West Kilbride, XLCC Hunterston
North Ayrshire Council · 29 June 2022
Back to Planning Committee — 29 June 2022 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Page 1
NORTH AYRSHIRE COUNCIL
29th June 2022
Planning Committee
Locality North Coast and Cumbraes
Reference 22/00133/PPPM
Application Registered 25th February 2022
Decision Due 25th June 2022
Ward North Coast
Recommendation Approved subject to Conditions
__________________________________________________________________
Location Former Coal Terminal Hunterston West Kilbride
Ayrshire
Applicant XLCC Fao Mr David Kelly
Proposal Planning permission in principle for the erection of a
high voltage cable manufacturing facility, including
detailed planning permission for the construction of a
185m high extrusion tower with associated factories,
research and testing laboratories, offices with
associated stores, transport, access, parking and
landscaping with on-site generation and electrical
infrastructure and cable delivery system
___________________________________________________________________
1. Description
Planning permission in principle is sought for the erection of a high voltage cable
manufacturing facility, with associated factories, research and testing laboratories, offices
with associated stores, transport, access, parking and landscaping with on-site generation
and electrical infrastructure and cable delivery system. Detailed planning permission is
sought for the construction of a 185m high extrusion tower.
The site is some 51ha in area, including existing access roads and jetty. The site is a former
coal yard, which has been vacant since 2016. The development would make use of an
existing access and the existing jetty and port. The site is identified in the Local
Development Plan (LDP) as part of the Hunterston Strategic Development Area and
suitable for business and industrial development. The Southannan Sands Site of Special
Scientific Interest ("the SSSI") is some 85m to the west. The Hunterston House Tree
Preservation Order ("the TPO") runs along the eastern boundary of the site.Page 2
A masterplan has been submitted which indicates that the main factory buildings, including the tower, would be sited in the southernmost portion of the site comprising some 30ha in area. The tower would be some 1450sqm in area. It would be sited some 440m north of the southern boundary of the site and 75m west of the eastern boundary of the site. The tower would be some 185m in height. It would be 25m wide, west to east, and 58m in length, north to south. It would be approx. 1km south of the settlement of Fairlie, as identified by the LDP. The application falls within the category of "major" development, in terms of The Town and Country Planning (Hierarchy of Developments) (Scotland) Regulations 2009. A pre-application consultation (PAC) was required, and a PAC notice was received on 9th July 2021 (ref: 21/00702/PREAPM). The proposal was scoped in accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (Scotland) Regulations 2017 on 17th December 2021 (ref: 21/01094/EIA). An EIA has been submitted and includes consideration of the following: Alternative Sites and Design The EIA states that it is anticipated there will be demand for two such facilities within the UK. A significant area of land is required for such a site, adjacent to a deep-water access for the cable laying vessels. The site must be near to a c.40MW power source. Road and rail access and proximity to a highly skilled workforce are also important factors. As such there are a very small number of sites in the UK which meet these needs, Hunterston being one. This site provides opportunity to access the existing port for cable export. It is considered the site has good connectivity through other means including active travel. The site allows for a layout to optimise production. The existing woodland could be retained to provide visual screening. The site also has the opportunity for the creation of a suitable drainage network. Constraints of the site are identified as the existing common road and railway tracks, other commercial interest in adjoining plots and the lack of infrastructure for the appro. 900 FTE jobs it is considered the development would provide. The size of the site has meant there has only been 3 iterations of the proposed layout. Only the siting of the tower would be determined through this application. Ecology and Nature Conservation The EIA assesses the habitats both within the site and designated sites in the wider area. In terms of the site itself, the majority of the site was found to be bare ground and any habitats identified were held to be of low conservation value. The habitats outwith the application site were held to have some opportunities for protected species. However, other than a few otter and badger footprints no evidence of usage of the site by protected species was found. The site has low potential for foraging or habitation by protected species. Mitigation is proposed to minimise any impacts on habitats and protected species. Any exterior lighting scheme would minimise light spill and designed to be activated only when required. Pre-construction checks would take place for protected species. Further surveys would be undertaken if commencement of works was delayed. During construction a 50m
Page 3
buffer zone with water courses and ditches would be maintained where possible. Best
practice techniques would be employed and Ecological Clerk of Works employees to
oversee works. It is considered the proposal would have no significant impact on habitats,
the SSSI or protected species.
Historic Environment
The effect on historic environment assets has been assessed. The assets assessed include
Listed Buildings at Hunterston Castle and Hunterston House, the Listed Building and
Scheduled Monuments at Old Lighthouse, Little Cumbrae and Fairlie Castle, the Scheduled
Monument at Little Cumbrae Castle, the Kelburn Castle Designed Landscape and Millport
Conservation Area ("the CA").
It is concluded that there would be no significant effect on any of the assets except for the
CA, because the tower would be visible in locations throughout the CA, and the sea front in
particular. It is considered that the impact on the CA will be moderate.
Landscape and Visual Effects
The EIA assesses the local landscape and visual impact of the proposal. It finds that the
impact on the immediate landscape would be moderate adverse during the day. It would
have a significant major adverse effect on the seascape in the short term. The effect on the
North Arran and Watershead Moor Wild Land Areas is found to be negligible to moderate
and not significant, as is the effect on the North Arran National Scenic Area, Kyles of Bute
National Scenic Area and Loch Lomond National Park. There would be a moderate impact
on the Clyde Muirshiel Special Landscape Area, but this would not be significant.
In terms of residential viewpoints, it is considered occupiers of Glenside and Southannan
Mains would experience major adverse impact in the short term. Other nearby residences
would experience less of an impact due to screening and orientation. From Fairlie the
construction of the tower would result in a moderate adverse impact temporarily which is not
considered to be significant. It is considered to be same at points in Millport and Largs.
Users of the Ayrshire Coastal Path would experience a minor to moderate impact
depending on the location. Other recreational routes on Arran and Bute would experience a
negligible to minor impact. Views for travellers on the road, and rail would experience a
negligible to minor impact. Sea based travellers would experience a major adverse impact,
at close to medium distance, during the day. The impact on views from the Largs to
Cumbrae ferry is considered to be moderate and not significant.
