Argyll and Bute CouncilDevelopment & Infrastructure Services

Committee Planning Application Report and Report of Handling as required by Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2013 relative to applications for Planning Permission or Planning Permission in Principle

Reference No: 15/03057/PPPlanning Hierarchy: MajorApplicant: Scottish Power Renewables UK LimitedProposal: Erection of 18 no wind turbines (17no. @ 126 metres and 1no. @

106 metres high to blade tip), formation of access tracks, erection of control building, sub-station and associated compound, 2 no anemometer masts, 5 no borrow pits and associated infrastructure

Site Address: Beinn An Tuirc Windfarm Phase 3Land at Meall Buidhe and south of A'Chruach, west of Saddell, Kintyre

DECISION ROUTE

Local Government Scotland Act 1973

(A) THE APPLICATION

(i) Development Requiring Express Planning Permission

Erection of 18 no wind turbines (17no. @ 126 metres and 1no. @ 106 metres high to blade tip) with external transformers at the base of each turbine (3m x 2.5m x 2.5m high);

Erection of sub-station, control building (18m x 35m) and external compound (45m x 55m) and installation of septic tank;

Upgrading and extension of existing access from the A83(T) serving Beinn an Tuirc 1 and 2 wind farms;

Formation of on-site access tracks (15km) and 5 No. culverted watercourse crossings;

Formation of 19 crane hardstandings (40m x 30m); Erection of 2 No. permanent anemometer masts (70m high) and

communications mast; Formation of temporary laydown area (1,600m2), and temporary

construction compound with site accommodation and car parking; Installation of on-site underground cabling.

(ii) Other specified operations

Grid connection to Carradale sub-station (subject to separate Section 37 application);

Forestry felling and compensatory planning; Implementation of on-site Habitat Management Plan; Formation of up to 5 No. borrow pit workings (subject to requirement for

separate mineral planning consents).

(B) RECOMMENDATION: That planning permission should be granted subject to the conditions and reasons set out in this report.

(C) CONSULTATIONS:

Scottish Natural Heritage (17.12.15 & 03.02.17) – initial response that the Landscape and Visual assessment contains insufficient information for SNH to be able to advise on the cumulative impacts of the proposal (notably the exclusion of the proposed Escairt windfarm from the baseline), particularly in terms of impact on the North Arran National Scenic Area, and accordingly, a holding objection was deployed. Additional information requirements were specified at that stage. The proposal is likely to have a significant effect upon the Kintyre Goose Roosts SPA and accordingly a Habitat Regulations ‘appropriate assessment’ is required to be carried out by the Council. SNH does not however consider that based on the information provided the proposal will affect the integrity of the site. Impacts on other species and habitats have been adequately assessed with suitable mitigation identified.

Subsequent response further to production of Further Environmental Information removing the original holding objection relating to the exclusion of Escairt windfarm from the baseline. SNH welcome the reduction in height of two turbines but advise that landscape fit could be improved further. The proposal would result in a more continuous ban of turbines in the southern part of Kintyre as viewed from Arran to the detriment of coastal and upland viewpoints but not to the point where an objection is warranted in terms of impact on the North Arran NSA. The impact on Arran would be compounded by the proposed use of larger turbines than Beinn and Tuirc 1 and 2, and by the sequential effects in combination with Escairt (should that be allowed on appeal), which is proposed closer to the coast. The proposal would introduce turbine visibility into the Rocky Mosaic at Carradale Bay and into the Hidden Glen LCT at Saddell Glen. Significant visual effects would also arise around Lussa Loch, in views from Campbeltown Loch and from the Kilbrannon Sound. It is suggested that further mitigation could be secured by removal of some of the easternmost turbines, notably T37 (but also T39, T36 and T32), and/or consideration should be given to further height reduction. Subsequently the applicants have agreed to the deletion of T37.

RSPB (19.01.16) – No objection subject to recommended conditions. Having regard to cumulative habitat loss it is advised that further habitat management in the form of open ground habitat restoration should be required in order to mitigate impacts. It is suggested that circa 40 ha of forestry south of Sgreaden Hill would be appropriate to be included with the 48.2ha of forestry removal indicated in the applicant’s’ intended habitat management plan. Impacts on the Kintyre Goose Roosts SPA are adjudged as being unlikely to be significant. Conditions relative to habitat/ornithology interests are recommended.

Transport Scotland (27th February 2015, 11th March 2015 and 15th July 2015) –no objection subject to conditions to: secure approval of the proposed route for any abnormal loads on the trunk road network; secure approval of any accommodation measures required including the removal of street furniture, junction widening and traffic management; and, to ensure acceptable additional signing or temporary traffic control is undertaken by a recognised Quality Assured traffic management consultant.

Council’s Area Roads Engineer (09.11.15) – no objection.

Historic Environment Scotland (07.12.15 & 09.01.17) – no objection in the absence of any historic environment issues of national significance.

West of Scotland Archaeology Service (22.12.15) – no objection in terms of direct impacts or impacts on the settings of historic assets subject to a condition requiring an archaeological watching brief.

SEPA (16.12.15 and 20.12.16) - no objection, advice to the applicant provided.

Council’s Public Protection Officer (17.12.15) – no objection either individually or cumulatively with other consented wind farm developments. The development is capable of meeting ETSU noise standards which is the accepted approach in terms of government policy. Appropriate noise related conditions recommended.

Council’s Flood Risk Engineer (08.12.15) – no objection subject to condition re design of watercourse crossings and surface water drainage.

Council’s Access Officer (25.11.15) – No objection. Development affects Core Path C088 and Kintyre Way. Advice to applicant provided re construction period. diversions and path closures.

Kintyre Way (04.12.15 and 06.09.16) – initial response objecting to the application on the grounds of visual amenity, landscape impact ,effects on the experience of users of the Kintyre Way and inadequate visualisations. It was also pointed out that the Kintyre Way had not received satisfactory assurance that the route would not be disrupted during the construction process, and that socio-economic impacts have in their view been underestimated by the applicants. Subsequent response further to discussion with the applicants indicating a positive and constructive stance adopted by the applicants who have a better appreciation of the value of the route and have provided reassurance relative to disruption and other impacts, with initiatives identified to be developed jointly between the parties. On this basis the initial objection has been withdrawn.

Forestry Commission Scotland (21.12.15) – no objection subject to condition to secure compensatory planting and long term management of the remaining woodland. Forestry Commission Scotland has no objection to the forestry related elements of the proposal subject to condition to secure compensatory planting and long term management of the remaining woodland.

Scottish Water (10.01.17) – No objection although Saddell boreholes are vulnerable to pollution form development activity within the Saddell Water catchment and two turbines appear to lie close to or may be within the Saddell catchment, in which case mitigation would be required. Advice to applicant provided.

National Air Traffic Services (NATS) (23.12.15) – no safeguarding objection to the proposal.

Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) (12.11.15) – no objection, advice re aviation interests provided.

Glasgow Prestwick Airport (13.11.15) – no objection.

BAA Aerodrome Safeguarding – no response

OFCOM Spectrum Licensing (13.11.15) – no objection

Highlands and Islands Airports (04.12.15 and 23.01.17) – initial responses that development may infringe safeguarded surfaces for Campbeltown Airport leading to a holding objection pending submission of further information. Further response indicating no objection subject to visible spectrum (i.e. not infra-red) obstacle lighting at hub height on some of the turbines.

WS Atkins on behalf of Scottish Water (15th July 2016) – no objection re UHF telemetry links.

Ministry of Defence (01.12.15) – no objection. In the interests of air safety the MoD requests that the perimeter turbines are fitted with 25 candela omni-directional red lighting or infrared lighting at the highest practicable point.

North Ayrshire Council (08.12.16) – no objection but concerns expressed about the cumulative visual impact of the development in association with Beinn an Tuirc 1 and 2 wind farms, as experienced from Machrie Bay in particular, but also the A841, the Arran Coastal Way and the North Arran NSA.

Arran Community Council (05.12.16) –. There are views of support and some of objection locally on the grounds of visual impact, but we believe the general balance is one where the community council should not raise objection, subject to nature conservation interests being taken account of in the decision-making process.

Argyll and District Salmon Fishery Board – no response

(D) HISTORY:

13/01344/SCOPE – EIA Scoping consultation for proposed Section 36 application for Beinn an Tuirc wind farm Phase 3 – consultation response issued to Scottish Government Energy Consents Unit 04.07.13

16/01872/PP - Erection of meteorological wind monitoring mast (up to 70.5m in height) for a temporary period of 5 years – granted 07.10.16

16/01873/PP - Erection of meteorological wind monitoring mast (up to 70.5m in height) for a temporary period of 5 years – granted 30.08.16

Various applications relating to Beinn an Tuirc 1 and 2 windfarms granted between 1998 and 2009.

(E) PUBLICITY:

Regulation 20, Major Application and EIA Advert (local newspaper and Edinburgh Gazette) expired 18.12.2015.

Further Environmental Information re-advertised with expiry date of 20.01.2017.

(F) REPRESENTATIONS: Seven representations have been received as follows:

Objectors:

Hilary Thompson, Dorran Cottage, Campbeltown PA28 6NXDavid McAllister, Top Flat, Limecraigs House, Campbletown PA28 6JRRod Clayton, Corrylach Farmhouse, Cambeltown, PA28 6NXRobin Nolan, North Beachmore, Muasdale, PA29 6XDLouise Duncan, North Beachmore House, Muasdale, PA29 6XD

Supporters:

Lori Smith Craigard House Hotel, Low Askomil, Cambeltown, PA28 6EPMatthew Green, 2 Lower Barn, Hemel Hempstead, HP3 9QL

The key issues raised are summarised below:

Against the proposal

Ornithological & Ecological Impact

The proposal will give rise to adverse wildlife impacts along with impacts on natural habitats and peat deposits, including adverse impacts upon nature conservation designations.

Comment: SNH and RSPB have not objected to the application on nature conservation grounds, subject to the implementation of identified mitigation.

Visual Impact

The scale of the proposed turbines is disproportionate to that of the receiving environment;

The visual impact of yet another series of industrialising turbines is detrimental to Kintyre’s recreational value.

In addition to the coast, the area around Lussa Loch is valued by locals and tourists. It is already adversely impacted upon by the presence of turbines, and this situation will be worsened by the development now proposed.

Cumulative Impact

The proposal would have an adverse cumulative impact with other turbine development already in Kintyre.

Saturation point has been reached with the number of turbine proposals in Kintyre the proliferation of which should be resisted to avoid the peninsula becoming a ‘wind farm landscape’.

Comment: The acceptability of landscape visual and cumulative impacts is considered in Sections C, D and E of Appendix A to this report.

Tourism & Recreation

Adverse impacts on the tourism economy, both within Kintyre and on the islands with views towards Kintyre.

Comment: There is conflicting research as to the impact of wind farms on the decisions made by tourists and insufficient evidence to be able to demonstrate unacceptable harm to the tourism economy.

Justification for the development

The proposal is being progressed purely for financial and political reasons. Kintyre his already doing its fair share of renewable generation. There are no turbines visible on Islay or Arran whilst nearly every view of Kintyre is affected by the presence of turbines.

Demand for renewable energy would be better served by re-powering the existing wind farms rather than by extending them onto hitherto undeveloped areas of land.

Comment: The application requires to be determined on its own merits regardless of the site selection and the availability of other means of renewable energy provision.

Property values

Property with a view of the windfarm will be devalued as a result of development.

Comment: This is not a material planning consideration.

In support of the proposal

The proposal will augment existing schemes which have been in place for some time providing employment, a community fund and other benefits to the community, as well as the cheapest form of new build renewable electricity production;

The topography of the upland of Kintyre makes it eminently suitable for wind power being removed from roads and population and being relatively unfrequented.

Misunderstanding about subsidy (now removed), damage to tourism (unsubstantiated in research) loss of property value (not evidenced elsewhere) and collision risk (over-emphasised relative to other threats to birds), means that some of the most frequently cited problems with turbines are not borne out in practice.

NOTE: Committee Members, the applicant, agent and any other interested party should note that the consultation responses and letters of representation referred to in this report, have been summarised and that the full consultation response or letter of representations are available on request. It should also be noted that the associated drawings, application forms, consultations, other correspondence and all letters of representation are available for viewing on the Council web site at www.argyll-bute.gov.uk

(G) SUPPORTING INFORMATION

Has the application been the subject of:

(i) Environmental Statement: Yes

(ii) An appropriate assessment under the Conservation (Natural Habitats) Regulations 1994: Yes

(iii) A Design or Design/Access statement: Yes

(iv) A report on the impact of the proposed development: Yes

Environmental Statement (October 2015); Additional Environmental Information (December 2016); Planning Statement (October 2015 updated December 2016); Pre-Application Consultation Report (October 2015).

NOTE: Committee Members, the applicant, agent and any other interested party should note that the letters of support referred to above, have been summarised and that the full letters of support are available on request and are also available for viewing on the Council web site at www.argyll-bute.gov.uk

(H) PLANNING OBLIGATIONS

Is a Section 75 agreement required: No.

(I) Has a Direction been issued by Scottish Ministers in terms of Regulation 30, 31 or 32: No

(J) Section 25 of the Act; Development Plan and any other material considerations over and above those listed above which have been taken into account in the assessment of the application

(i) List of all Development Plan Policy considerations taken into account in assessment of the application.

