Part 2 of 2
Officers will talk through the initial conclusions and recommendations in presentation to Committee, with the assistance of slides.
2.2 As referred to at paragraph 10.5 of their draft report, LUC have provided more detail elsewhere in their report by way of strategic assessment of cumulative effects, following a landscape sensitivity evaluation. This will be used alongside their conclusions and recommendations. It should be noted that the strategic assessment of cumulative effects is presented by landscape character type (LCT); a particular LCT may be present in one or more specific parts of the study area, but the materials prepared by LUC do go on to refer to those specific parts.
2.3 As stated at paragraph 10.13 of LUC’s draft report, their assessment is a strategic study and their recommendations are not a substitute for project-specific landscape and visual impact assessment and cumulative assessment. The study should not be taken as indicating that any particular application that has yet to be determined is or is not acceptable. The recommendations do not provide a ‘traffic-light’ style indication of the acceptability, or otherwise, of development – and the wording of the recommendations (and colours used for the conclusions in figure 10.3) are in no way intended to imply such an approach.
It may not be a traffic light approach but it is a sequential approach and that is what caused HRES to fail
However, some of the recommendations are more suggestive of development limitation whilst others are more suggestive of development potential. There is clear emphasis on the importance of siting and design of individual proposals. Important to the degree of effect of the recommendations in helping to manage development and its cumulative effects spatially across
If there is “clear emphasis” as stated it is not in the draft conclusions. Members are being asked to approve of a document which they have not seen.
the study area will be the extent to which regard is had to all of the recommendations as we move forward with use of the study. The study will help us develop a clear basis for the assessment of proposals.
3. Next Steps
3.1 The second draft of LUC’s report for Caithness has been checked by officers and LUC will be asked to make some final changes particularly in the interests of accuracy, clarity and ease-of-use. In addition, we have identified that it would be valuable to do some further work to set out the key, relevant information in an accessible form by geographic area; this will assist both the Council, agencies such as SNH and developers assess individual proposals, taking into consideration the LUC report.
Normally a report is written and conclusions drawn. This smacks of the report being tailored to the conclusions.
This further work will primarily be a matter of drawing together from the LUC report the relevant recommendations and related LCT-based conclusions and guidance for each of the sub-areas on the conclusions map (as identified by the bullet-points in paragraphs 10.18, 10.21, 10.24 and 10.27 of LUC’s draft report). Where appropriate, reference will also be made to relevant established guidance, in particular to SNH’s “Siting and Designing Windfarms in the Landscape” (2009). Undertaking these steps will enable LUC’s report to be published and have weight within the planning process.
There appears to be no opportunity for the content of the report to be debated.
LUC will provide training to officers in its use.
3.2 Our intention is to revise our Onshore Wind Energy Interim Supplementary Guidance after the finalised version of the new Scottish Planning Policy has been published in June 2014. This revision of our Interim Supplementary Guidance will include taking into account LUC’s report for Caithness and the significance, for its recommendations, of any changes to the pattern of consents and proposals since the snapshot was taken of development on which the LUC study is based.
This report was commissioned over two years ago. On what date was the “snapshot” taken? How relevant is it to today’s level of development?
Members will recall that Draft SPP proposed a number of changes to planning policy for onshore wind, particularly to the methodology for preparing the spatial framework which is part of our Interim SG. Finalised SPP is expected in June 2014. We therefore anticipate bringing draft revisions to the Interim SG to Committee for consideration at its meeting in November 2014; this will bring together cumulative landscape and visual considerations with a wide range of other considerations within the planning balance, such as those already within our Interim Supplementary Guidance.
3.3 Once we receive from LUC their part-assessment for Ardross, we will consider what steps would remain to be undertaken to get useful outputs to inform our policy and guidance for that area and options for delivery, and subject to that we will seek to progress it.
3.4 Our report to Committee in November 2014 will therefore include updating members on progress for the Ardross area and also on options for producing cumulative landscape and visual guidance for other areas of Highland.
4. Implications
4.1 Resource: We have resource to finalise the Caithness study. Upon receipt of initial work for Ardross we will consider options for completion of that. We will
also need to consider options for producing relevant assessment and guidance for other pressured areas of Highland. Resource pressures mean that we will need to consider alternative approaches to delivery. Discussions are also underway with Scottish Natural Heritage on the potential for joint work being done in future.
4.2 Legal: Planning law sets out requirements for development plans and development management. A distinction is made between documents forming part of the development plan (our adopted Local Development Plans, adopted Local Plans as continued in force and adopted Supplementary Guidance) and any other material considerations.
4.3 Equalities: The landscape and visual assessment is strategic and is unlikely to lead to significant adverse or differential effect on particular equality groups. Our Onshore Wind Energy Interim SG has previously been subject of Equalities Screening.
4.4 Carbon Clever / Climate Change: The assessment assists in the identification of opportunities for renewable energy development, which will contribute towards Carbon Clever and in responding to Climate Change.
5. Conclusions
5.1 Receipt of a second draft of LUC’s assessment for the Caithness area is an important step forward. Some further work will be done to finalise that report for publication and to set out the key, relevant information in an accessible form by geographic area. Committee will receive a further report at a future meeting with associated recommendations for our Onshore Wind Energy Supplementary Guidance (which, once statutorily adopted, will carry ‘development plan’ weight) and an update on similar work for elsewhere in Highland.
Recommendation
Committee is asked to:
(a) Note the initial conclusions and recommendations from the consultant’s draft report on the Cumulative Landscape and Visual Assessment of Wind Energy in Caithness;
(b) Agree the next steps in finalising the report, to enable it to be published and have weight within the planning process; and
Note again that there is no apparent opportunity for debate of the content
(c) Note the intention that a further report will be brought to a future meeting of the Committee to consider revision of the Onshore Wind Energy Interim Supplementary Guidance in the light of this work and on options for producing cumulative landscape and visual guidance for other areas of Highland.
Designation: Director of Development and Infrastructure Date: 1st May 2014 Author: David Cowie, Principal Planner (01463-702827)
Adoption of this report is of crucial importance to the people of Caithness and ultimately Highland. It is possible that there will be Members who have never been to Caithness, and it is likely that only a few have been to Caithness recently to see the huge visual intrusion there. A site visit is essential to inform Members and the meeting should be held in Caithness to allow Caithness people to attend.
Bookmarks