Hydrology and Flood Risk
The report states that with appropriate embedded mitigation measures the construction of
the development would have a minor adverse impact on water quality. The proposal would
not result in a loss of floodplain storage or alter fluvial flow paths. Mitigation measures can
reduce the risk of groundwater flooding. The proposal would not result in an increase of
surface water runoff.
Hydrogeology, Geology and Ground ConditionsPage 4
The report states that the development should have no significant impacts in terms of contamination. Mitigation measures would be undertaken to prevent additional sediment from the site entering the SSSI and other water courses. Further investigation and remediation where required could be controlled through the planning process. Traffic and Transport This assessment concludes that once operational there would be long-term adverse effects in terms of traffic, simply by virtue of increased vehicle movements. On the A78 this would be negligible. Conditions such as traffic delay and pedestrian amenity would not change. During construction, roads specifically identified as unsuitable for construction traffic would not be used. Noise and Vibration The EIA considered noise from both the construction and operational phases. It is concluded that any noise/vibration from construction could be mitigated by adopting best practice as set out in British Standards. Such measures would be implemented through a Code of Construction Practice (CoCP), which would include notification to those nearby, who may be affected; construction hours of 7am to 7pm Monday to Friday, 8am to 1pm Saturday and not at all on Sundays or Bank Holidays; and siting works away from noise sensitive receptors. During operation of the development, it is considered that a reasonable acoustic environment is attainable at the nearest noise sensitive receptors. Most of the noise generating plant would be within buildings. External plant could be fitted with silencers. With suitable mitigation it is considered the noise from construction and operation would have negligible to minor adverse impact. There is not considered to be any impact from vibration. Climate Change The potential impacts of the proposal on climate change were assessed. The greenhouse gas emissions from the construction phase are predicted to be between some 107,400 tCO2e and 127,700 tCO2e. It is considered that this could be mitigated through the detailed design phases, and procurement and supply chain practices. The operational phase of the development is considered to have greenhouse gas emissions of approx. 53,200 tC02e. The majority of this is from electricity consumption. This amounts to a approx. 0.0137% of the UK annual carbon budget to 2027. An assessment of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research (2022) suggests this would be about 15% of North Ayrshire's carbon budget. This proportion of North Ayrshire's budget should be seen in the context of a lack of manufacturing industry employment opportunities. This would provide approx. 900 full time equivalent jobs. The proposal is also considered to be in line with the Scottish Government's key principle of supporting the change to a low carbon economy as it will manufacture transmission cable to facilitate increased deployment of renewable and low carbon energy generation. Air Quality The potential impacts of air quality were assessed. During construction, the main impact was considered to be dust. No odour, gaseous or particulate emissions would be emitted
Page 5
during operational phase and the impact on air quality would be negligible. A Dust Management Plan could be developed and implemented to control emissions during construction. This could include site management, monitoring, and maintenance. Subject to such mitigation if is considered the risk from construction dust in terms of air quality would be negligible. Social and Economic Impact Assessment This Assessment states that the proposal would have a minor beneficial short-term effect on the economy of North Ayrshire during construction. It is assessed that the construction period would create the equivalent of 70 jobs in North Ayrshire. The benefits of construction are assessed as negligible for the wider Scottish and UK economies. For the operational phase of the development, it is assessed the benefit to North Ayrshire would be major and long term. It is considered there would be a £60 million GVA and 1,010 job benefit impact for the area. The benefits during operation for Scotland and the UK are assessed as £92 million GVA, 1,600 jobs and £183 million, 3,610 jobs respectively. These benefits are considered to be negligible but are seen as long-term effects. The assessment considers the impact of the development on tourism. The assessment considers the development will not impact directly on the features which make the tourism destinations of Great Cumbrae, the Isle of Bute, Largs, Fairlie, Ardrossan and the Clyde Muirshiel Regional Park attractive. It is considered the impact on those areas will be negligible. Nearby walking routes, including the coastal path and walks within the Regional Park, and marine receptors are assessed. It is considered that the impact on these areas would be minor and not significant in terms of tourism. The landscape and visual impact are assessed in the Landscape and Visual Effects section. Overall, it is considered there would be no significant effect on tourism to the area. In addition to the EIA, the following documents have been submitted in support of the application: PAC report The PAC report notes the publicity measures undertaken and the public events held. An online public exhibition was held from 23rd August to 3rd September 2021 with a live web chat on 25th August 2021. The procedure was carried out in accordance the Town and Country Planning (Miscellaneous Temporary Modifications) (Coronavirus) (Scotland) Regulations 2020. The online exhibitions received 266 unique visits. 11 comments were received. Comments ranged from questions regarding building height, job creation, funding of the development, the developer's background, noise as well as expressions of support. The applicant held public meetings in the week beginning 9th May 2022. These meetings were not a requirement of the PAC process or this application process. Transport Assessment
Page 6
This assesses the existing transport infrastructure. It concludes that the existing active
travel network offers a means of securing improved access by foot and bicycle from the
local catchment subject to minor upgrading of infrastructure. The introduction of bus stops
would encourage the use of sustainable transport among employees. The existing vehicle
access is capable of accommodating increased traffic flows. Restrictions on movements of
HGVs can be implemented through a Construction Management Plan (CMP) and Travel
Plan.
Planning Statement
The planning statement describes the proposed development, summarises the planning
background, and policy context.
The Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 states that when determining planning
applications regard shall have to the provisions of the development plan, so far as material
to the application, and to any other material considerations.
The relevant policies of the Local Development Plan adopted November 2019 (LDP) are
Strategic Policy 1: The Coast Objective; Strategic Policy 2: Placemaking; Strategic Policy 3:
Hunterston Strategic Development Area; Policy 7: Business and Industry Employment
Locations; Policy 15: Landscape and Seascape; Policy 16: Protection of our Designated
Sites; Policy 17: Clyde Muirshiel Regional Park ("CMRP"); Policy 23: Flood Risk
Management; Policy 27: Sustainable Transport and Active Travel; Policy 29: Energy
Infrastructure Development; and Policy 31: Future Proofing for Heat Networks.