‘Argyll and Bute Local Development Plan’ (Adopted March 2015)

LDP STRAT 1 – Sustainable DevelopmentLDP DM 1 – Development within the Development Management ZonesLDP 3 – Supporting the Protection Conservation and Enhancement of our EnvironmentLDP 5 – Supporting the Sustainable Growth of our EconomyLDP 6 – Supporting the Sustainable Growth of RenewablesLDP 9 – Development Setting, Layout and DesignLDP 10 – Maximising our Resources and Reducing our ConsumptionLDP 11 – Improving our Connectivity and Infrastructure

Supplementary Guidance to the Argyll and Bute Local Plan 2015’ (2016)

SG LDP ENV 1 – Impact on Habitats, Species and our BiodiversitySG LDP ENV 4 – Impact on SSSIs and National Nature ReservesSG LDP ENV 6 – Impact on Trees / WoodlandSG LDP ENV 7 – Water Quality and the EnvironmentSG LDP ENV 11 – Protection of Soil and Peat ResourcesSG LDP ENV 12 – Impact on National Scenic Areas (NSAs)SG LDP ENV 13 – Impact on Areas of Panoramic Quality (APQs)SG LDP ENV 14 – LandscapeSG LDP ENV 19 – Impact on Scheduled Ancient Monuments (SAMs)SG LDP ENV 20 – Impact on Sites of Archaeological ImportanceSG LDP PG 1 – Planning GainSG LDP SERV 2 – Incorporation of Natural Features/SuDSSG LDP Sustainable – Sustainable Siting and Design PrinciplesSG LDP SERV 3 – Drainage Impact Assessment

SG LDP SERV 6 – Private Water Supplies and Water ConservationSG LDP SERV 7 – Flooding and Land Erosion – Risk FrameworkSG LDP TRAN 1 – Access to the OutdoorsSG LDP TRAN 4 – New & Existing, Public Roads & Private Access RegimesSG LDP TRAN 6 – Vehicle Parking ProvisionSG LDP TRAN 7 – Safeguarding of AirportsSG LDP Renewables

Note: The Full Policies are available to view on the Council’s Web Site at: www.argyll-bute.gov.uk

(ii) List of all other material planning considerations taken into account in the assessment of the application, having due regard to Annex A of Circular 3/2013.

Scottish Planning Policy (2014); Scottish Government Advice Note on Onshore Turbines (2012); ‘Argyll and the Firth of Clyde Landscape Character Assessment’ SNH (1996); ‘Argyll and Bute Landscape Wind Energy Capacity Study’ SNH and A&BC

(2012); ‘Guidance on Siting and Designing Windfarms in the Landscape ’SNH

(2009); Cumulative Landscape & Visual Assessment of Wind Energy Development

in Kintyre, prepared by LUC for Argyll & Bute Council, December 2015; ‘Control of Woodland Removal Policy’ (FCS 2009) ‘Argyll and Bute Woodland Forestry Strategy’ (2011) Planning Advice Note 1/2013 ‘Planning and Environmental Impact

Assessment; Circular 2/2011 ‘Planning and Environmental Impact Assessment’; Scottish Historic Environment Policy (HES); ‘Scottish Energy Strategy: The Future of Energy in Scotland’ (consultation

draft) January 2017 ‘Onshore Wind Policy Statement’ (consultation draft) Scottish Government

January 2017 Views of statutory and other consultees; Legitimate public concern or support expressed on relevant planning matters.;

(K) Is the proposal a Schedule 2 Development not requiring an Environmental Impact Assessment: This proposal is a Schedule 2 EIA Development and an EIA has been required due to the potential for significant environmental impact.

(L) Has the application been the subject of statutory pre-application consultation (PAC): Yes

(M) Has a sustainability check list been submitted: No separate consideration of the proposal’s degree of sustainability has been required as the concept is implicit within the EIA process.

(N) Does the Council have an interest in the site: No

(O) Requirement for a hearing (PAN41 or other): No.

(P) Assessment and summary of determining issues and material considerations

The application seeks the construction of an 18 turbine wind farm to the south of the operational wind farms at Beinn and Tuirc 1 and 2 on land between Saddell and Lussa Loch in Kintyre. It stems from an original proposal for a much larger development of up to 37 turbines encompassing additional land to the south of the site, but following concerns raised by officers and SNH on landscape grounds, this has now been excluded from the application, with turbine numbers having been reduced accordingly.

The proposed turbines are 125m to the blade tip other than for one turbine which has a 20m reduced hub height in order to limit visibility to blades and blade tips (rather than a full rotor) from short range locations in East Kintyre with predicted visibility. The proposed turbines compare with the existing 100m high turbines 0.5km to the north at Beinn an Tuirc 2, and the original 67m turbines 2.0km to the north at Beinn an Tuirc 1. Despite the difference in height between the turbines at these sites, there are few locations from which these can be experienced in combination, other than at considerable distances.

The proposed scheme would have an installed capacity of 36MW and would have a design life of 25 years. A carbon balance calculation taking into account emissions from manufacture, construction, transport and displacement of peat resources on site, and offsetting those against the emission savings over the life of the wind farm, estimates that it would be capable of producing annual savings of 42,500 tonnes of CO2 per year against the current UK grid mix of fossil fuel types. Most of the site is has the most favourable Category 3 status in terms of SPP Spatial Guidance for wind farms, although some of it has Category 2 status by virtue of the influence of published SNH Peatland and Carbon Soils mapping. However, the applicants have demonstrated more fine grained analysis of peat on the site and subject to avoidance of deep peat and mitigation during construction the less favourable status of part of the site should not prejudice the development.

Access to the site would be from an extension of the existing route from the A83(T) in West Kintyre which already serves Beinn an Tuirc 1 and 2 windfarms and this is acceptable to Transport Scotland. Much of the site is commercial forestry and it is intended that the infrastructure be key-holed with forestry use continuing. Forestry Commission Scotland are satisfied with the applicant’s proposals subject to conditions, including compensatory planting. The proposal includes an intended Habitat Management Area which would see 40.7ha of forestry plantation removed in favour of an intention to restore blanket bog habitat in the interests of nature conservation. The site is well removed from habitation and other sensitive receptors, so noise and other potential amenity impacts during construction and operation phases are not a concern in this case.

There are no landscape, nature conservation or historic environment designations relating to the site. It has potential to affect off-site designations, notably the north Arran National Scenic Area and the Kintyre Goose Roosts SPA. The applicant’s LVIA has demonstrated that the NSA will not be subject to significant adverse effects either individually or cumulatively with other existing or proposed wind farm developments. SNH has not objected in relation to impacts upon the NSA but has expressed concern about multiple wind farm development is Kintyre eroding the setting of Arran. A Habitats Regulations ‘appropriate assessment’ relative to the SPA is appended to this report, and this concludes that that the proposal will not adversely affect the

integrity of the site for its qualifying interests. Neither SNH nor the RSPB have objected to the development in terms of nature conservation interests.

The principal issues in this case are the consequence of the presence of the development on the landscape character of the Upland Forest Moor Mosaic LCT and for adjoining landscape character types, along with visual impact and cumulative impact with other approved and proposed wind farm developments. The proposal represents the enlargement of the established Beinn an Tuirc cluster, and does not pose a threat of coalescence with other consented sites or emergent proposals, and so respects the cluster and space approach which the Council has pursued in Kintyre, having regard to the recommendations of the ‘Landscape Wind Energy Capacity Study’ and the ‘Cumulative Landscape & Visual Assessment of Wind Energy Development in Kintyre’. The removal of originally proposed turbines from the distinctive Sgreadan Hill and the consequent reduction in the lateral extent of the three Beinn an Tuirc windfarms has served to reinforce the relationship with the two operational sites, and secures visual cohesion in longer distance views of the site from the Kilbrannon Sound and from Arran. Notwithstanding this, North Ayrshire Council has raised concerns about the prospect of further cumulative impacts being experience on Arran as a result of additional turbine development in Kintyre, although Arran Community Council has decided not to object.

The applicants original Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment has been augmented by a December 2016 addendum, addressing various matters which have arisen since the application was submitted in 2015, and providing more fine grained analysis of visual impacts in East Kintyre and cumulative impacts upon Arran. This has concluded that the landscape, visual and cumulative effects of the development are within acceptable limits. Those areas likely to be most affected by the development are either at close quarters from around Lussa Loch immediately to the west or from the Kintyre Way which passes through the site; whereas the more frequented areas to the east around Carradale, Saddell and along the B842 East Kintyre road are generally shielded by the effects of topography, with visibility being localised, intermittent and limited to the upper parts of some rotors. More open views and some cumulative effects would be experienced from the west coast of Arran and from upland locations in the North Arran NSA, but these are moderated by the effect of distance, the large scale of the upland landscape and the separation between sites in north and central Kintyre.

In response to concerns raised by officers and by SNH, the applicants have latterly reduced the hub height of T36 by 20 metres and have deleted T37 in its entirety in order to reduce impacts upon available views from Carradale to the north-east, from the East Kintyre road south of Saddell and from Campbeltown Loch to the south. At time of writing 7 letters of representation have been received 5 of which express objection and 2 of which express support.

(Q) Is the proposal consistent with the Development Plan: Yes

(R) Reasons why planning permission should be granted: The proposal is considered in conformity with government policy expressed in SPP, with the adopted Local Development Plan policy and associated Supplementary Guidance, and guidance published by the Council in the ‘Argyll & Bute Landscape Wind Energy Capacity Study’; insofar as it reinforces the established pattern of wind farm development in Kintyre without giving rise to unacceptable cumulative impacts, whilst contributing to the attainment of national renewable energy targets and

providing some short-term benefits to the local economy.

(S) Reasoned justification for a departure to the provisions of the Development Plan: n/a

(T) Need for notification to Scottish Ministers or Historic Scotland: No

Author of Report: Richard Kerr Date: 8th February 2017

Angus GilmourHead of Planning & Regulatory Services

CONDITIONS AND REASONS RELATIVE TO APPLICATION: 15/03057/PP

1. The development shall be undertaken in accordance with the application dated 30th October 2015; the Environmental Statement October 2015; the Further Environmental Information (EIA Addendum) December 2016; and approved drawings:

1 of 12 - Site Location, Figure 1 2 of 12 - Planning Application Boundary, Figure 2 3 of 12 - Typical Wind Turbine Elevation, Figure 3 4 of 12 - Typical Turbine Foundation Details, Figure 4 5 of 12 - Typical Crane Platform Layout, Figure 5 6 of 12 - Typical Track Cross Sections, Figure 6 7 of 12 - Meteorological Mast, Figure 7 8 of 12 - Typical Cable Trench Detail, Figure 8 9 of 12 - Control Building and Substation Compound, Figure 9 10 of 12 - Typical Control Building Details, Figure 10 11 of 12 - Construction Compound Layout, Figure 11 12 of 12 - Comparative Turbine Elevations (126m and 106m) Figure 6.10.1

unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority and except insofar as amended by the terms of this permission.

Reason: To ensure the development is carried out in accordance with the application documentation.

Turbine dimensions and micro-siting

2. The overall height of the wind turbines shall not exceed 125 metres to tip of the blades when the a turbine blade is in the vertical position as measured from the natural ground conditions immediately adjacent to the turbine base, with the exception of T36 where the blade tip height shall be restricted to 105 metres. This permission should not be construed as giving any consent for T37 and its ancillary development, or for access track formation beyond the spur serving T36, as this turbine was deleted from the scheme during the processing of the application.

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in order to define the permission.

3. The approved turbines shall be erected and the site tracks constructed in the positions indicated in the Environmental Statement, save for the ability to vary under the supervision of the Ecological Clerk of Works required by condition 9 and without further recourse to the Planning Authority, the indicated position of any turbine, track or associated infrastructure by up to 30 metres in any direction, with the exception of the movement in an easterly direction of T21 or T30 to T36 inclusive. Variations of between 30 and 50 metres may be permitted subject to the prior written approval of the Planning Authority. Any such micro-siting shall not encroach further into any environmentally sensitive areas indicated in the Environmental Statement.

Reason: In order to enable re-positioning in response to local ground conditions having regard to environmental constraints.

Timing and Operation

4. The permission shall enure for a period of 25 years from the ‘First Export Date’ being the date when electricity is first exported from all the wind turbines to the electricity grid network. Written confirmation of the First Export Date shall be provided to the Planning Authority no later than one calendar month after that event.

Reason: To define the duration of the permission.

5. If any turbine fails to supply electricity to the grid for a continuous period of 6 months, then unless otherwise approved in writing by the Planning Authority, a scheme for the removal of the wind turbine should be submitted in writing for the approval of the Planning Authority. The scheme shall thereafter be implemented as approved.

Reason: To ensure that any redundant wind turbine is removed from site, in the interests of safety, amenity and environmental protection.

Decommissioning

6. Not later than 12 months before the end of this permission, a decommissioning and site restoration method statement shall be submitted for the written approval of the Planning Authority, such scheme to include the removal of above-ground elements of the development (save for access tracks which may be left in situ with the approval of the Planning Authority), the management and timing of any works, environmental management provisions, including aftercare, and a traffic management plan to address any traffic impact issues during the decommissioning period.

Reason: To ensure the decommissioning and removal of the development in an appropriate and environmentally acceptable manner and the restoration of the site, in the interests of safety, amenity and environmental protection.

