Agendas, reports and minutes

Minute of Meeting of the South Planning Applications Committee held in the Chamber, The Town House, High Street, Inverness on Thursday 19 March 2015 at 2.00 pm.

Committee Members Present:

Mr R Balfour, Mr A Baxter, Mrs M Davidson, Mr D Fallows, Mr J Gray, Mr M Green, Mr D Kerr, Mr R Laird, Mr B Lobban, Mr T MacLennan, Mr H Wood

Officials in attendance:

Mr A Todd, Area Planning Manager South, Mr R Patton, Principal Officer (Land), Mr G Stuart, Forestry Officer, Mr S Hindson, Planner, Ms S Blease, Principal Solicitor (Clerk), Mr S Taylor, Administrative Assistant 

Mr J Gray in the Chair

Preliminaries

The Chairman confirmed that the meeting would be filmed and broadcast over the Internet on the Highland Council website and would be archived and available for viewing for 12 months.

Business

1. Apologies for Absence
Leisgeulan

Apologies were received from Mr B Clark, Mr J Crawford, Mr A Duffy, Mr J Ford, Mr F Parr, Mr T Prag and Mrs J Slater.

2. Declarations of Interest
Foillseachaidhean Com-pàirt

None

3. Continued Items
Cuspairean a’ Leantainn 

3.1 Applicant: WPD Beinn Mhor Ltd (14/01731/FUL) (PLS/014/15)
Location: Land at Beinn Mhor, Guisachan, Tomich (Ward 13)
Nature of Development: Formation of an 18 MW wind farm, including erection of 6 wind turbines on 78.5 m towers (height to tip 119.5 m) (rotor diameter 82 m), erection of control building/sub-station, erection of a meteorological mast, formation of hardstandings, access tracks and temporary assembly areas
Recommendation: To respond to the Reporter in accordance with Section 2 of the report.

Mr A Baxter advised that the husband of his child-minder was an objector to the application and that he was a Member of both John Muir Trust and Mountaineering Council of Scotland both of which had objected to the application. He confirmed, however, that he considered these interests to be remote and insignificant and that he had not participated in, or been present during, the John Muir Trust or the Mountaineering Council of Scotland’s decision to comment on this application. He accordingly advised that he did not consider these to be declarable interests and that he would take part in the deliberation and determination of this item.

There had been circulated Report No PLS/014/15 by the Head of Planning and Building Standards advising that The Beinn Mhor Wind Farm planning application had been appealed on the grounds of non-determination and would be determined by a Reporter appointed by The Scottish Government. As part of this process the South Planning Applications Committee required to come to a view on the application to form the response to the Directorate for Planning and Environmental Appeals of The Highland Council.

Mr Hindson presented the report and recommendation.

In response to questions it was confirmed that:

• The public footpath leading up to the Tweedmouth Monument ended within approximately a quarter of a kilometre of the monument. However, the monument could be accessed from this point onwards through fairly steep and boggy ground.
• The tree survey undertaken on the access route to the site did not go beyond the avenue to the site entrance as abnormal loads would not be travelling along that section of road.
• Toll Creagach was one of the closest Munros to the development. There were other Munros in the area. However, these were largely located further to the south.
• There had been a 60% turnout in the postal ballot of the Strathglass Community Council electorate.
• The environmental impact assessment identified the worst case scenario on the basis of a typical turbine and that if any further works were required further assessments would have to be undertaken.
• The wind turbines located at Corrimony Wind Farm were 100 metres in size to blade tip whilst the proposed turbines at Beinn Mhor would be 119.5 metres in size. The Committee was advised that Corrimony Wind Farm sat at a higher elevation than the proposed site at Beinn Mhor and was further away. Therefore, they were considered distinctly different schemes in the landscape.

During discussion Members commented that:

• Whilst the wind farm would not be highly visible from Knockfin, many visitors to the village came to walk and climb and would therefore have higher levels of visibility of the turbines rather than those in the village itself.
• Around Loch Ness and surrounding Glens businesses were vulnerable to potential risks arising from construction of this nature.
• It was difficult to gauge how much of an impact the wind farm would have on local businesses as there had been other wind farms built in areas with minimal impact on local businesses.
• Concern was expressed that whilst there might not be an impact on people visiting for the first time, they might not come back.
• In terms of access to the site, the impact of road works in the area to allow HGV access had caused greater disruption than anticipated due to the length of time required for improvements.
• The applicant’s proposals in terms of tree preservation were welcomed.
• Disappointment was expressed that the applicant had chosen not to use the existing tracks installed for the Beauly to Denny power line project as a means of routing construction traffic. This had been looked at in the scoping stage of the application and the secondary environmental information submitted by the applicant. However, significant engineering work to a tight corner on this route would be required and the applicant had decided that the proposal was therefore not feasible.
• Concern was expressed at the number of special areas of protection in the immediate surrounding area.
• There would be a much longer negative effect on the village economy than the 10 month construction period of the site access road.
• Cannich and Tomich were designated protected areas.
• The surrounding area was of recognised outstanding beauty.
• The construction of the access roads and avenue would have an adverse impact on the community and the importance of tourism to the community was recognised.
• Whilst the economic impact the wind farm would have on tourism might be small, construction of the access road would have an adverse impact on tourism.

Mrs M Davidson, seconded by Mr H Wood, then moved that, had they been in a position to determine the application, they WOULD HAVE REFUSED it for the following reasons:

i. The road works required between Tomich and the Fasnakyle Bridge to enable the developers to commence construction of the wind farm, and the disruption to road users during the 40 week wind farm construction period thereafter, would have significant adverse impact on community amenity and disrupt the local economy through negative impact on tourism; and

ii. The extent of the road works between Tomich and the Fasnakyle Bridge which would be required to allow the development to take place would destroy the rural character of the road.

For both reasons, the development would be contrary to Policy 28 of the Highland-wide Local Development Plan.

There being no amendments proposed, the Committee unanimously AGREED the motion.

The Committee members further AGREED that, in the planning permission conditions to be proposed to the Reporter as appropriate conditions to be imposed in the event that the Reporter decided to allow the appeal, the following adjustments be made to the conditions recommended in the 24 February Report, final wording of these proposed conditions to be delegated to the Head of Planning and Building Standards:

• Reason in Condition 6 to be adjusted to include reference to tree protection and retention
• Condition 11 ii a. to be adjusted to make reference to tree protection and retention
• Reason in Condition 19 to be adjusted to include tree protection and retention as the primary consideration
• Condition 21 to be adjusted to require a tree planting plan for the tree avenue and an ongoing tree management and maintenance plan for the existing trees along the avenue.

The meeting ended at 3.35 pm.