The Hunterston Development Framework was approved by the Planning Committee on 1st
December 2021.
The Scottish Government's National Planning Framework 4 (NPPF4) is currently in draft.
The consultation period on the draft NPF4 ended 31st March 2022. Hunterston is identified
in the draft NPPF4 as a National Development. Certain development at Hunterston, which
would otherwise have been of a scale or type that is classified as 'major,' would be
designated as a national development should NPPF4 be adopted in its current form. The
classes of development proposed are those which support the redevelopment and reuse of
existing strategic assets and land, contributing to a net zero economy. They include
infrastructure to support a multi-modal deep-water harbour; land and buildings for industrial,
commercial, research and development, and training uses; and infrastructure for the
generation and storage of electricity from renewables of or exceeding 50 megawatts.
Relevant Development Plan Policies
Strategic Policy 1
Spatial Strategy
Our spatial strategy is based on the principle that we want to direct the right development to
the right place. This means we want to direct most development to our towns, villages and
developed coastline where we have infrastructure capacity to support new development,
where there is access to existing services and where we have opportunities to re-use and
redevelop brownfield land.Page 7
We recognise that for island and rural communities we have to be more flexible to ensure they can grow and thrive too so we have set out a distinct approach for them which continues to promote a sustainable pattern of development but that also empowers our rural economy and communities to develop while protecting our countryside areas as a valuable natural asset. We have indicated what this means on our Spatial Strategy Map and in the mini maps included throughout this Local Development Plan. Strategic Policy 1 includes objectives and policies for how development can enhance and protect our Towns and Villages, our Countryside and our Coast. We will assess development proposals against the principles set out in the spatial strategy. All development proposals must also comply with Policy 2: Placemaking and any relevant policies of this Plan. We will resist development outwith the boundaries of towns and villages, except where the development would positively contribute to the vision or priorities identified in the spatial strategy or where detailed policies of the LDP provide support. We will refer to Scottish Planning Policy's presumption in favour of development that contributes to sustainable development in considering proposals that are not supported by the spatial strategy. Strategic Policy 2 Placemaking Our Placemaking policy will ensure we are meeting LOIP priorities to make North Ayrshire safer and healthier by ensuring that all development contributes to making quality places. The policy also safeguards, and where possible enhances environmental quality through the avoidance of unacceptable adverse environmental or amenity impacts. We expect that all applications for planning permission meet the six qualities of successful places, contained in this policy. This is in addition to establishing the principle of development in accordance with Strategic Policy 1: Spatial Strategy. These detailed criteria are generally not repeated in the detailed policies section of the LDP. They will apply, as appropriate, to all developments. Six qualities of a successful place Distinctive The proposal draws upon the positive characteristics of the surrounding area including landscapes, topography, ecology, skylines, spaces and scales, street and building forms, and materials to create places with a sense of identity. Welcoming The proposal considers the future users of the site and helps people to find their way around, for example, by accentuating existing landmarks to create or improve views (including sea views), locating a distinctive work of art in a notable place or making the most of gateway features to and from the development. It should also ensure that appropriate signage and lighting is used to improve safety and illuminate attractive buildings. Safe and Pleasant The proposal creates attractive places by providing a sense of security, including by encouraging activity, considering crime rates, providing a clear distinction between private and public space, creating active frontages and considering the benefits of natural surveillance for streets, paths and open spaces. The proposal creates a pleasant, positive sense of place by promoting visual quality, encouraging social and economic interaction and activity, and by considering the place before vehicle movement.
Page 8
The proposal respects the amenity of existing and future users in terms of noise, privacy, sunlight/daylight, smells, vibrations, glare, traffic generation, and parking. The proposal sufficiently investigates and responds to any issues of ground instability. Adaptable The proposal considers future users of the site and ensures that the design is adaptable to their needs. This includes consideration of future changes of use that may involve a mix of densities, tenures, and typologies to ensure that future diverse but compatible uses can be integrated including the provision of versatile multi-functional greenspace. Resource Efficient The proposal maximises the efficient use of resources. This can be achieved by re-using or sharing existing resources and by minimising their future depletion. This includes consideration of technological and natural means such as flood drainage systems, heat networks, solar gain, renewable energy and waste recycling as well as use of green and blue networks. Easy to Move Around and Beyond The proposal considers the connectedness of the site for people before the movement of motor vehicles, by prioritising sustainable and active travel choices, such as walking, cycling and public transport and ensuring layouts reflect likely desire lines, through routes and future expansions. SP3 Strategic Development Area 1: Hunt Strategic Development Area 1: Hunterston Hunterston We recognise the strategic national importance of Hunterston as an energy hub and deep-water port. We strongly support the inclusion of Hunterston in the National Planning Framework 4. In particular we will support the following uses: Hunterston Deep Water Port o Renewables generation, manufacture, maintenance, research and development, testing and training (including support for a renewables skills academy) o Strategic grid connections recognising its importance as a landfall to support the offshore renewable energy sector o Maritime construction and decommissioning (including oil and gas structures) o Bulk handling facilities for importing, processing and distributing all dry and bulk liquid cargoes o Local scale Bio-mass energy generation developments as per Town and Country Planning (Hierarchy of Developments) (Scotland) Regulations 2009 o Other storage, processing and distribution uses and general light industrial activities where they would not undermine the strategic importance of, and unique assets of Hunterston as a deep-water port. Hunterston Nuclear o Appropriate development to support the operational life of the existing facility o Nuclear decommissioning and radioactive waste management from within the site o Other facilities for large and small scale power generation Energy Sector & Nuclear Facilities Hunterston provides a unique combination of energy generation, infrastructure and network accessibility.