7. No work shall start on the site in implementation of this permission until details of the financial provisions to be put in place to cover the full cost of decommissioning and site restoration have been submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority; documentary evidence has been provided that these provisions are in place and the Planning Authority has confirmed that these arrangements are satisfactory. Thereafter, the provisions must be kept in place until required to complete site decommissioning, restoration and aftercare in accordance with condition 6.

Reason: To guarantee funding for site restoration on the cessation of the wind farm operation.

Construction and Environmental Management Plan

8. At least six weeks prior to the commencement of any works, a full site-specific Construction and Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) shall be submitted for the written approval of the Planning Authority, in consultation with SNH and SEPA and all work shall be carried out in accordance with the duly approved plan. The required documents shall take account of matters set out in the Environmental Statement including details of all on-site construction works, post-construction reinstatement, drainage, mitigation, and other restoration, together with details of the timetabling and shall include the following: -

a. Traffic Management Plan including details of any temporary diversions of access routes (including pedestrian routes) and associated signage;

b. Site Waste Management Plan including pollution prevention and control measures;c. Drainage Management Plan, including Sustainable drainage system (SuDS) design

concept including run-off and sediment control measures; flood risk management, and details of foul drainage arrangements;

d. Watercourse Crossing Assessment with detailed design prior to construction of any water course engineering works, including culverting of watercourses and other crossings;

e. Water Quality Monitoring Programme (prior to and during construction) including any measures required for the protection of private water supplies;

f. Dust management including cleaning arrangements for the junction with the A83(T) should this be necessary as a result of abnormal use of the junction;

g. Arrangements for on-site storage of fuel and other chemicals;h. Ecological monitoring over construction period including all necessary pre-

construction surveys and a watching brief for protected species with a Species Management Plan (where necessary);

i. Details of temporary site illumination;j. Details of the methods to be adopted to reduce the effects of noise occurring during

the construction period to the lowest practicable level and in accordance with BS5228;

k. Post-construction restoration/reinstatement of the working areas;l. Spoil management plan, including management of any peat generated from site

works.

The Construction and Environmental Management Plan shall be carried out as approved for the duration of construction works.

Reason: To set out the detailed site development methodology including measures to control pollution of air, land and water and to ensure full consideration of all consequential effects arising during the construction period.

Ecology

9. Prior to commencement of development, the developer shall appoint an appropriately qualified and experienced independent Ecological Clerk of Works acceptable to the Planning Authority. The terms of appointment shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, and will cover the periods of:

a. wind farm construction, including micro-siting and finalisation of the wind farm layout, as well as subsequent post-construction restoration; and, in due course,

b. wind farm decommissioning.

In relation to (a) the terms of appointment shall be submitted prior to the commencement of the development and in relation to (b), prior to the commencement of any decommissioning works.

Reason: In the interests of nature conservation and environmental protection.

10. The Ecological Clerks of Works required under the terms of the above condition shall have a duty to:

a. Carry out pre-construction surveys to inform the Construction Environmental Management Plan required in terms of Condition 8; and thereafter,

b. Supervise any micro-siting of turbines and associated infrastructure pursuant to condition 3 above;

c. Ensure that the impacts of development on blanket bog are minimised; and

b. Monitor compliance with ecological and hydrological aspects of the Construction Environmental Management Plan required in terms of Condition 8, and the Decommissioning Method Statement required in terms of Condition 6. The Ecological Clerk of Works shall have a duty to report promptly to the developer’s

nominated construction project manager (during the construction period) or decommissioning project manager (during decommissioning) any non-compliance with the hydrological or ecological aspects of the construction method statement and other relevant approved schemes and proposals or the ultimate restoration plan, respectively.

Reason: in the interests of nature conservation and environmental protection.

11. No development shall commence until a Peat Management Plan has been agreed in writing with the Planning Authority in consultation with the Scottish Environment Protection Agency. Thereafter the approved Peat Management Plan shall be implemented in full for the duration of construction works, unless any intended revisions are submitted to and approved in writing in advance by the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interest of ensuring the conservation of peat resources.

12. No construction works, vegetation clearance or tree felling, or decommissioning shall be carried out during the bird breeding season (April to July inclusive) until a Bird Protection Plan has been agreed in writing with the Planning Authority in consultation with Scottish Natural Heritage and the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds. Thereafter the approved Bird Protection Plan shall be implemented in full for the duration of construction works, unless any intended revisions are submitted to and approved in writing in advance by the Planning Authority.

Reason: In order to minimise disturbance to birds of conservation concern during the construction period in the interests of nature conservation.

13. Prior to wind farm commissioning, a Habitat Management Plan (HMP) shall be developed and shall be submitted to and be approved in writing by the Council as Planning Authority in consultation with Scottish Natural Heritage, the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds and Forestry Commission Scotland. The extent of the habitat management area to which the plan relates and the ecological objectives of the plan should accord with the area identified and the intentions set out in the Environmental Statement (October 2015) accompanying the application. The duly approved plan shall be implemented for the full duration of the operational phase of the development and during the decommissioning phase, unless any variations thereof are subsequently agreed in writing by the Planning Authority.

Reason: In order to restore afforested areas back to peatland habitat the interests of nature conservation.

14. A Habitat Management Group (HMG) to which Scottish Natural Heritage and the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds should be invited to be members, shall be established to oversee the preparation and delivery of the HMP required by condition 14 above and to review and assess the information from the ongoing monitoring and survey results. The HMG should have powers to make reasonable changes to the HMP sufficient to deliver its agreed aims and should report progress to the Planning Authority on an annual basis. (The HMG could either be constituted separately or could form part of the established Central Kintyre Habitat Management group).

Reason: In order to ensure delivery of the Habitat Management Plan in the interests of nature conservation.

15. The developer shall establish a programme of post-construction monitoring of bird populations in respect of the wind farm site details of which shall be agreed in advance by the Planning Authority in consultation with Scottish Natural Heritage, the Royal

Society for the Protection of Birds. This shall be implemented in respect of the development site and the associated Habitat Management Area and the state of the habitat and the response of species to habitat and the management of habitat should be quantified and assessed in order to inform the decisions of the Habitat Management Group required by condition 14 above.

Reason: In order to ensure delivery of the Habitat Management Plan in the interests of nature conservation.

Construction hours

16. The hours of any vehicular movements to and from the development site and construction activities shall be limited to 0700 hours to 1900 hours Monday to Fridays and 0800 to 1300 hours Saturdays (excluding public holidays), otherwise than with the prior written approval of the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interest of amenity.

Appearance

17. Prior to commencement of development, details of the turbine model selected for installation on the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. The turbine model selected shall not exceed the blade tip heights, hub heights and rotor diameter approved by virtue of the effect of conditions 1 and 2 above. Thereafter the development shall be implemented in accordance with the duly approved details.

Reason: In order to ensure that the development adheres to the design parameters considered in the assessment of the proposal and in the absence of the actual turbine model to be installed being specified in the application.

18. The wind turbines shall be finished in a matt grey white colour (RAL 9002 or RAL 7035), or such other colour as may be agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, and the colour and finish of the wind turbine shall not be altered thereafter without the written approval of the Planning Authority. No illumination (with the exception of aviation safeguarding lighting required under condition 28) shall be permitted, nor shall any symbols, signs, logos, or other lettering, except as may be required by law, be applied to the turbines without the prior written approval of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To minimise reflection and reduce the impact of the turbines in the interest of visual amenity.

19. The control building shall be faced in natural stone or smooth cement or wet dash render painted a recessive colour (or other natural/recessive finish as agreed in writing by the Planning Authority) with the roof finished in natural slate or a good quality slate substitute, samples or full details of which shall be submitted for the prior written approval of the Planning Authority prior to building works commencing.

Reason: In order to secure an appropriate appearance in the interests of amenity and to assimilate the building into the landscape setting.

20. Prior to the commencement of development, details of materials, external finishes and colours for external transformer housings and any other ancillary structures shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority. The development shall be implemented in accordance with the duly approved details.

Reason: In order to secure an appropriate appearance in the interests of amenity and to assimilate the structures into the landscape setting

21. All turbines rotors shall rotate in the same direction.

Reason: In the interest of visual amenity

Access

22. No development shall obstruct the Core Path (C094/Kintyre way) through the site or result in the Core Path being closed unless prior written consent is obtained from the Council’s Access Officer and a temporary alternative footpath has been provided. An Access Plan showing the route, design and specification any alternative path should be submitted to and agreed by the Access Officer in advance of access being restricted.

Reason: To safeguard access along the Core Path.

23. Following completion of construction works the overall condition of the Core Path through the site shall be of a standard that is at least comparable to the path prior to the work starting with any necessary remedial/improvement works post construction being carried out by the developer as soon as practicable following the cessation of construction activities.

Reason: To safeguard access along the Core Path.

Traffic

24. The proposed route for any abnormal loads on the trunk road network must be approved by the Trunk Roads Authority prior to the movement of any abnormal load. Any accommodation measures required including the removal of street furniture, junction widening, traffic management must similarly be approved.

Reason: To maintain safety for both the trunk road traffic and the traffic moving to and from the development. To ensure that the transportation of abnormal loads will not have any detrimental effect on the trunk road network

25. Any additional signing or temporary traffic control measures deemed necessary due to the size or length of loads being delivered must be undertaken by a recognised Quality Assured traffic management consultant, to be approved by the Trunk Road Authority before delivery commences.

Reason: To minimise interference with the safety and free flow of the traffic on the trunk road.

Flood Risk

26. All watercourse crossings shall be designed to allow free passage of the 1 in 200 year plus climate change event, plus an allowance for freeboard, to the satisfaction of the Council’s Flood Risk Assessor. Details of the design of watercourse crossings plus surface water drainage and SuDS proposals designed per CIRIA C753 shall be submitted for the written approval of the Planning Authority in advance of any works on site with potential to give rise to effects upon the water environment.

Reason: To ensure that appropriate water course crossing designs and surface water drainage measures are adopted in the interests of avoiding flooding.

Television and radio interference

27. No wind turbine shall be erected until a scheme to secure the investigation and alleviation of any electro-magnetic interference to TV and radio reception at residential properties lawfully existing at the date of this permission caused by the operation of the turbines has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. The scheme shall be implemented as approved if issues arise.

Reason: To avoid interference with television signals in the interests of residential amenity.

Aviation

28. Prior to the erection of the first wind turbine, the developer shall provide:

a. written confirmation to the Ministry of Defence of the anticipated date of commencement of and completion of construction; the height above ground level of the highest structure in the development and the position of each wind turbine in latitude and longitude, and

b. shall provide to the Planning Authority a scheme for visible and infra-red combi aviation lighting for the wind farm to a specification agreeable to Highlands and Islands Airports in their capacity as safeguarding authority for Campbeltown Airport and also to the Ministry of Defence. The turbines shall be erected with the duly approved lighting installed which shall remain operational throughout the duration of the permission.

Reason: In the interests of aviation safety.

Noise

29. The level of noise immissions from the wind turbines shall not exceed 35dB LA90, 10min (including the application of any tonal penalty) when measured at any residential dwelling which lawfully exists but where occupiers are not financially involved with the development at the date of consent.

Reason: To minimise the adverse impact of noise generated by the operations on the local community.

30. Prior to the installation of any turbines the developer shall submit a report for approval by the Planning Authority which demonstrates compliance with the noise limits in condition 27 above. The report shall include details of any proposed noise reduction measures and shall be prepared with reference to the Institute of Acoustics Good Practice Guide to the Application of ETSU-R-97 and associated supplementary guidance notes.

Reason: In order to protect the amenities of the area from noise disturbance.

31. Within 21 days from the receipt of a written request from the Planning Authority or following a complaint to the Planning Authority from the occupant of a dwelling, the wind turbine operator shall, at the wind turbine operator’s expense, employ an independent consultant approved by the Planning Authority to assess the level of noise immissions from the wind turbines at the complainant’s property in accordance with procedures to be agreed with the Planning Authority.

Reason: To establish the procedure to be adopted in the event of a complaint about noise.

32. The wind turbine operator shall provide the Planning Authority the independent consultant’s assessment and conclusions regarding the said noise complaint, including all calculations, audio recordings and raw data upon which those assessments and conclusions are based. Such information shall be provided within 2 months of the date of a written request from the Planning Authority, unless otherwise extended in writing by the Planning Authority. The wind turbine operator shall take such remedial action required to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To permit the assessment of any complaint and, where necessary, to provide the basis for a solution.

33. Wind speed, wind direction and power generation data shall be continuously logged and provided to the Planning Authority in a format to be agreed at its request and within 28 days of such a request. Such data shall be retained by the operator for a period of not less than 12 months.

Reason: To ensure that adequate background data is available.

Archaeology

34. No development shall be commenced until the developer has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted by the developer, agreed by the West of Scotland Archaeology Service and approved in writing by the Council as Planning Authority. Thereafter the developer shall ensure that the programme of archaeological works is fully implemented and that all recording and recovery of archaeological resources within the development site is undertaken to the satisfaction of the Council as Planning Authority.

Reason: To enable the opportunity to identify and examine any items of archaeological interest which may be found on the site, and to allow any action required for the protection, preservation of recording of such remains.

Borrow Pits

35. For the avoidance of doubt this permission should not be construed as conferring consent for the working of any borrow pits within the application site, the provision of which would require to be the subject of separate applications to the Council as Planning Authority for mineral planning consent.

