does not raise natural heritage issues of national importance. SNH has, however, commented adversely in respect of landscape and visual impacts and despite its reduction in scale from the previous proposal which was refused, concerns remain about the suitability of this location for windfarm in strategic and cumulative terms. SNH considers that the development remains visually highly prominent despite the more compact form proposed and therefore has consequences for the infilling of an area currently free of windfarms between those established areas of windfarm development in Kintyre and at the head of Loch Fyne. Accordingly, some landscape and visual impacts of significance remain. Significant adverse visual effects will arise from locations of importance on the coastal edge of Loch Fyne/Loch Gilp to the east, from Loch Caolisport to the west and from west Cowal. The locations contain settlement and transport routes concentrated on the coastal edge some of which would be subject to significant adverse impacts. Comment: clarification sought from SNH has indicated that their position of ‘no objection’ is founded upon the lack of impacts of significant magnitude upon national landscape and nature conservation designations. They have provided by way of an annex detailed landscape advice on matters of regional and local importance. SNH has indicated that it is for the Council to consider and give weight to this in reaching a decision. The substance of this advice is addressed further in Appendix A of this report where landscape and visual impacts are addressed. In terms of nature conservation interests, SNH has commented as follows: Knapdale Lochs SSSI and Special Protection Area for Birds – no likely significant effect on qualifying interests subject to mitigation and appropriate conditions. Golden Eagles – collision risk assessed to be low. Habitat management required to mitigate for loss of juvenile habitat as a consequence of development. Golden Plover – measures required to mitigate disturbance during construction. Blanket bog – condition required to address drainage design and incorporation of mitigation measures identified in the Peat Slide Risk Assessment produced for this site. Other issues – Construction Method Statement and Habitat Restoration proposals to be subject to condition and consultation with SNH. Employment of an Ecological Clerk of Works to supervise construction, mitigation measures and restoration is recommended. Landscape and Habitat Enhancement Plan - should help address impacts arising from habitat loss, construction disturbance, hydrological impacts and collision risk contributing to habitat enhancement within the site and in the surrounding area. This should be an obligation imposed by way of a section 75 legal agreement in order to ensure deliverability. Barton Willmore (Planning consultants) (09.06.10) – have been contracted to provide a review of the Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) prepared by the applicants in support of their proposal, in the light of consultation advice received from Scottish Natural Heritage and the subsequent response to the contents of that advice received from the applicants. Their advice to the Council (also considered in Appendix Section C xi below) may be summarised as follows: LVIA methodology – appropriate and generally in line with published guidance; Attribution of significance to viewpoints – flawed in the case of viewpoints 9 and 17 (Lochgilphead Front Green and Ballimore, Otter Ferry) where these locations ought to have been accorded high and medium high sensitivity respectively, rather than medium high and medium sensitivity respectively. Accepting the medium magnitude of change attributed by the applicants to the development at both of these locations, this higher sensitivity would result in both of these locations being subject to a significant impact as a consequence of the proposal, rather than the not significant impact attributed in both cases in the environmental statement. Also flawed in the case of viewpoint 14 (Kintyre Way) which ought to have been accorded a medium high sensitivity. However, in the view of the accepted low magnitude of change identified in the environmental statement, the impact from the proposal at this point remains not significant. Magnitude of change as a result of proposal – overstated in the case of viewpoint 1 (A83 Stronachullin) where the magnitude of change ought to be considered low rather than medium as stated in the environmental statement. Conclusion re visual effects – under-evaluation of the sensitivity of two viewpoints has resulted in the failure of the environmental statement to attribute significant impacts upon these locations. The review of visual effects supports the landscape advice provided to the Council by Scottish Natural Heritage in their consultation response. Cumulative effects - It is considered that cumulative landscape and visual effects are approaching a threshold of acceptable impact within the vicinity of Loch Fyne, particularly with regard to the sequential cumulative effects as experienced from the coastal edges of Loch Fyne. Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (20.04.10) – objects unless a legal agreement is concluded to oblige the developer to implement a habitat enhancement plan in association with the development. Their principal concerns relate to the potential of the development to impact on sub-adult golden eagles. Conditions would be required for the monitoring of effects upon black-throated divers and for the management and restoration of blanket bog. The habitat enhancement plan should address mitigation/compensation for habitat loss and for blanket bog management and restoration, appropriate pre and post construction monitoring, and a mechanism to require