Page 9
The decommissioning of Hunterston A is ongoing and will be followed at some point after 2023 by the decommissioning of Hunterston B. We want to support the retention of the high value jobs in the energy industry at Hunterston. Hunterston is an area where co-ordinated action and a masterplanned approach is required. We would expect all development to take account of the special environmental and safety constraints of Hunterston including detailed transport studies to identify options for enhancing port/rail/road accessibility, and management of impact of uses on nearby communities and the natural and built heritage assets in the area. Detailed Policy 7-B&I Employment Location Policy 7: Business and Industry Employment Locations We will, in principle support and promote the development of the locations listed in schedule 5 for business and industry uses. In these locations other employment generating uses may also be supported providing they would not undermine the marketability of the area for business and industry uses. The following are some examples of other employment generating uses that we will consider: o General leisure and commercial leisure uses, where there is no sequentially preferable location within town and edge of town centres or commercial centres o Waste recycling and power generation (including renewables) o Non-industrial uses that provide services and amenities for employees in business locations, and that do not undermine the town centre strategy in the LDP (for example nurseries), or the wider function of the industrial areas o A range of other businesses that have difficulties in finding appropriate locations For other employment generating uses, including outwith identified employment locations, we will consider the resultant employment density of the proposed development, the impact on the vitality and viability of the area's town centre network, in accordance with Policy 3 Town Centres and Retail, the effect on local transport infrastructure and potential environmental impact. We will seek to ensure that infrastructure provision at employment locations is exemplary and will support development which includes superfast broadband provision, heat network connection (or future-readiness), and low carbon technology integration (such as car charging points). We will monitor the location, size, planning status, existing use, neighbouring land uses and any significant land use issues (e.g., underused, vacant, derelict) within the business land supply. We will use the appropriate employment densities guide published by the U.K Government to consider potential employment generating uses. Detailed Policy 15-Landscape & Seascape Policy 15: Landscape and Seascape We will support development that protects and/or enhances our landscape/seascape character, avoiding unacceptable adverse impacts on our designated and non-designated landscape areas and features. In particular, we will consider the following:
Page 10
a) National Scenic Areas Development that affects the North Arran National Scenic Area including the need to protect existing sport and recreation interests, will only be supported where: i) the objectives of the designation and the overall integrity of the area will not be compromised; or ii) any significant adverse effects on the qualities for which the area has been designated are clearly outweighed by social, environmental or economic benefits of national importance. b) Special Landscape Areas We will only support development which affects Special Landscape Areas where it would not have an unacceptable impact on their special character, qualities and setting. c) Wild Land We will only support development within Wild Land areas where any significant effects on the qualities of these areas can be substantially overcome by siting, design or other mitigation. d) Local Landscape Features Where appropriate, development should take into consideration its individual and cumulative impacts on landscape features, including: i) patterns of woodlands, fields, hedgerows and trees; ii) lochs, ponds, watercourses, wetlands, the coast and wider seascape; iii) settlement setting, including approaches to settlements; iv) the setting of green network corridors, such as important transport routes and the cycle and footpath network; v) historic, natural and recreational features of interest, skylines and hill features, including important views to, from and within them. For all development with the potential to have an impact on either Landscape Character or Landscape features (including their setting), appropriate mitigation measures should be considered as part of any planning application. Where there is potential for development to result in significant adverse landscape/visual impact, a landscape and visual impact assessment (LVIA) will be required. The Ayrshire Landscape Character Assessment (SNH, 1998) and North Ayrshire Settlement Development Strategy (Entec, 2008) provide further information on designations such as Local Landscape Character Areas and the Potential Limit of Development Expansion areas as shown on the map on page 81 and on our online proposals map. These landscape assessment documents, and any new or updated landscape assessments, will be key considerations in determining whether development proposals would be acceptable within the landscape. Detailed Policy 16- Protection of our Designated Sites Policy 16: Protection of our Designated Sites We will support development which would not have an unacceptable adverse effect on our valuable natural environment as defined by the following legislative and planning designations;
Page 11
a) Nature Conservation Sites of International Importance Where an assessment is unable to conclude that a development will not adversely affect the integrity of a site, development will only be permitted where there are no alternative solutions; there are imperative reasons of overriding public interest; and suitable compensatory measures are provided to ensure that the overall coherence of the Natura Network is protected. b) Nature Conservation Sites of National Importance Development affecting Sites of Special Scientific Interest will not be permitted unless it can be demonstrated that the overall objectives of the designation and the overall integrity of the designated area would not be compromised, or any adverse effects are clearly outweighed by social, environmental or economic benefits of national importance. c) Nature Conservation Sites of Local Importance Development adversely affecting Local Nature Reserves or Local Nature Conservation Sites will generally not be permitted unless it can be demonstrated the overall objectives of the designation and the overall integrity of the designated area would not be compromised, or any adverse effects are clearly outweighed by social, environmental or economic benefits of local importance. d) Marine Protected Areas Development likely to have an adverse effect on the protected features of South Arran MPA will not be supported. Proposals are also required to consult with the Clyde Marine Planning Partnership (CMPP). e) Biodiversity Action Plan Habitats and Species Development adversely affecting priority habitats or species set out in the North Ayrshire Local Biodiversity Action Plan will not be permitted unless it can be demonstrated the impacts are clearly outweighed by social or economic benefits of local