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt, and having regard to the need for separate planning permission.

Forestry

36.

37. (RSPB to be consulted on replanting plan)

Protection of Water Catchment

38. No development shall be commenced until written confirmation has been received from Scottish Water of their satisfaction that the development will not affect abstractions and Drinking Water Protected Areas within the Saddell Water catchment. In the event that precautions or protection measures are deemed necessary by Scottish Water to safeguard these assets, they shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority for the duration of construction works.

Reason: In order to safeguard public water supplies.

NOTES TO THE APPLICANT

The length of the permission: This planning permission will lapse on the expiration of a period of three years from the date of this decision notice, unless the development has been started within that period. (See section 58(1) of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (as amended).

Notice of the start of development: The person carrying out the development must give advance notice in writing to the planning authority of the date when it is intended to start. Failure to do so is a breach of planning control. It could result in the planning authority taking enforcement action. (See sections 27A and 123(1) of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (as amended).)

Notice of the completion of the development: As soon as possible after it is finished, the person who completed the development must write to the planning authority to confirm the position. (See section 27B of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (as amended).)

Display of notice: A notice must be displayed on or near the site while work is being carried out. The planning authority can provide more information about the form of that notice and where to display it. (See section 27C of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 Act (as amended) and Schedule 7 to the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2008.

Transport Scotland Advisory Notes:

The applicant should be informed that the granting of planning permission does not carry with it the right to carry out works within the trunk round boundary and that permission must be granted by Transport Scotland Trunk Road and Bus Operations. Any works required and contact details are provided on Transport Scotland’s response to the Planning Authority and is available on the Council’s planning portal

Trunk road modification works shall, in all respects, comply with the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges and the Specification for Highway Works published by HMSO. The developer shall issue a certificate to that effect, signed by the design organisation.

Trunk road modifications shall, in all respects, be designed and constructed to arrangements that comply with the Disability Discrimination Act: Good Practice Guide for Roads published by Transport Scotland. The developer shall provide written confirmation of this, signed by the design organisation.

Trunk Roads Authority contact details: development_mangement@transportscotland.gov.uk 0141 272 7382

Access officer comments: All the existing paths and tracks used by walkers, cyclists, and horse riders of all abilities and any new paths should be of the same standard or better than those to which they connect. The level of any road crossing a path should be tied into it so that movement is not impeded. Any gates erected on paths or tracks should be provided with a self-closing bridle gate to allow public access. Please have regard to the attached note re access obligations. Contact 01546 604314.

APPENDIX A – RELATIVE TO APPLICATION NUMBER: 15/00205/PP

PLANNING LAND USE AND POLICY ASSESSMENT

A. Settlement Strategy

The proposed wind farm is located within ‘very sensitive countryside’ as defined by the Argyll and Bute Local Development Plan. Policy LDP DM1– Development within the Development Management Zones supports sustainable forms of renewable energy development on appropriate sites in very sensitive countryside. Policy LDP 6 – Supporting the Sustainable Growth of Renewables only supports renewable energy developments where they are consistent with the principles of sustainable development and it can be adequately demonstrated that there would be no unacceptable significant adverse effects, whether individual or cumulative, including on local communities, natural and historic environments, landscape character and visual amenity, and that the proposals would be compatible with adjacent land uses.

In this case, it is considered that the scale and location of the proposal will integrate sympathetically with the landscape, without giving rise to significantly adverse consequences for landscape character and visual amenity of its surroundings. It will reinforce the established pattern of development which takes advantage of the expansiveness and relative remoteness of the interior of the peninsula from settlement, transport routes, historic environment assets and smaller scale landscapes, all of which tend to be associated with the coast. The scheme has been reduced in scale from that being pursued initially, both to reduce the extent of the footprint of windfarm development in association with the nearby operational farms, and to remove development from the most significant localised hill tops, so as to avoid unacceptable impacts upon landscape character. In so doing more regard has been had to the advice given in the Landscape Wind Energy Capacity Study which seeks to support large scale turbine development in upland Kintyre where it can be assimilated without significantly adverse landscape, visual or cumulative impacts.

Latterly, further amendments to improve landscape fit have been made by the applicants in the form of the height reduction of one turbine and the deletion of another. The purpose of this has been to remove full rotor visibility from viewpoints assessed in East Kintyre in order that visibility is largely restricted to blades and tips. For the reasons detailed below in this report, it is considered that this proposal does satisfy Local Development Plan policy, and Scottish Government policy and advice in respect of wind farm development.

Having due regard to the above it is considered that the proposal is consistent with the provisions of the SPP (2014); the Scottish Government’s Specific Advice Sheet on Onshore Wind Farms and relevant Local Development Plan Policy in this regard.

B. Location, Nature and Design of Proposed Development

The proposal comprises the erection, operation for a 25 year term and subsequent decommissioning after 25 years of an 18 turbine wind farm to the south of the operational Beinn an Tuirc 1 and 2 windfarms. The site lies to 0.5km the west of Lussa Loch, approximately 7.5km to the north of Campbeltown, 3km west of Saddell and 7km south-west of Carradale.

The proposed layout comprises a north cluster (Meall Buidhe) of 8 turbines and a south cluster of 10 turbines (A’Chruach). An original proposal to develop a third cluster further south (Sgreadan Hill) has been deleted from the scheme. Of the remaining turbines,

17 would be 126 metres high to the blade tip, with 1 turbine reduced to 106 metres high to blade tip in the interests of reducing visibility from locations with visibility in East Kintyre. These compare with the existing 100m high turbines 0.5km to the north at Beinn an Tuirc 2, and the original 67m turbines 2km to the north at Beinn an Tuirc 1. Despite the difference in height between the turbines at the three separate Beinn an Tuirc windfarms there are few locations where these can be experienced in combination, other than at considerable distances. The proposed scheme would have an installed capacity of 36MW.

The site extends to 2,300 hectares much of which his Forestry Commission conifer plantation with open unplanted hilltops. The original proposal was for a scheme of up to 37 turbines extending over a larger area and encompassing Sgreaden Hill. During the design process and following discussion with planning officers and SNH the scheme was reduced, primarily to reduce visual intrusion into Saddell Glen and to keep turbines off this locally distinctive hill top, both of which improved compliance with the landscape advice given in the Council’s ‘Landscape Wind Energy Capacity Study’. The height of the turbines is such that it enables co-existence of the wind farm with established forestry areas and accordingly clear-felling for wind resource and turbulence reasons will not be required in this case. The forestry will require keyhole and other felling which will amount to 243 hectares overall. Most of this will be the subject of replanting but there will be an overall net loss as a result of the proposal of 35 hectares, which will replanting elsewhere in order to satisfy the government’s ‘Control of Woodland Removal Policy’. The site includes a proposed habitat management area which would entail plantation removal in favour of restoration of blanket bog on deep peat for nature conservation purposes. The Kintyre Way long distance path runs within 450m of the nearest proposed turbine and the visual influence of the development would extend along the route in varying degrees for around 12km.

The proposed turbines are conventional horizontal axis three bladed models with a maximum hub height of 81 metres (61metres in the case of T36) and a rotor diameter of 90m metres. There would be an external transformer and a crane hardstanding at the base of each turbine. Wind monitoring would be via two permanent 70m high anemometer masts. Access to the site would be via an improvement of the existing route from the A83(T) in west Kintyre near to Bellochantuy, which already serves Beinn an Tuirc 1 and 2 wind farms. A further 15km of on-site tracks would be required to serve the additional turbine locations and these would require the installation of five culverted crossings over minor watercourses. The wind farm would be served by an on-site control building, sub-station and external equipment compound, to which the turbines would be connected via underground cabling. The wind farm would be linked to the grid at the Carradale sub-station via a connection which would be sought separately from the government under Section 37 of the Electricity Act. During construction there would be a temporary on-site contractors’ compound and materials laydown area and the provision of a mobile concrete batching plant. Up to five on-site borrow pits would be required to provide aggregate for access track formation and for concrete production, although the details of these would be subject to the requirement for separate mineral planning consents. The construction period is estimated to be 18 months with a temporary workforce of up to 75 FTE/day, reducing to 4 FTE/day once the wind farm is operational.

The Council’s general approach to wind farm development reflects that established by Scottish Planning Policy, which in turn has regard to national energy policy and the drive to increase the proportion of electricity generation produced from renewable sources. The Council’s LDP and associated supplementary guidance supports renewable energy developments where these are consistent with the principle of sustainable development and it can be adequately demonstrated that there would be no unacceptable significant adverse effects, whether individual or cumulative, including

on local communities, natural and historic environments, landscape character and visual amenity, and that the proposals would be compatible with adjacent land uses. The various material considerations requiring to be addressed by virtue of the effect of national and development plan policy and relevant Council and SNH siting, design and and landscape guidance are assessed individually below. In the absence of any of those considerations presenting an insurmountable impediment which would point to the need to withhold consent, it is considered that subject to identified mitigation and appropriate conditions that planning permission should be granted.

Having due regard to the material considerations assessed below it is considered that the proposal is consistent with the provisions of SPP (2014) and Scottish Government’s Specific Advice Sheet on Onshore Wind Farms (2012) and the relevant Local Development Plan Policy in this regard.

C. Landscape Character & Landscape Impact

The application site is situated between the east coast of Kintyre and Lussa Loch which lies in the centre of the peninsula. It is situated to the south of operational wind farms at Beinn and Tuirc 1 and 2. The proposed development straddles the summit of Meall Buidhe (375m AOD) in the north part of the site, and the south part of the site lies immediately west of the summit of A’Chruach (343m AOD). The layout takes the form of two turbine clusters separated by land either side of the route of the Kintyre Way which runs east – west through the centre of the site. An original proposal for a larger wind farm of up to 37 turbines also encompassed Sgreadan Hill (379m AOD) to the south of the site, but following concerns raised by officers and SNH on landscape grounds, this has now been excluded from the application with turbine numbers having been reduced accordingly.

Impacts on landscape designations

The site is not located within any landscape designation. It lies 13km south-west of the North Arran National Scenic Area and the North Ayrshire designated North Arran Special Landscape Area, 16 km south-west of the North Arran Wild Land Area, and 2km west of the LDP designated East Kintyre Area of Panoramic Quality. Elsewhere within the 35km study area there is the west Kintyre APQ and more distant South Knapdale and Mull of Kintyre APQ’s, upon which the proposal will only exert inconsequential effects.

The applicant’s LVIA accords the North Arran NSA ‘high’ sensitivity due to its national significance, but concludes that the proposal will only exert a ‘negligible’ magnitude of change producing a ‘moderate/minor’ effect which will not be of significance in EIA terms. With regard to both the NSA and the North Arran Wild Land Area the proposal will extend development south of the existing wind farms at Beinn and Tuirc 1 and 2, in a direction which is away from both of these designations. In terms of the East Kintyre APQ the LVIA concludes that there will be localised ‘moderate’ effects but that these will not be significant in EIA terms relative to the designation as a whole.

In view of its national status SNH has commented on the impact of the development on the North Arran NSA with its associated wild land status. Whilst SNH considers that the proposal would result in a more continuous bank of turbines in the southern part of Kintyre as viewed from Arran, which would be to the detriment of coastal and upland viewpoints, it does not consider that this effect is to the point where an objection is warranted in terms of impact on the North Arran NSA. The proposal would introduce turbine visibility into the coastal Rocky Mosaic LCT at Carradale Bay and into the upper end of the Hidden Glen LCT at Saddell Glen. SNH concludes that the proposal would result in significant visual effects around Lussa Loch to the west of the site and from the Kilbrannon Sound to the east and also in longer distance views from Campbeltown

Loch from the south. SNH suggests that that further mitigation could be secured by removal of some of the easternmost turbines, notably T37 (but also T39, T36 and T32), and/or consideration should be given to further height reduction.

In response the applicants have conceded that T37 is the most prominent turbine in views which concern SNH and they have latterly decided to delete this from the scheme in its entirety. In combination with the previously agreed reduction in height of T36 by 20 metres this reduces full rotor visibility from viewpoints of concern in East Kintyre, so that where there is visibility this is largely restricted to blades and tips and reduces the overall impact of the wind farm upon landscape character.

Argyll and Bute Landscape Wind Energy Capacity Study (2012)

The proposal is situated within the SNH defined ‘Upland Forest Moor Mosaic’ Landscape Character Type (LCT) which forms a back drop to the ‘Rocky Mosaic’ Landscape Character Type along the coast as viewed from the Kilbrannan Sound and the Isle of Arran. In view of the expansiveness and relatively simple landform of the UFFM LCT, the Council’s ‘Landscape Wind Energy Capacity Study’ accords this LCT ‘medium’ sensitivity to the large scale (80m – 130m) wind turbine typology, but nonetheless cautions against developments which would intrude inappropriately on locally distinctive hill tops or which would result in unacceptable cumulative impacts, notably in views of the Kintyre peninsula from Arran. In particular, it recommends that developments should be set back into the interior of the peninsula and set back from the coast and more sensitive edge hills.