importance. f) Protected Species Development likely to have an unacceptable adverse effect on; i) European Protected Species (see Schedules 2 & 4 of the Habitats Regulations 1994 (as amended) for definition); Birds, Animals and Plants listed on Schedules 1, 5 and 8 (respectively) of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended); or badgers, will only be permitted where the applicant can demonstrate that a species licence is likely to be granted. ii) The Scottish Biodiversity List (SBL) of animals, plants and habitats that Scottish Ministers considered to be of principle importance for biodiversity conservation in Scotland. Detailed Policy 17 - CMRP Policy 17: Clyde Muirshiel Regional Park Proposals that affect Clyde Muirshiel Regional Park must have regard to the Park's statutory purpose of providing recreational access to the countryside. Proposals should also take account of wider objectives as set out in relevant management plans and strategies, namely to: o Provide visitors of all ages and abilities the opportunity for quality recreation. Using its unique assets, the Park will facilitate a high quality programme of leisure activities which contribute to the health agenda
Page 12
o Ensure the Park is an increasingly popular and productive venue for formal and informal education and outdoor learning. More people will participate in learning opportunities and will develop a better appreciation of the area's natural and cultural heritage o Ensure the Park is an attractive and ecologically important visitor destination with increased biodiversity value. The Park embraces opportunities for positive environmental change Detailed Policy 23-Flood Risk Management Policy 23: Flood Risk Management We will support development that demonstrates accordance with the Flood Risk Framework as defined in Scottish Planning Policy and shown in schedule 7, relevant flood risk management strategies and local flood risk management plans. We will also support schemes to manage flood risk, for instance through natural flood management, managed coastal realignment, wetland or green infrastructure creation. Generally, development should avoid locations of flood risk and should not lead to a significant increase in the flood risk elsewhere. Land raising and elevated buildings will only be supported in exceptional circumstances, where it is shown to have a neutral or better impact on flood risk outside the raised area. Development proposals should: o Clearly set out measures to protect against, and manage, flood risk. o Include sustainable urban drainage systems (SuDS) where surface water is proposed to be discharged to the water environment, in accordance with the Water Environment (Controlled Activities) (Scotland) Regulations 2011 as amended. o Include provision of temporary/construction phase SuDS. o include appropriate long-term maintenance arrangements. o Be supported by an appropriate flood risk assessment where at risk of flooding from any source in medium to high risk areas and for developments in low to medium risk areas identified in the risk framework (schedule 7). o Take account of SEPA's flood risk and land use vulnerability guidance (2018) and any relevant updates to, or replacements of this guidance. Detailed Policy 27 Sustainable Transport and Active Travel We will support development that: contributes to an integrated transport network that supports long term sustainability o reduces inequality by improving the accessibility and connectivity of employment opportunities and local amenities o provides safe and convenient sustainable transport options and supports modal shift to sustainable transport and active travel. o reduces the need to travel or appropriately mitigates adverse impacts of significant traffic generation, road safety and air quality, including taking into account the cumulative impact.
Page 13
o takes a design-led, collaborative approach to street design to provide safe and convenient opportunities for integrated sustainable travel in the following order of priority: pedestrians, people on cycles, people using collective transport (buses, trains etc.) and people using private transport. o considers the potential requirements of other infrastructure providers, including designing for the potential development of district heat networks by for example incorporating access points into the transport network to allow for future pipe development or creating channels underneath the road/infrastructure to enable pipe development with minimal disruption to the networks. o enables the integration of transport modes and facilitates movement of freight by rail or water (in preference to road). This would include, for example, the provision of infrastructure necessary to support positive change in transport technologies, such as charging points for electric vehicles and the safeguarding of disused railway lines with the reasonable prospect of being used as rail, tram, bus rapid transit or active travel routes. o considers the impact on, and seeks to reduce risk to level crossings, including those located within Ardrossan, Stevenston and Gailes. Proposals are expected to include an indication of how new infrastructure or services are to be delivered and phased, and how and by whom any developer contributions will be made. We will take account of: o the implications of development proposals on traffic, patterns of travel and road safety. o Significant traffic generating uses should be sited at locations that are well served by public transport, subject to parking restraint policies, and supported by measures to promote the availability of high-quality public transport services. Where this is not achievable, we may seek the provision of subsidised services until a sustainable service is achievable. o the potential vehicle speeds and level of infrastructure provided for the expected numbers of trips by all modes. o the relationship between land use and transport and particularly the capacity of the existing transport network, environmental and operational constraints, and proposed or committed transport projects. o committed and proposed projects for the enhancement of North Ayrshire's transport infrastructure, including improved park and ride provision. o specific locational needs of rural communities. We recognise that in rural areas we need to be realistic about the likely viability of public transport services and innovative solutions such as demand-responsive public transport and small scale park and ride facilities at nodes on rural bus corridors will be considered. o The Council's adopted Local Transport Strategy, Core Paths Plan, Town Centre Parking Strategy and parking requirements. o The need to mitigate and adapt to climate change with regard to the Climate Change (Scotland) Act 2009. o The provision of new and improved links to existing and proposed active travel routes which are integrated with the wider strategic network, including the National Walking and Cycling Network, core paths and the Ayrshire Coastal Path. Developments likely to generate significant additional journeys will be required to be accompanied by a Transport Assessment, Air Quality Assessment and a Travel Plan. A Transport Statement will be required for smaller scale developments that will not have a major impact on the transport network, but are still likely to have an impact at a local level on the immediate transport network.