The contraction of the layout as submitted, and the disposition of the turbines proposed, have resulted in a scheme which has limited effects on the smaller scale and more sensitive adjacent coastal landscape character types (but with residual effects still apparent in the generally unfrequented upper section of Saddell Glen and localised effects on more regularly frequented locations within the Rocky Mosaic LCT, such as the East Kintyre road and the environs of the settlement of Carradale) Effects on other surrounding character types including Bay Farmland, Low Coastal Hills LCT’s and the Kilbrannon Sound are assessed in the LVIA as being not significant in EIA terms. Cumulative impacts with existing wind farms are mainly apparent from the sea and from the west coast of Arran rather than from locations within Kintyre itself.

Impact on settlements

The applicant’s LVIA assesses impacts upon surrounding settlements including Carradale (8km north-east) Drumlemble (13km south-west) Blackwaterfoot and Machrie, Arran (both 13km east), concluding that where the development will be visible from these locations it will exert ‘moderate’ effects at these distances, which will not result in significant effects in EIA terms.

Impact on routes and roads

The route most affected by the development will be the Kintyre Way long distance footpath which passes east-west through the centre of the site. Effects of the development would be experienced intermittently over a 12km section of the route, with impacts upon the section between the head of Saddell Glen and Lussa Loch being assessed in the applicant’s LVIA as being locally significant, with the nearest turbine being located 430m from the route. This route is already subject to influence from a number of man-made sources, including wind farms, electricity lines, hydro-electric development and commercial forestry, so despite its relative remoteness and distance from habitation, it does not traverse a pristine landscape. Nonetheless the addition of a further wind farm will however undoubtedly increase the sequential impact of turbines on the experience of this route.

From Arran the presence of further turbines on the spine of Kintyre will exert an influence on the Arran Coastal Way long distance footpath with effects which are assessed as being locally significant in the applicant’s LVIA. These effects will be experienced at distances between 12km and 24km, so will be much less immediate that those experienced by users of the Kintyre Way.

The LVIA has assessed impacts on other transport routes including the A841, Arran (13km to 24km), the B842 and NCR 78 East Kintyre (2km to 26km), the B843 Stewarton – Machrihanish (10km), and the route of the Campbeltown – Ardrossan ferry (8km). In all cases the impacts on these routes are adjudged to be not significant in EIA terms.

Additional Environmental Information (December 2015)

The applicant’s EIA has been augmented by an addendum which has regard to the following matters which post-date the production of the original Environmental Statement:

The adoption of the UN Framework on Climate Change (Paris Agreement) which gives additional impetus to the drive to increase renewable electricity generation;

The production (and subsequent adoption) of Renewables Supplementary Guidance by the Council;

The production of the Council’s technical working note on ‘Cumulative Landscape & Visual Assessment of Wind Energy Development in Kintyre’ (LUC 2015);

Consent for the repowering of Tangy Wind Farm, the submission of Escairt Wind Farm, and pre-inquiry amendments to the proposed Creggan Wind Farm (s36 scheme awaiting ministerial determination);

An LVIA update produced in response to issues raised during the consultation phase on the original application details, which provides:

i) An updated cumulative assessment to include at SNH’s request the subsequently submitted Escairt wind farm (refused and at appeal);

ii) An expansion on the assessment of impact upon the cited ‘special qualities’ of the North Arran National Scenic Area, in response to initial comments provided by SNH and North Ayrshire Council;

iii) An expansion of the visibility assessment for East Kintyre and Arran including more fine grained terrain modelling, additional graphics and a detailed route assessment of the B842 East Kintyre road, in response to initial concerns raised by officers and by SNH;

iv) A reduction in blade tip height by 20m in respect of T36 and T37 by lowering hub height so as to remove full rotor visibility from the vicinity of Carradale and from the B842 East Kintyre road south of Saddell, whilst maintaining a constant rotation speed across the site. (Note: subsequent to the submission of the updated LVIA T37 has since been deleted in its entirety).

The LVIA update concludes that despite the emergence of the additional wind farm proposal at Escairt in North Kintyre, this will not produce, in combination with the proposed Beinn an Tuirc 3 wind farm, a significant effect in EIA terms on landscape character, on the North Arran National Scenic Area or on the North Ayrshire Council

designated North Arran Special Landscape Area; largely due to the 23.5km separation between these projects and the relatively low incidence of combined visibility. A combination of more accurate visualisations better capable of representing the likely affect upon locations and routes in East Kintyre and a reduction in the height of two turbines have been advanced in order to demonstrate the predicted impact of the proposal upon these areas and to provide reassurance that the original LVIA conclusion that effects upon East Kintyre will not be significant in EA terms remains valid. Despite this conclusion, following further comments by SNH, the applicants have agreed to remove T37 from the scheme in order to further improve landscape fit.

Conclusion

This proposal has been reduced in scale from that originally proposed, with turbines removed from the north end of the site to reduce impacts on the smaller scale and more sensitive Saddell Glen, and removed from Sgreadan Hill in order to avoid development on this local distinctive hilltop and to reduce the lateral extent of development as viewed from Arran. Together these have improved compliance with the recommendations in the Council’s Landscape Wind Energy Capacity Study. They have also reduced prominence in views from South Kintyre in combination with the effects of Tangy wind farm to the west.

Although the turbines are large scale than those employed at either Beinn an Tuirc 1 or 2, there are limited locations in Kintyre where they will be appreciated in combination, and in those views which are mainly from the south, the larger turbines will appear in the foreground so will not run counter to the effect of perspective. The additional development will contribute to the cumulative impact of multiple wind farm developments on the skyline of the peninsula when viewed from Arran, although at 12 to 13km these will be moderated by the effect of distance. Effects on locations in East Kintyre including the coast road will be sporadic and whilst they will contribute to the perception of wind farms being located within the interior of Kintyre they will not impinge on these locations to a point at which the maintenance of landscape character will be threatened. The reduction in height of one turbine and the removal of another will benefit the appreciation of the wind farm from locations with visibility in East Kintyre.

The most significant impacts will be upon locations closest to the wind farm – the Kintyre Way as it approaches and then passes through the site, locations around Lussa Loch to the west and from the head of Saddell Glen to the east. Although they are valued locally for the recreational opportunities which they afford, these are not locations which are frequented by large numbers of people which is influential upon the acceptability of the development. Nonetheless the development should be regarded as having a significant presence in the landscape locally for a limited number of receptors, which is an inevitable consequence of the short range appreciation of development on this scale.

North Ayrshire Council has expressed some reservations as to the desirability of more turbines in Kintyre in terms of cumulative impact on landscape character, although Arran Community Council has decided the development does not warrant objection. SNH considers that the amended proposal would still result in a more continuous bank of turbines in the southern part of Kintyre as viewed from Arran, to the detriment of coastal and upland viewpoints, but not to the point where an objection is warranted in terms of impact on the North Arran NSA. Of the two clusters, the A’Chruach cluster would be less associated with the interior plateau because of the closer visual relationship with smaller scale coastal landscape. SNH concludes that significant impacts on landscape character would arise in the Upland Forest Moor Mosaic surrounding the site, around Carradale within the Rocky Mosaic LCT and within Saddell Glen within the Hidden Glens LCT. A reduction in easternmost turbine numbers and or height could lessen these impacts in the LVIA their opinion.

This scheme has been through a series of iteration with significant design changes made by the applicants to limit impact upon Saddell Glen, locations with visibility in East Kintyre and to avoid development extending onto the locally distinctive Sgreadan Hill. The scheme has been reduced from an original proposal for 37 turbines to a submitted scheme of 19 turbines and has been amended further during processing by a reduction in height of one turbine and the removal of another in order to secure better landscape fit. This contraction of the scheme has been to the benefit of the appreciation of the development from locations on Arran. It is considered that the residual proposal does not exert inappropriate influence over landscape character to a point where refusal would be warranted, particularly when weighing in the balance the contribution which a scheme of this installed capacity could make to the attainment of what continue to be ambitious renewable energy targets set by the government.

Having due regard to the above it is considered that this proposal is consistent with the provisions of SPP; Scottish Government’s Specific Advice Sheet on Onshore Wind Farms (2012); the Argyll and Bute Local Development Plan; and the Wind Energy Capacity Study.

D. Visual Impact

Viewpoint assessment and the production of associated photomontages to meet SNH guidance has been conducted in respect of a range of locations which represent the experience of road users, tourists and those accessing the countryside. The applicant’s LVIA has assessed 23 representative viewpoints which were agreed in advance with the Council and SNH and which address the various landscape character types, transport routes identified as being potentially affected as a result of the production of Zone of Theoretical Visibility mapping. These address particular areas of interest revealed by the ZTV process, including the Kintyre Way and Lussa Loch, roads and settlement in East Kintyre, longer distance locations on the west coast of Arran, and localised areas of visibility from the south, to the west of Campbeltown.

Of these only four locations are identified in the LVIA as being subject to significant effects in EIA terms, namely:

VP 3 Kintyre Way – moderate change;VP 4 Lussa Loch – substantial change;VP13 Blackwaterfoot, Arran – moderate change;VP 14 Machrie Bay, Arran – moderate change.

Additional Environmental Information (December 2015)

In response to concerns expressed by officers and SNH, by means of Further Environmental Information (December 16) the applicants have reduced the height of two turbines (one of which has been subsequently deleted), have provided some updated and more accurate visualisations based on finer grain topographical information, and have undertaken a detailed route analysis of the East Kintyre road south of Carradale. Together these have served to demonstrate that the visual impacts upon the area fringing the settlement of Carradale, the Rocky Mosaic LCT and APQ along the East Kintyre Coast, and the route of the B842 and NCR 78 will be within acceptable limits, with occasional prominence in the vicinity of Saddell and Ugadale, but only for a very short duration when travelling through this landscape. More open but longer distance views will be available from the Kilbrannon Sound, the A841 along the west coast of Arran and the more elevated B880 String Road on the descent to Blackwaterfoot. The FEI accepts that the most affected location would be Machrie Bay on the west coast of Arran, although the most compelling views down the Kilbrannon Sound would not be intruded upon. An updated assessment of effect on locations within the North Arran NSA, the North Arran Special Landscape Area, the A841 Arran

coast road, the B880 String Road on Arran and the B842 East Kintyre Road has been carried out. This confirms the absence of significant effects in EIA terms on receptors in these locations.

More sophisticated modelling has enabled a better assessment of the likely visual effects upon users of the B842 East Kintyre Road which is also National Cycle Route 78. This identifies distant visibility southbound between Claonaig and Rockfield for 4km in North Kintyre, further intermittent visibility travelling south of Carradale for 1.2km (now blades only given the reduction in hub height of T36 and the deletion of T37) followed by some further intermittent views between Ugadale and Ballochgair, after which sight of the windfarm would be lost. Travelling north there would be combined visibility with Tangy wind farm at long distance from the road approaching Stewarton from Southend, and then intermittent views on the approach to Peninver and Ugadale. The reduction in height of one turbines and the deletion of another has improved the scheme as it would be appreciated from the area south of Saddell and also from the vicinity of Carradale, so views from the east coast are now generally limited to blades and blade tips, resulting in a simpler composition and reducing visual impact.

In response to the amended scheme SNH maintains that significant effects would arise in respect of the Kintyre Way around Lussa Loch and the head of Saddell Glen, Carradale Bay and locations above Carradale, Campbeltown Loch, the Kilbrannon Sound and locations on the west coast of Arran. A reduction in easternmost turbine numbers and or height could lessen these impacts in their view.

The final scheme has been amended further by the deletion of T37 which is of benefit in overcoming concerns about views of the wind farm from Carradale and Campbeltown Loch. Impacts upon the upper end of Saddell Glen, on the route of the Kintyre Way and the area around Lussa Loch would be inevitable with any scale of wind farm on this site given their proximity. Impacts upon Arran are addressed in the cumulative impact section which follows. It is considered that the residual proposal does not exert inappropriate influence over viewpoints which have been assessed to a point where refusal would be warranted, particularly when weighing in the balance the contribution which a scheme of this installed capacity could make to the attainment of what continue to be ambitious renewable energy targets set by the government.

Having due regard to the above it is considered that this proposal is consistent with the provisions of SPP; Scottish Government’s Specific Advice Sheet on Onshore Wind Farms (2012); the Argyll and Bute Local Development Plan; and the Wind Energy Capacity Study.

E. Cumulative Impact

Given the number of operational and proposed wind farm developments in Kintyre, it is inevitable that cumulative impacts will be of concern in this case, particularly given the proximity of Beinn an Tuirc 1 and 2 wind farms. The following locations are relevant in terms of cumulative landscape and visual assessment:

Beinn an Tuirc 1 (67m to blade tip), 2.3km north, operational

Beinn an Tuirc 2 (100m to blade tip), 0.7km north, operational

Deucheran hill (93m to blade tip), 10.4km north, operational

Tangy 1 and 2 (66m but 126m consented to blade tip) 5.6km south-west, operational

Cour (111m to blade tip) 15km north, operational

Freasdail (100m to blade tip) 24km north, under construction

Auchadaduie (100m to blade tip) 4.7km west, consented but not implemented

Beyond these, there are further sites under consideration at appeal (Blary Hill, Creggan and Escart) and the subject of as yet undetermined applications (Clachaig Glen and Killean).

The applicant’s LVIA concludes that cumulative effects will not be significant in EIA terms on landscape character types or landscape designations. A significant effect is however identified in terms of views from Blackwaterfoot and from Machrie on Arran (a combination of ‘high’ sensitivity and ‘moderate’ change) in combination with Beinn an Tuirc 1 and 2 wind farms. The Kintyre Way passes a number of wind farms but these are viewed sequentially with only limited combined visibility, and the development does not intrude in the more important views out from Kintyre towards Arran, so cumulatively the impact is assessed by the LVIA as being not significant in EIA terms. The differences in the scale of turbines across the three Beinn an Tuirc locations are also a consideration, although these will not be readily discernible given the limited numbers of regularly frequented locations where the sites are capable of being viewed in combination, other than from Arran, where the effect is moderated by the effect of distance. No significant cumulative effect is anticipated on the North Arran NSA given that the development extends away from the direction of that designation to the south of the existing turbines at Beinn an Tuirc 1 and 2.

In view of the continuing interest by the renewables sector in exploiting the available wind resource in Kintyre the Council has commissioned consultants to produce a ‘Cumulative Landscape & Visual Assessment of Wind Energy Development in Kintyre’ (LUC 2015), which in the absence of public consultation has the status of a technical working note rather than supplementary guidance. The study suffers somewhat from being founded around a 2012 baseline, which has become rapidly out of date given the continuing prospecting for wind farm sites in Kintyre. Nonetheless in summary, this advocates a ‘cluster and space’ approach in order to build upon the established pattern of wind farm development in Kintyre, but which seeks to maintain separation between clusters in order to afford some relief from excessively large numbers of turbines, and to avoid inappropriate cumulative impacts.

This study does not specifically identify support for this proposal and the applicants contend that more reliance should be placed on their cumulative assessment which is more up to date and reliable. Insofar as the proposal represents the enlargement of the established Beinn an Tuirc cluster, and does not pose a threat of coalescence with other consented sites or emergent proposals, it nonetheless respects the thrust of the ‘cluster and space’ approach advocated. The removal of originally proposed turbines from Sgreadan Hill and the consequent reduction in the lateral extent of the three Beinn an Tuirc windfarms has served to reinforce the relationship with the two operational sites and secures better visual cohesion in longer distance views of the site from the Kilbrannon Sound and from Arran.

From Arran although there is visibility of multiple wind farms in Kintyre, these are appreciated at distance in the context of a large scale upland landscape, in locations which appear well separated in views form the east. An assessment by the applicants upon views experienced by those engaged in outdoor activities in elevated parts of the NSA concludes that the cumulative effect of development will have a ‘moderate’ impact, but not one which would be of significance in EIA terms. There are less opportunities from within Kintyre itself to experience all three sites at Beinn an Tuirc, other than at close quarters where the experience tends to be a sequential one - from the route of the Kintyre Way for example.

Additional Environmental Information (December 2015)

As noted in Section C above, additional detail updating the original LVIA has been provided in order to have regard to subsequent events and also to provide reassurance that the conclusions of the original LVIA remain valid. The updated cumulative visual assessment (including the proposed Escairt Wind Farm) concludes that there will be some sequential effects from the coast road on Arran which are regarded as not being significant for vehicle users but of significance for cyclists who have more opportunity to discern features in the landscape at distance. From the East Kintyre road there would be intermittent sequential views (travelling north) although these would not amount to significant effects. In terms of the Kintyre Way this route is already affected by multiple wind farms and the sequential effects from Escairt and Beinn an Tuirc 3 would not be significant in terms of the 50km distance between Claonaig and Lussa Loch. Cumulative viewpoints have been assessed from locations where combined visibility might be experienced (high points on Arran and Kintyre, from Skipness looking south and from the Kilbrannon Sound) but none of these effects have been deemed significant in EIA terms.

SNH considers that the impact on the west coast of Arran would be compounded by the proposed use of larger turbines than Beinn and Tuirc 1 and 2, and by the sequential effects in combination with Escairt (should that be allowed on appeal). The potential development of two additional wind farms closer to the coast than those previously consented would result in more extensive visibility of turbines in Kintyre when viewed from Arran. Additional improvements in landscape fit and a reduced horizontal extent from Arran could be achieved by deletion/reduction in height of turbines.

The conclusion of officers in cumulative impact terms is that the relative absence of in combination views from locations in East Kintyre is to the advantage of the scheme, which nonetheless will contribute to some sequential impacts, particularly as far as the Kintyre Way is concerned. Cumulative effects will primarily be experienced from Arran in views towards Kintyre, although contraction of the proposal has reduced the increase in lateral extent of the Beinn an Tuirc group of turbines and has left the distinctive Sgreadan Hill untouched. There remains significant separation between this group and other wind farms to the north at Deucheran Hill, Cour and Freasdail (and Escairt should that be allowed on appeal). Inevitably the addition of a further wind farm in Kintyre will contribute to the visibility of turbines in the landscape from the west Arran coast road, albeit at a distance where the appreciation of wind farms would not seriously impinge on the experience of Arran itself. Views out from Arran NSA are not one of its cited ‘special qualities’ although SNH considers that views out must contribute to the setting of the island. Overall officers consider that the residual proposal does not exert inappropriate cumulative impacts to a point where refusal would be warranted, particularly when weighing in the balance the contribution which a scheme of this installed capacity could make to the attainment of what continue to be ambitious renewable energy targets set by the government.

Having due regard to the above it is considered that this proposal is consistent with the provisions of SPP; Scottish Government’s Specific Advice Sheet on Onshore Wind Farms (2012); the Argyll and Bute Local Development Plan; the Landscape & Wind Energy Capacity Study; and the Council’s ‘Cumulative Landscape & Visual Assessment of Wind Energy Development in Kintyre’ (LUC 2015).

F. Ecological Impact

The application site has been the subject of an Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey and NVC Classification surveys have been carried out plus species surveys for possible

species of interest (bats, mammals, fisheries and freshwater pearl mussel). There are no ecological designations on the site, the nearest non-avian designation being Tangy Loch SSSI 2.5km away. No non-statutory sites of nature conservation importance have been identified in the environmental assessment process. There is no record of invertebrates of conservation interest on the site, although some butterflies, salmonids, reptiles, otter and red squirrel frequent the wider surrounding area.

Of the development area 1,657ha is commercial forestry plantation, 391 ha is blanket bog or heavily modified heath affected by forestry, whilst the remainder is grassland and shrub heath. Forestry plantation is dominated by sitka spruce in densely stocked coups not favourable for peatland species due to drainage and shade. Blanket bog is distributed over the hill summits with grassland on unforested slopes. Vegetation points to relatively dry bog conditions with wetter areas restricted to localised flushes and hollows. Bog in favourable conservation condition is limited in extent.

The predicted habitat loss to construction is mainly forestry plantation (35ha or 2.1%) with only minor loss of blanket bog (7ha or 1.8%) with negligible loss in terms of other habitat types. No bog in favourable condition will be lost or disturbed during construction. Impact on salmonids, bats, otters and reptiles during construction and operation is assessed in the environmental statement as not being significant.

An on-site Habitat Management Area covering 54.3ha is proposed which will afford positive effects in terms of peatland habitats. Currently this comprises 40.7ha of forestry plantation plus modified bog habitat in rides and clearings. The management proposed includes tree removal, reinstatement of ridges and furrows, and encouragement of re-vegetation to produce 25.8 ha of restored blanket bog, which will double the amount of blanket bog already in target condition across the site as a whole.

In terms of the SPP Spatial Framework (which has regard to the prevalence of peatland resources amongst other constraints) the application site falls predominantly within the most favourable Group 3 categorisation, and is therefore defined as an ‘area with potential for windfarm development’ in SPP terms. Parts of the west and south-eastern margins of the site lie within a less favourable Group 2 categorisation as a result of the influence of the SNH Carbon and Peatland Map (2016). However, this application has been accompanied by a detailed site specific assessment of peat resources across the site which is much finer grained than the high level mapping produced by SNH, and given the siting of infrastructure to avoid areas of deep peat and the mitigation measures identified to safeguard peat assets during construction, this categorisation of part of the site ought not to be regarded as an impediment to development. SNH does not have any objection to the development in terms of terrestrial ecology subject to mitigation measures identified in the applicant’s environmental statement being implemented. SEPA have not raised any concerns in terms of their Groundwater Dependant Terrestrial Ecosystem interests or in terms of any hydrological impacts upon nature conservation interests.

Having due regard to the above, it is considered that this proposal is consistent with the provisions of SPP and Scottish Government’s Specific Advice Sheet on Onshore Wind Farms (2012); and the relevant Local Development Plan Policy in terms of its impact on ecological interests.

G. Ornithological Impact

There are no statutory ornithological designations on the site. There are two European Special Protection Areas for Birds (SPA’s) within 20km, namely the Kintyre Goose Roosts SPA and the Arran Moors SPA. Bird survey work has been carried out on the site to meet SNH requirements. This has revealed numerous Greenland Wild Fronted

Goose and Hen Harrier flights, with only occasional activity by Whooper Swan, Greylag Goose, White Tailed Eagle, Golden Eagle, Osprey and Short-Eared Owl.

The habitat loss arising from the proposal would be primarily forestry of little conservation value. The primary impact would therefore be the risk of displacement arising from construction activities, primarily tree felling and vehicle movements. The proposal would represent a potential loss of open ground to golden eagles and hen harriers of about 160ha (Meall Buidhe c.48ha and A’Chruach c112ha). Although the presence of turbines means that golden eagles may well not use the ground, hen harriers may continue to do so with the consequent risk of collision, although survey work did not reveal much use of A’Chruach by hen harrier. The Meall Buidhe area appears better used by hen harrier, and the hectarage is not dissimilar to the area proposed for the Habitat Management Plan.

Migratory over-wintering White-Fronted Geese use the nearby Lussa Loch as an overnight roost. This would be 800m from the nearest construction activity. Forestry Commission Scotland already have protocols in place to avoid disturbance of this species during sensitive times of the day/year. Scottish Power adopted these in the construction of Beinn an Tuirc 2 wind farm and intend to do so again with this development. In particular this would limit any construction within influencing distance of the loch between 1hour before sunset and sunrise during those times of the year when roosting occurs.

Golden eagle do frequent this area but have only been recorded over the site 28 times in 2 years. There is an absence of nesting sites on or around the proposed site, the nearest being some 6km to the north. The applicant’s environmental statement concludes that recorded activity is likely to represent infrequent forays by juveniles prospecting for territory rather than sustained use by a small number of resident birds. Habitat on and around the site out to 2km is not optimal for Golden Eagle. Any short-term displacement arising from construction disturbance or risk of collision during the operational phase is unlikely to be significant at population level.

SNH has indicated that proposal must be considered likely to have a significant effect upon the Kintyre Goose Roosts SPA and accordingly there is an obligation for a Habitat Regulations ‘appropriate assessment’ to be carried out by the Council in its capacity as ‘competent authority’. SNH does not however consider that based on the information provided the proposal affect the integrity of the designated site, and this view is shared by the RSPB. The required ‘appropriate assessment’ is included as an appendix to this report.

The RSPB has not objected to the proposal but has indicated its desire to see the proposed Habitat Management Area almost doubled in size to address the cumulative impact of the development on bird interests when considered in combination with exiting wind farm development in the area. They have suggested that an additional area of 40ha of stunted forestry south of Sgreaden Hill would be appropriate to remove and be included in an enlarged HMP area. Officers have asked SNH for a view on this as to whether in their view it is warranted and proportionate to the anticipated ornithological and other nature conservation impacts of the development proposed. Although SNH has accepted that the proliferation of wind farms is causing cumulative pressure on raptors (particularly juvenile eagle territory), SNH is of the view that the extent of the HMP proposed by the applicants is proportionate to the likely consequences of this development for birds without the inclusion of additional land, however welcome that might be from an ornithological perspective.

Having due regard to the above, it is considered that this proposal is consistent with the provisions of SPP and Scottish Government’s Specific Advice Sheet on

Onshore Wind Farms (2012); and the relevant Local Development Plan Policy in terms of its impact on ornothological interests.

H. Hydrological & Hydrogeological Impact

There is one water dependant statutory designated site within the applicant’s environmental statement study area, namely Lussa Loch SSSI (Greenland white fronted geese). The catchment for this loch is not hydraulically connected to the proposed site infrastructure, and the site itself drains eastwards towards the Kilbrannon Sound via a number of minor watercourses, with any flood risk being limited to the immediate watercourse corridor only. Tidal flood risk is absent and groundwater flood risk is low due to low permeability of the underlying rock. Surface water run off can be expected during high rainfall and/or saturated ground and good construction practice will need to be employed during construction to avoid sedimentation and pollution of water draining from the site, and to avoid interception of groundwater or localised diversion of surface water. A fisheries assessment has been carried out which indicates only low numbers of salmonids and an absence of freshwater pearl mussel.

Groundwater quality at this location is classified as ‘good’ by SEPA and the site lies within a Drinking Water Protection Area under the EU Drinking Water Directive. Those Groundwater Dependant Terrestrial Ecosystems identified in survey work are dependant on outflow from blanket bog up gradient from areas to be subject to construction activity. No infrastructure is proposed in the Saddell catchment feeding Saddell Water Treatment Works. Four private water supplies are sourced within the development area and these have been avoided, the nearest serving Ifferdale Farm being 2km from intended infrastructure.

Good practice mitigation measures have been identified including the preparation of a Construction Method Statement, a Construction Environmental Management Plan, a Peat Management Plan and a Sediment and Drainage Management Plan. Water quality monitoring will be undertaken during development works and an Ecological Clerk of Works will be employed on site. Overall the applicant’s environmental statement concludes that impacts on water related interests will after avoidance/mitigation be minor or negligible.