Page 14
National Development: The National Walking and Cycling Network (NWCN) was designated as a national development within the National Planning Framework (NPF3). This is an ambitious project which aims to grow Scotland's network of paths from 6,000 to 8,000 km by 2035. Key routes in North Ayrshire which will contribute to this network are detailed below. These are being developed in partnership with Sustrans and Scottish Natural Heritage as lead organisations for the delivery of the NWCN. These include the development of an off-road alignment for: o National Cycle Network (NCN) Route 73 (North) between Brodick and Corrie on the Isle of Arran o NCN Route 753 between Skelmorlie and Ardrossan o While not explicitly referenced in NPF3, support will be given to development of an off-road alignment for NCN Route 7 between Kilwinning and Kilbirnie. Detailed Policy 29 - Energy Infrastructure Policy 29: Energy Infrastructure Development We will support development proposals for energy infrastructure development, including wind, solar, tidal, cropping and other renewable sources, where they will contribute positively to our transition to a low carbon economy and have no unacceptable adverse environmental impacts, taking into consideration (including cumulatively) the following: Environmental o Communities and individual dwellings - including visual impact, residential amenity, noise and shadow flicker; o Water quality; o Landscape - including avoiding unacceptable adverse impacts on our landscape designations; o Effects on the natural heritage - including birds; o Carbon rich soils including peat; o Impacts on the historic environment - including scheduled monuments, listed buildings and their settings. Community o Establishing the use of the site for energy infrastructure development; o providing a net economic impact - including socio-economic benefits such as employment, associated business and supply chain opportunities; o Scale of contribution to renewable energy generation targets; o Public access - including impact on long distance walking and cycling routes and scenic routes identified in the National Planning Framework; o Impacts on tourism and recreation; o Specific locational opportunities for energy storage/generation. Public Safety o Greenhouse gas emissions; o Aviation and defence interests and seismological recording;
Page 15
o Telecommunications and broadcasting installations - particularly ensuring that transmission links are not compromised; radio telemetry interference and below ground assets; o Road traffic and adjacent trunk roads; o Effects on hydrology, the water environment and flood risk including drinking water quality and quantity (to both the public and private water supplies); o Decommissioning of developments - including ancillary infrastructure, and site restoration and aftercare. Proposals should include redundancy plans which will demonstrate how apparatus will be timeously removed as reasonably soon as the approved scheme ceases operation. There may be a requirement for financial bonds to ensure that decommissioning can be achieved. Taking into consideration the above, proposals for wind turbine developments should accord with the Spatial Framework (as mapped) and consider the current Landscape Capacity Study for Wind Farm Development in North Ayrshire. This study will be used as a point of reference for assessing all wind energy proposals including definitions of what small to large scale entails. Buildings: Low and Zero Carbon Generating Technology Proposals for all new buildings will be required to demonstrate that at least 10% of the current carbon emissions reduction set by Scottish Building Standards will be met through the installation and operation of low and zero-carbon generating technologies. A statement will be required to be submitted demonstrating compliance with this requirement. The percentage will increase at the next review of the local development plan. This requirement will not apply to: 1. Alterations and extensions to buildings 2. Change of use or conversion of buildings 3. Ancillary buildings that stand alone and cover an area less than 50 square metres 4. Buildings which will not be heated or cooled, other than by heating provided solely for frost protection. 5. Buildings which have an intended life of less than two years. Detailed Policy 31 - Future Proofing for Policy 31: Future Proofing for Heat Networks We will support proposals for the creation or enhancement of district heat networks in as many locations as possible in North Ayrshire (even where they are initially reliant on carbon-based fuels if there is potential to convert them to run on renewable or low carbon sources of heat in the future). We will seek to identify and safeguard existing and future heat network generation and distribution infrastructure, including piperuns and pipework within, and to the curtilage of, new developments.
Page 16
Proposals for development that constitute a significant heat source or substantial development* which would not result in the creation or enhancement of district heat networks should include: i) provision for on-site heat recovery and re-use infrastructure; or ii) a heat network generation and distribution infrastructure plan (a district heating plan), taking into account the potential to connect to future heat demand sites; or iii) demonstrable evidence that district heating or other forms of renewable generation storage have been explored but are not feasible for technical (proximity, geography, safety etc) or economic reasons. * 'Substantial' developments consist of urban extensions, large regeneration areas or large development sites subject to master planning or large mixed use developments and major sites (50 residential units and above). There is, however, an element of judgment that will need to be applied here and it might be that some other locations offer significant potential for heat networks due to their local context, support from the local authority, and 'buy in' from developers. 2. Consultations and Representations Neighbour notification was carried out and the application was advertised and in response there have been 5 objections and 2 representations in support. Following the applicant holding public meetings during the w/c 9th May, Fairlie Community Council provided 21 more objections from members of the public (see below). The objections can be summarised as follows: 1. Noise. Noise and vibration must be assessed. Noise from operation will disturb Fairlie particularly as continuous operation is sought. Loading the cable onto ships should not be allowed. Previous shipping at the dock, including cable ships, have impacted on residents. An assessment of the noise from moving cable along the jetty and then onto ships should be undertaken. The noise from construction will disturb residents. Response: NAC Environmental Health was consulted and has offered no objections. The applicant has provided information that the operation of the factory and external plant, can be carried out so as not to exceed the rated background noise level. This could be controlled by condition and adherence to this condition would ensure no statutory noise nuisance even with continuous operation. The port is a lawful existing use and the loading or unloading of ships could be undertaken regardless of any permission for the rest of the site. Construction could be controlled through a Construction Management Plan and Environmental Health has powers to take action against statutory noise nuisance. 2. Height and Visual Impact. The tower would dominate the landscape for miles around and adversely affect the area. It is suggested a balloon be flown at the height of the building to allow locals to understand the proposal. There are no comparable structures in the area. It is not considered that the LVIA has assessed enough locations within Fairlie to properly assess impact. The LVIA is considered to be deficient, and no determination should be made until further viewpoints are assessed. The village would be overshadowed
Page 17
Response: The visual impact is considered further below. The LVIA is considered sufficient to assess the application. Given the position of the tower and distance to Fairlie, it is not considered the village would be overshadowed. An assessment of shading is considered more fully below. 3. Flooding. There are issues with surface water and flooding at the site. Coastal erosion could make the site further at risk. Response: The application site is not at risk of flooding except for small areas of potential surface water flooding. NAC Flooding and SEPA both have no objection and details of drainage to deal with surface water could be required by condition is permission is granted. 4. Decommissioning. A bond should be required to ensure proper decommissioning should the use cease. Response: Noted. A condition requiring details of finance for the removal of the tower should it become obsolete could be added to any permission. 5. Fire safety. It is questioned whether the Fire Service would be able to respond to a fire, particularly with respect the height of the tower which will be one of the tallest in Scotland. Response: This is not a material planning consideration. The tower would have to meet the requirements of the Building Regulations in terms of fire safety. 6. Environment. The adjacent SSSI will be affected as will the Clyde Muirshiel Regional Park. The operation of the site will adversely affect local wildlife. Air pollution will be caused by the operation of the site. This will harm residents and wildlife. Light pollution will affect villagers. The biodiversity of the site will be lost. The jetty should not be used as ship movements will have an adverse impact on the environment. Response: NatureScot was consulted and is satisfied the SSSI will not be affected. The impact on CMRP is considered to be minimal. No protected species or habitats have been found in the site which is a former coal yard. A condition could be added to any permission requiring further habit/species surveys as required. The jetty is part of an existing lawful port and ship movements cannot be restricted by the Council, as Planning Authority. 7. Traffic. No construction vehicles or other deliveries should be allowed through Fairlie. Increased traffic due to the operation of the development would be detrimental to the village. Response: The relevant roads authorities have been consulted and their responses are below. Construction traffic can be controlled through a plan required by condition of any permission including avoidance of Fairlie. The representations of support can be summarised as follows: 1. The area needs sustainable employment. The shutdown of the nuclear power stations means a loss of high paid and high skilled jobs. This is a development which can aid low carbon electricity. Regular use of the jetty will decrease the likelihood of ships with nowhere else to go docking and causing disturbance. The wider benefits for the local area and whole country outweigh any potential inconveniences. The proposal should not prevent further development at the site.