Subject to identified mitigation and the imposition of conditions to ensure implementation, SEPA, Scottish Water and the Council’s Flood Risk consultant have no objections to the proposal in terms of its impacts on the water environment or in terms of flood risk.

Having due regard to the above, it is considered that this proposal is consistent with the provisions of SPP and Scottish Government’s Specific Advice Sheet on Onshore Wind Farms (2012); and the relevant Local Development Plan Policy in terms of its impact on water environment interests.

I. Forestry

The application site is one which is substantially forested and the turbine size proposed is one which can co-exist with continued forestry subject to unavoidable losses associated with the key-holing of turbines, the formation of access and cable corridors, and other essential site infrastructure. Felling and key-holing will affect 243ha of plantation, which with replanting, will result in an overall net loss of 35ha. Forestry Commission Scotland has no objection subject to condition to secure compensatory planting and long term management of the remaining woodland. They expect to see forest related works satisfy the Scottish Government’s Control of Woodland Removal

Policy (CoWRP), to provided appropriate compensatory planting (CP) and the application of UK Forest Standard (UKFS) to the tree related activity.

Having due regard to the above it is considered that the proposal is consistent with the provisions of the relevant Local Development Plan policy in terms of forestry interests.

J. Borrow Pits

The ES states that up to five borrow pits are likely to be required to provide a local source of construction aggregate, which will minimise the amount of material required to be imported to the site. These will be the subject of individual mineral consent applications in the event that planning permission is granted for the wind farm.

K. Historic Environment

The applicant’s environmental statement has identified 33 known heritage assets (mainly sheilings and sheepfolds of low cultural significance). Only one Iron Age dun and one Neolithic cup marked stone are of significance and most of the remaining assets are post-medieval. The archaeological value of the forested parts of the site has already been diminished by ploughing and planting. There are 14 Scheduled Ancient Monuments within 5km of the site (duns/cairns/standing stones) and listed buildings at Saddell Castle, Saddell House and Lussa Power station.

No construction activities are proposed in the vicinity of any of these known assets and the archaeological potential of this disturbed area is predicted to be low. Operational effects arising from the presence of turbines in the landscape are on the settings of designated and undesignated assets are all considered to be negligible or nil.

A programme of archaeological works is to be agreed with WoSAS during construction who have indicated that a watching brief condition will suffice in this case. No mitigation during the operational phase is required. Historic Environment Scotland no objection in the absence of any historic environment issues of national significance.

Having due regard to the above it is considered that the proposal is consistent with the relevant Local Development Plan Policy in terms of historic environment interests.

L. Noise, Air Quality & Lighting

The main issues of concern in terms of possible amenity effects are operational noise, construction noise, air pollution (such as dust during the construction phase), lighting during the construction phase and effects upon private water supplies.

An assessment of operational noise has been undertaken in accordance with the simplified method in ETSU-R-97 ‘Assessment and Rating of Noise from Wind Farms’ with consideration of the Institute of Acoustics ‘Good Practice Guide to the Application of ETSU-R-97 for the ‘Assessment and Rating of Wind Turbine Noise’ (May 2013). (Planning Advice Note 1/2011 ‘Planning and Noise’ provides advice on the role of the planning system in helping to prevent and limit the adverse effects of noise and refers to ETSU-R-97 in regard to wind turbine developments).

The site is remote from residential premises and other noise sensitive occupied properties. The operation of the development in isolation, and in combination with other operational and consented developments would not exceed the relevant

limit at properties closest to the development. Although 31 properties at distance were considered in the noise assessment, the likelihood of disturbance due to construction is small given the separation involved. No requirement for operational mitigation has been identified by the applicants. The Council’s Public Protection officer has no objection to either the construction related or operational impacts of the development, subject to the imposition of recommended conditions.

The main construction site is at a sufficient distance from the nearest housing to avoid any significant dust emissions, and the access route from the A83(T) is through forestry plantation well separated from occupied property. The requirement for the submission of a Construction Method Statement will address any issues relating to the propogation of dust. Given the distance between the construction site and the nearest sensitive receptors there are no anticipated glare or intrusive light issues associated with construction at this site. Four private water supplies are sourced within the development area but these have been avoided and are well separated from construction locations.

Having due regard to the above it is considered that the proposal is consistent with the relevant Local Development Plan Policy in this regard.

M. Tourism & Recreation Impact

The Kintyre Way footpath runs east west between Saddell and Lussa Loch passing through the application site between the northern and southern clusters of turbines. It runs within 450m of the nearest proposed turbine and the visual influence of the development would extend along the route in varying degrees for around 12km. The existing route is already affected visually by a number of Kintyre wind farms, including Cour, Deucheran Hill, Beinn an Tuirc and Tangy. This prompts consideration of the possible justification for financial or some other support being secured for the Kintyre Way via the planning process, in recognition of the additional impacts on the route both during the construction period and once the wind farm becomes operational.

The initial stance of the Kintyre Way as an organisation was, it has to be said, somewhat hostile to the proposal, citing potentially unacceptable disruption during the construction phase and cumulative landscape and visual impacts during the operational phase, to the detriment of the recreational value and the indirect economic benefits associated with it as a resource drawing visitors to Kintyre. It appears however that this initial stance has since been influenced by a commitment of funding and the prospect of other collaborative working between Scottish Power and the Kintyre Way, and attitudes have softened to the point where the initial objection has been withdrawn.

Scottish Power have opted to foster collaborative links with the Kintyre Way in advance of this application being considered, having particular regard to the Kintyre Way’s short-term need for financial support. In the absence of any intended contribution by Scottish Power to the Kintyre Way it would have been recommended by officers that an appropriate form of planning gain should be sought in the event this proposal were to be approved. However, bearing in mind that the applicants and the Kintyre Way have reached prior agreement between them as to how the former can contribute to the latter as a means of helping to offset the cumulative impact of additional development, then in these circumstances there is no need to seek to secure this by means of planning gain on the back of this application. The approach adopted is actually a preferable one as the Kintyre Way’s short-term funding deficit, would not have been capable of being readily satisfied by any planning obligation associated with future development; the implementation of which could still be some way off, even if permission were to be granted.

The Council’s Access Officer has no objection to the proposal subject to the Core Path C303 Kintyre Way being kept open and free from obstruction at all time during the construction period, and all path closures/diversions to be agreed in advance. An access plan showing the impacts of the development on Core Paths and other routes throughout the construction process will be required to be secured by planning condition. A Section 208 Order would be required for the temporary or permanent diversion of any Core Paths (28 day public consultation period).

Scottish Planning Policy (2014) identifies tourism as one of the key sectors in Scotland with particular opportunities for growth which should be supported by the functioning of the planning system in the delivery of the visitor economy. It requires that development plans should be informed by the Tourism Development Framework for Scotland in order maximise the sustainable growth of this sector. In the context of onshore wind development, this has contributed to the introduction of the Spatial Framework approach set out in Table 1 (page 39) in which SPP deems wind farms to be unacceptable in National Parks and National Scenic Areas, ostensibly as a consequence of their scenic sensitivity to large scale development and their value to Scotland’s tourism economy. This would indicate that at government level there is recognition that wind farms sited inappropriately in sensitive locations valued for their scenic qualities would be unlikely to be in the interests of sustaining Scotland’s tourism economy.

The Council also regards landscape as being a particularly valued asset both in terms of its intrinsic qualities and in terms of its value to the tourism economy. For all types of development the maintenance of landscape character is an important facet of decision-making in the countryside in Argyll and Bute, regardless of the scale of development proposed. The Council’s Local Development Plan Policy LDP 6 identifies impacts on tourism and recreation as a material consideration in the assessment of wind turbine developments on the basis that inappropriate developments with significant adverse effects which contribute to the degradation of landscape character are unlikely to be in the interests of the Argyll tourism economy.

The response of visitors and the public across Scotland to the appearance of wind farms in the landscape appears polarised, as indeed it does towards the desirability of pursuing wind energy as a matter of principle. Therefore unlike many other sectors where there is likely to be consensus amongst the public as to the desirability or otherwise of a particular form of development, the public response to wind turbines continues to be very subjective.

There has been wide ranging and often conflicting research undertaken to establish the attitude of tourists in Scotland towards wind farms, and the extent to which their presence in the landscape might deter repeat visits. Given the relatively rapid and continuing spread of wind farm development in Argyll and Bute and elsewhere, it is questionable how much reliance can be placed on the findings of these reports, which have been based upon the experience of participants based upon the extent of wind farm development in place at the time of the research. They rely on attitudes fashioned by the experience of developments which this far tend to have been carefully sited under the auspices of the planning system, and in most cases involving turbines of a lesser scale than those which would be contemplated in contemporary developments. If less care were to be taken in future planning decision-making over the siting of turbines in the landscape, public attitudes might shift significantly. However, given that the available evidence is inconclusive and not necessarily a reliable indicator of future attitudes, there is simply too much uncertainty surrounding this particular issue to be able to be definitive in the matter.

In this case the absence of seriously adverse landscape, visual or cumulative impacts, and notably, the lack of any significant stated opposition to the proposal by third parties, would suggest that, if granted, the development would be unlikely influence public

attitudes to a point where tourists might become dissuaded from visiting Kintyre due to the proliferation of wind farms. The proposal would undoubtedly have some impact on the experience of users of the Kintyre Way and also upon what is largely local recreational use of the area around Lussa Loch, which share a close relationship with the proposed wind farm. Both of these assets are already influenced by existing turbine development and other man made influences, such as forestry and electricity lines, so they cannot be regarded as being within a pristine landscape, and it is considered that there remains scope to assimilate this additional wind farm in the landscape without presenting any serious quantifiable threat to the tourism economy in Kintyre.

Having due regard to the above it is considered that the proposal is consistent with the provisions of Local Development Plan Policy in this regard.

N. Shadow Flicker & Ice Throw (Equipment Safety)

Government guidance advises that if separation is provided between turbines and nearby dwellings ‘shadow flicker’ should not generally result in adverse effects. The ES confirms that the separation between the wind farm and the nearest residential property is well beyond than 10 x rotor diameters. Under accepted good practice and guidance, this will ensure that shadow flicker will not present a problem and Public Protection has not raised any concern in this regard.

Ice throw is not a matter which falls under the auspices of Planning or Public Protection. This said, companies supplying products and services to the wind energy industry are required to operate to a series of International, European and British Standards and the operator has a duty of care not to prejudice the health and safety of site operatives or other persons frequenting the site.

Having due regard to the above, in terms of shadow flicker and ice throw, it is considered that the proposal is consistent with the provisions of SPP; Scottish Government’s Specific Advice Sheet on Onshore Wind Farms (2012); and the relevant Local Development Plan Policies in this regard.

O. Television Reception

Television reception can be affected by the presence of turbines although this has become less of a problem since the switchover from analogue to digital broadcasting. In this location due to poor reception properties tend anyway to rely on satellite signals so no measures are required to address any deterioration in conventionally broadcast signals.

Having due regard to the above, in terms of television reception, it is considered that the proposal is consistent with the provisions of SPP; Scottish Government’s Specific Advice Sheet on Onshore Wind Farms (2012); and the relevant Local Development Plan Policies in this regard.

P. Aviation Matters

The principal safeguarding concern of the MoD with respect to the development of wind turbines relates to their potential to create a physical obstruction to air traffic movements and cause interference to Air Traffic Control and Air Defence radar installations. The MoD has no objection to this proposal. However, in the interests of air safety they request that the perimeter turbines are fitted with 25 candela omni-directional red lighting or infrared lighting with an optimised flash pattern of 60 flashes per minute of 200ms to 500ms duration at the highest practicable point.

National Air Traffic Services has confirmed that they have no safeguarding objection to the proposal. Glasgow Prestwick Airport has confirmed that the proposal does not conflict with their safeguarding criteria and they have no objection. Highlands and Islands Airports Limited has confirmed their requirement for obstacle lighting in the visible spectrum (i.e. not just infra-red) as some of the turbines infringe the protected surfaces for Campbeltown Airport. The need for this has been disputed by Scottish Power but it is understood that the CAA have endorsed the stance adopted by HIAL. At most wind farms it is possible to use infra-red aviation lighting not be visible to the naked eye in what are normally characteristically ‘dark’ areas. In this case however some hub height red aviation lights will be an operational safety requirement.

Having due regard to the above, in terms of aviation interests, it is considered that the proposal is consistent with the provisions of SPP; Scottish Government’s Specific Advice Sheet on Onshore Wind Farms (2012); and the relevant Local Development Plan Policies in this regard.

Q. Electro-Magnetic Interference to Communication Systems

The relevant operators have been consulted to determine whether their systems would be affected by electro-magnetic radiation associated with electricity generation. SPP (2014) and Local Development Plan Policy highlights telecommunications interference as a material consideration in considering the acceptability of wind turbines.

No interference with UHF or microwave telecommunication links has been identified in this case and there have been no objections from relevant consultees.

Having due regard to the above, in terms of communication interests, it is considered that the proposal is consistent with the provisions of SPP; Scottish Government’s Specific Advice Sheet on Onshore Wind Farms (2012); and the relevant Local Development Plan Policies in this regard.

R. Road Traffic Impact

Access to the site is from the A83(T) approximately 1km north of Bellochantuy via the wind farm/forestry access currently serving Beinn an Tuirc 1 and 2 wind farms. No improvements on the public road network are required in connection with the proposal. Construction traffic movements per day over 18 months would range between 27 and 84, of which up to 37 could be HGV’s. The trunk road would continue to operate comfortably under design capacity during this period. A Traffic Management Plan is proposed to dictate routes, timings, signage, damage monitoring etc. during the construction period. Traffic flows during the operational phase would not be significant.

Transport Scotland in its capacity as Trunk Roads Authority has no objection to the proposal subject to conditions to secure approval of the proposed route for any abnormal loads on the trunk road network, to secure approval of any accommodation measures required including the removal of street furniture, and traffic management and to ensure acceptable additional signing or temporary traffic control is undertaken by a recognised Quality Assured traffic management consultant.

Having due regard to the above, it is considered that in access and traffic terms, the proposal is consistent with the provisions of SPP and Scottish Government’s Specific Advice Sheet on Onshore Wind Farms (2012) and relevant Local Development Plan Policy in this regard.

S. Infrastructure

The proposal will not be connecting to public water or drainage infrastructure. Four private water supplies are sourced from within the development area. These sensitive resources have been avoided by tracks having over 100m and turbine locations over 250m separation. No infrastructure is proposed in the water catchment feeding Saddell Water Treatment Works. A Sediment and Drainage Management Plan and Water Quality Monitoring Plan are to be devised and implemented to avoid potential run off or sedimentation which might affect any sensitive receptors.

Having due regard to the above, it is concluded that, in terms of drainage and water supply, the proposal is consistent with the provisions of SPP; Scottish Government’s Specific Advice Sheet on Onshore Wind Farms (2012); and the relevant Local Development Plan Policies in this regard.

T. Grid Network & Cables

Connection to the National Grid is not a matter of land use policy, however, it should be considered ‘in the round’ as part of the planning application process. The Environmental Statement states that the wind farm will be connected by overhead line from the on-site sub-station and control building to the Carradale grid sub-station. The route and detail of the connection would be will be agreed by SSE Power Distribution (SSE) who have statutory responsibility for the grid in this part of Scotland, and would then be considered separate from the planning process by means of an Electricity Act Section 37 application to the Scottish Government (upon which the Council would be consulted in its capacity as Planning Authority).

Having due regard to the above it is considered that the proposal is consistent with the Scottish Government’s Specific Advice Sheet on Onshore Wind Farms.

U. Community and Economic Benefit

Community Benefit is not considered to be a ‘material planning consideration’ in the determination of planning applications. In the event that permission were to be granted, the negotiation of any community benefit, either directly with the local community or under the auspices of the Council, would take place outside the application process. Scottish Power are signatories to the protocol between renewables developers and the Economic Development arm of Council which would determine the extent of payments and the purposes for which they would be utilised.

Economic benefit is a material planning consideration and arises from procurement construction, employment and indirect benefits associated with the supply chain. Office for National Statistics data for 2014 shows that direct and indirect economic activity associated with the deployment of onshore wind energy in Scotland amounted to £3.2 billion in turnover, and that Scotland employs 46% of all UK renewables employment. The proposal will contribute an estimated expenditure of £20.4 million locally and a further £14.6 million regionally. Experience of wind farm development elsewhere in Kintyre, and with the previous Scottish Power developments at Beinn and Tuirc, indicates that local employment of contractors, hauliers and so on, will be of significance during the construction period and that accordingly economic benefit should be regarded as a factor weighing in favour of the development in the planning balance.

V. Decommissioning

In the event planning permission is granted a requirement for decommissioning and site restoration should be included in the planning condition(s), which will be triggered by either the expiry of the permission or if the project ceases to operate for a specific period. This would ensure that at the end of the proposal’s operational life the turbines would be decommissioned and principle elements removed, the site would be restored to its former use leaving little if any visible trace. Foundations, tracks and hardstandings would be covered over with topsoil and reseeded, cables would be de-energised and left in place, and the electrical sub-station building would be demolished to ground level with the foundation covered with topsoil and reseeded.

Having due regard to the above, it is considered that the proposal is acceptable in terms of SPP (2014); the Scottish Government’s Specific Advice Sheet on Onshore Wind Farms; and the relevant Local Development Plan Policies.

W. Scottish Government Policy & Advice

The commitment to increase the amount of electricity generated from renewable sources is a vital part of the response to climate change. Renewable energy generation will contribute to more secure and diverse energy supplies and support sustainable economic growth (SPP). The current target is for 100% of Scotland’s electricity and 11% of heat demand to be generated from renewable sources by 2020 (2020 Routemap for Renewable Energy in Scotland).

The Scottish Government has recently published two consultation documents namely the ‘Scottish Energy Strategy: The Future of Energy in Scotland’ and the associated ‘Onshore Wind Policy Statement’ (January 2017) both of which have consultation deadlines at the end of May this year. These seek to increase the drive to secure zero carbon energy sources, with a stated ambition to meet half the country’s energy needs across all sectors (including electricity generation) by 2030. Onshore wind is anticipated to continue to represent a significant contributor to the attainment of what is an ambitious overall target. Stated policy is to support deployment of onshore wind, whilst protecting the environment (landscape and visual, ecological and other environmental impacts); protecting residential amenity; and maximising local benefits, including through promoting shared ownership and community benefits. The Scottish Government’s intention is to continue to support further development of onshore wind in order to achieve the targets set by the Climate Change (Scotland) Act at the lowest cost. The Scottish Government’s position is that wind offers the best opportunity to secure low carbon renewable electricity at scale and sustains growth and employment in the Scottish supply chain.

Scottish Planning Policy 2014 advises that wind farms should only be supported in locations where the technology can operate efficiently and environmental and cumulative impacts can be satisfactorily addressed. Furthermore, that criteria for determining wind farm proposals varies depending on the scale of proposal and its relationship to the characteristics of the surrounding area, but usually includes: landscape and visual impact, effects on the natural heritage and historic environment, contribution of the development to renewable energy generation targets, effect on the local and national economy and tourism and recreation interests, benefits and disbenefits for communities, aviation and telecommunications, noise and shadow flicker, and cumulative impact. Finally, that the design and location of any wind farm should reflect the scale and character of the landscape and the location of turbines should be considered carefully to ensure that the landscape and visual impact is minimised.

Having due regard to the relevant considerations reviewed above it is considered that the proposal is consistent with the provisions of SPP (2014); the

Scottish Government’s Specific Advice Sheet on Onshore Wind Farms; and the relevant Local Development Plan Policies.

X. Scottish Government Renewable Energy Targets & Argyll & Bute’s Contribution

In assessing the acceptability of wind farm proposals, it is necessary to have regard to the macro-environmental aspects of renewable energy (reduction in reliance on fossil fuels and contribution to reduction in global warming) as well as to the micro-environmental consequences of the proposal (in terms of its impact on its receiving environment).

Installed onshore wind energy generation capacity in Scotland is currently 5.8 GW and is expected to continue to grow in response to the Scottish Government target of meeting 100% of demand from renewable sources by 2020. Onshore wind accounts for over 70% of installed capacity in terms of Scotland’s renewable energy resources. Currently projects totalling almost 2,000MW of onshore wind generation are under construction, with a further 2,000MW consented but yet to be implemented Operational and consented sites now mean that this target is now well within reach, albeit that it does not represent a ceiling. The government’s latest policy pronouncement in its draft ‘Onshore Wind Policy Statement’ (January 2017) makes it clear that there is continued appetite for further onshore wind delivery in order to meet the latest and most ambitious targets which have been set for the delivery of renewable energy.

The design capacity of the proposed wind farm is 36MW based on the installation of 18 x 2MW candidate machines. The applicants have undertaken a ‘carbon balance calculation’ in accordance with government requirements, taking into account emissions from manufacture, construction, transport and displacement of peat resources on site, and offsetting those against the emission savings over the life of the wind farm as a result of the displacement of electricity which would otherwise be generated from conventional fuel sources. Annual electricity production will vary according to a number of factors including wind speed and maintenance requirements, but is estimated that Beinn an Tuirc 3 wind farm would produce annual savings of 42,500 tonnes of CO2 per year against the current UK grid mix of fossil fuel types. The contribution of the development to renewable energy targets in Scotland is therefore palpable and should weigh in favour of the development in the planning balance.

Z. Conclusion

The Council is keen to ensure that Argyll and Bute continues to make a positive contribution to meeting the Scottish Government’s targets for renewable energy generation, and considers the merits of onshore wind farms carefully, particularly given the value of the local wind resource to the country as a whole. These targets are important given the compelling need to reduce our carbon footprint and reduce our reliance on fossil fuels. The Council further recognises the important role which the renewable energy industry can play in developing our local economy, as encouraged by the Council’s Renewable Energy Action Plan (REAP).

Argyll and Bute has a distinguished track record of pioneering and delivering renewable energy projects and we are well placed to continue to respond to the needs of the renewable energy industry and take advantage of the economic opportunities that are available to us. The Council seeks to support the further development of renewables where possible Argyll and Bute, by taking a sustainable approach by protecting and conserving our outstanding environment, including our landscape and protected species, our local communities and other sectors of our economy from unacceptable significant adverse effects as a result of proposed renewable energy developments.

The achievement of sustainable economic growth is one of the main themes of Scottish Planning Policy and this is reflected in the Council’s Local Development Plan. The main aims of Policy LDP 6 – Supporting Growth of Renewables and the associated Renewables SG, together with technical documents such as the Argyll and Bute Onshore Wind Energy Landscape Capacity Study, are to seek to deliver the growth of this important industry in a sustainable manner. It is concluded in this case that the proposal will reinforce the established pattern of wind farm development in Kintyre without giving rise to significant adverse effects on the receiving environment either individually or cumulatively with previously consented developments, whilst also making an important contribution to national energy policy and producing some short-term direct and indirect benefits to the local economy. Accordingly, the application is recommended for approval subject to the recommended conditions and reasons set out in this report.

APPENDIX B – HABITATS REGUATIONS APPROPRIATE ASSESSMENT - RELATIVE TO APPLICATION NUMBER: 15/03057/PP

Note: Appropriate Assessment relates to ‘Designations’ rather than ‘Species’. As there are no Golden Eagle SPA’s close to/on the site, although they are an Annex 1 protected species which frequent the area, they are not required to be included in this Appropriate Assessment.

The proposal is close to the Kintyre Goose Roosts Special Protection Area (SPA) designated under European legislation for its internationally important wintering population of Greenland white-fronted goose (Anser albifrons flavirostris).

The site’s status means that the requirements of the Conservation (Natural Habitats, & c.) Regulations 1994 as amended (the “Habitats Regulations”) or, for reserved matters the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 as amended, apply. Consequently, the Council is required to consider the effect of the proposal on the SPA before it can be approved (commonly known as Habitats Regulations Appraisal).

SNH have advised the Council in this matter and have taken the view that this proposal has potential to have a significant effect on the Greenland white-fronted goose qualifying interest(s) of the site. In these circumstances, in accordance with the aforementioned regulations, an ‘appropriate assessment’ is required to be carried out by the Council in its capacity as ‘competent authority’, in view of the site’s conservation objectives for its qualifying interest(s).

The appraisal SNH carried out considered the impact of the proposal on the following factors:

Is the plan or project directly connected with or necessary to site management for nature conservation? - This is a wind farm proposal which is not connected with or necessary to site management of any of the SPA lochs for nature conservation.

Is the plan or project (either alone or in combination with other plans or projects) likely to have a significant effect on the site? - Greenland white-fronted geese may fly over the wind farm site on migration, or on flight paths from their roosting lochs between the migratory periods of autumn and spring.

SNH has concluded that the proposal is likely to have a significant effect on the SPA site.

Can it be ascertained that the proposal will not adversely affect the integrity of the site?

Greenland white-fronted goose (Anser albifrons flavirostris) could be affected by the proposal due to collision risk with the turbines, and by disturbance and displacement during both the construction and operational phases of the development.

The nature of the proposal is the erection of 18 wind turbines with a maximum blade tip height of 125m and a combined generating capacity of notionally 36MW, with new access tracks, crane hardstandings, sub-station and control building, underground cables, and a temporary construction compound. The life of the development is 25 years. Once the development has been decommissioned the effect will be removed.

The wind farm contributes to a number of wind farm proposals in Kintyre which could have a likely significant effect on the Greenland white fronted goose feature of the SPA so cumulative impacts are a consideration.

Given the results of the Vantage point work and the distance from the SPA lochs for Greenland white-fronted geese SNH agrees with the ES conclusion that there will be

negligible disturbance to geese and negligible collision risk and displacement from habitats that support GWF geese.

SNH concludes that, in their view, based on the information provided, the proposal will not adversely affect the integrity of the site. Their position is endorsed by the RSPB who likewise indicate their opinion for the requirement for ‘appropriate assessment’ but advise of their conclusion that the impacts are unlikely to be significant in this case. In circumstances where the applicant’s assessment accords with the views expressed in consultation responses by both SNH and the RSPB it can be concluded that there is an absence of ‘reasonable scientific doubt’ in this case and that Habitats Directive interests will be safeguarded by this proposal.

Consultation advice from SNH and RSPB has informed the Council’s conclusion in the matter, which is that it has been demonstrated that this proposal will not adversely affect the integrity of the SPA and that the proposal will not adversely affect the integrity of the site for the qualifying interests.