Page 18
2. The principle of the application should be warmly welcomed as part of a plan for the continued economic development of the area, as well as for tackling the climate emergency. Given the power station decommissioning, the need for a just transition and local job creation has taken on a new urgency, and it is welcome that the proposals in this application will support the renewable energy sector and have an overall positive impact on the fight against climate change. The site has a long history of heavy industry. It is acknowledged that the visual impact is not ideal in this location. However, there are many advantages in revitalising an existing industrial site with appropriate infrastructure links such as this. 3. Any development should not commence unless NatureScot is content regarding mitigation of impact on the SSSI. There should be obligations for the remediation of the site. The mitigation measures recommended in the climate section of the Environmental Impact Assessment should also be accepted by the applicants. Response: The above support is noted. NatureScot was consulted and the response is noted below. A condition could be imposed in respect of restoration of the tower if the development ceases and other conditions could be imposed with respect to the permission in principle being sought. EDF, as operator of the nearby Hunterston B Power Station, has made a representation. EDF is supportive of the proposal provided it does not impact on the Hunterston B operational use of the railway, jetty and approaches to the A78. Hunterston B is being defueled and use of the transport network, including rail, is likely to increase. Any electricity supply cables from the substation to the south of Hunterston B should not prejudice EDF's landholding and early engagement with EDF should be undertaken. The Towns Water Main supply to Hunterston B should also not be impacted. EDF expect the applicant to cooperate with any aspect of the day-to-day running of Hunterston B or its safety. The applicant should ensure its proposal has measures to ensure the proper emergency planning of the area. The use of the railhead by EDF should be actively protected by any permission. Response: Noted. The applicant has been passed EDFs comments and advised to engage directly. The railhead will remain extant, and any construction management plans could address the needs of decommissioning Hunterston B. Consultations NatureScot (SNH) - The implementation of the mitigation measures detailed in the application will mean there is no impact on the SSSI. This will also protect Priority Marine Features. A Habitat Management Plan (HMP) should be developed for the site. Advice is given as to what this should include. Low light splay LED lighting, triggered by motion sensors can help reduce light pollution. A natural capital assessment is being undertaken on behalf of the landowners, NAC and NS for the wider area, which is welcomed by NS and consider this will give opportunity to enhance the SSSI.
Page 19
From the North Arran National Scenic Area (NSA) the site is viewed in the context of existing industrial and wind farm development. The proposed use of different cladding to break up the solid mass would form a more prominent visual feature in this context. New lighting would be noticeable. However, this would again be viewed in the context of lighting for existing industrial and coastal settlements. Views towards the Arran NSA from the mainland would be altered, mainly from the west facing slopes of the CMRP. Many of these views are already gained in the context of the existing industry and post-industrial land of the coastal edge. Overall, it is not considered the development would significantly affect the special quality of the Arran NSA. The Kyles of Bute NSA has a special quality of ever-changing vistas. There will be limited visibility throughout this NSA, and it would be seen at distances of 25-30km. However, it is not considered it would significantly impact on the Kyles of Bute NSA. The development would be visible on the western fringes of the Clyde Muirshiel Regional Park. Given relative proximity there would be significant localised adverse impacts from those locations, whilst the majority of the CMRP would be unaffected. The development would further increase cumulative human influence throughout the CMRP and lead to a reduction in opportunities for quite enjoyment. Notwithstanding, the Waterhead Moor-Muirshiel Wild Land Area (WLA), which sits within the CMRP, would not be significantly affected. The North Arran WLA sits some 20km to the south-west. The development would be visible from some of the high tops of the WLA. However, it is again considered its qualities would not be significantly affected. It is not considered that the proposed aviation safeguarding lighting would be unduly incongruous within the local contact, where it would be seen in combination with existing lighting. It would not give rise to significant night-time impacts. It is considered difficult to mitigate a development of this scale. However, the measures set out in Section 7. 1.182 of the EIAR are welcome. Green roofs should be explored as should mitigation such as curvature of buildings to sharpen soft edges. Any new planting should be robust and should consider drought tolerant native species. Several conditions are recommended for any permission including the appointment of an Ecological Clerk of Works (ECoW) to review and formulate the CMP and Habitat and Species Plan and oversee construction. The finalised drainage scheme and construction methods should be part of the CMP and there should be a Code of Construction Practice (CoCP) agreed with NAC and SEPA. No ground clearance should be undertaken during the bird breeding season of March to August inclusive. If this is not possible then nesting surveys should be undertaken. Pre-construction checks for protected species should also be undertaken. With measures to protect mobile species be undertaken. It is recommended that construction works should be carried out in daylight wherever possible. Response: Noted. The suggested conditions could be attached to any permission if permission is granted. Transport Scotland - No objections. Any permission should be subject to a condition requiring a Construction Traffic Management Plan to be agreed with the Council through consultation with Transport Scotland.
Page 20
NAC Active Travel and Transportation (Roads) - No objections. It is known that there are other proposals for Hunterston. Specific roads (C26 and local unclassified roads, the B780/B781, and the A78 through Fairlie) are unsuitable for construction traffic. This should be stipulated in any Construction Management Plan. Further details of active travel modes and protection of users of the cycle network during construction should be provided. Improvements to the footway/cycleway links between the site and Fairlie railway station should be provided, including upgrading of the cycle crossing for the entrance of the site, and provision of a cycle shelter at the main entrance. Response: The responses of the Roads Authorities are noted. A condition requiring a Construction Management Plan with the requirements of both authorities could be attached to any permission. NAC Flooding - No objections. The principle of the surface water flood risk mitigation, i.e., avoiding the risk area and installation of a surface water drainage system together with ground reprofiling, is acceptable. Conditions for any permission are suggested, including confirmation of any scheme being in accordance with the principles of SuDS, details of ground levels and FFLs, and overland flows demonstrating that people and property would not be put at risk during a storm event. Response: Noted. Conditions could be attached to any permission requiring such relevant details to be submitted or considered through further applications. SEPA - No objections. Satisfied with the assessment on flood risk. The assessment has informed the design of the site and development will be limited to land which is unlikely to be at risk of fluvial or coastal flooding. A conceptual surface water drainage strategy has been produced and the applicant should liaise with NAC on this matter. Discussions between SEPA, Sottish Water and the applicant on the matter of foul drainage are ongoing. A Construction Management Plan (CMP) should be submitted in order to mitigate risk of pollution. There will be no engineering in the water environment and 8m easement between development and the nearest burn. A Phase 2 site investigation is planned for the presence of contamination. The planned mitigation measures and further site investigation will ensure risk to groundwater is acceptable. Scottish Water - No objections. There is current sufficient capacity at the local water treatment works. Advice is given on what any developer must do to meet Scottish Water's requirements. The applicant is advised to engage with Scottish Water. Response: The lack of flood risk is noted as are the ongoing discussions between Scottish Water, SEPA and the applicant over foul drainage. The other details required by SEPA could be governed by conditions. Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) - The scale and location are such the ONR do not advise against the application unless the emergency planners responsible for the Hunterston B off-site emergency plan state the proposed development cannot be accommodated within those plans. The applicant should liaise directly with the operators of the nuclear power stations. Response: Noted. The applicant has been provided EDF's comments and advised to contact them to discuss these issues.
Page 21
NAC Environmental Health - No objections subject to conditions. Prior to development commencing the applicant should implement the mitigation measures detailed in Chapter 9 (Hydrogeology, Geology and Ground Conditions) and Chapter 13 (Air Quality) of the EIA. 3. The rated noise level, as defined in `BS4142:2014+A1:2019, from the operation of the facility must not exceed the background noise level at the curtilage of any existing or consented noise sensitive property at the time of application. The applicant has submitted a noise impact assessment which demonstrates that this can be complied with. However, the applicant must ensure the facility and all external plant is selected, designed and installed in such a manner that takes into account the noise assumptions contained within the report. Response: Noted. The suggested conditions could be added to any permission if granted. Argyll & Bute Council - No objection. The submitted LVIA has taken account of the Kyles of Bute National Scenic Area and the West Island Way long distance footpath on Bute. None of the levels of effect on these areas is considered significant. There is no significant impact on the 5 specific viewpoints assessed in Argyll & Bute. It is requested that Community Council's in Argyll & Bute be consulted. Response: Noted. The Argyll & Bute Community Councils were consulted. However, no response was received. South Ayrshire Council and Loch Lomond & The Trossachs National Park were also consulted but have not provided a response. NATS Safeguarding - The proposal does not conflict with their safeguarding criteria. Prestwick Airport - No objection. Given the height and position of the tower, there is a requirement for omni-direction red warning lights to be fitted to the tower, because the area is uses to route Search & Rescue helicopters to the north of the aerodrome on an emergency response. Any cranes required during construction should be notified to Prestwick Airport Air Traffic Control. Glasgow Airport - The development does not conflict with safeguarding criteria. Advice is given on the use of cranes. Ministry of Defence (MOD) - No safeguarding concerns. The tower should be fitted with aviation warning lighting in accordance with the Civil Aviation Authority Air Navigation Order 2016. Notification must be given of details including the precise location of the tower and date of commencement so that mapping information can be updated. Response: The responses from the bodies concerned with aviation safety are noted. The applicant has been made aware of the specific requirements of each body. Conditions could be attached to any permission to ensure the necessary aviation lighting and notification of the MOD. Historic Environment Scotland - No objections. The proposal does not raise any historic environment issues in the national interest. Response: Noted.
Page 22
Fairlie Community Council (FCC) - FCC do not consider that there have been serious attempts to engage with local community. FCC has sought paper copies of the documents from the applicant, but the request was rejected. A NAC report on the future of Hunterston following the closure of Hunterston B has not been published. There is no guarantee that jobs can be guaranteed for local residents. The likelihood of contracts for the cable appears uncertain to the FCC. There should be a bond to secure restoration of the site. The public should be made aware of any public funding which would be needed for the project. FCC do not consider the project to be financially viable. FCC do not want any more public money spent on this part of Hunterston. The proposal is a serious threat to the amenity of Fairlie. There is no mention in the application of fumes or toxic air and sea discharges. There is no mention of dangerous or hazardous material to be used. How will a fire in the tower be dealt with? FCC considers there will be a smell from the site despite the assurances of the applicant. Noise will impact on the residents of Fairlie. The industrial tower will dominate the scenic area. FCC does not consider anything can be done to mitigate this impact. Use of the existing jetty already causes noise disturbance. The increased road traffic will be a danger to the roads. The A78 in Fairlie is too narrow. The railway is single track and not considered much use. If used, diesel engines will cause noise disturbance. FCC is concerned there is no information regarding onsite energy generation. The water run-off from the site into the SSSI. The site is at risk of flooding. This is on the closest part of the site to Fairlie. FCC extremely concerned that the site is to be developed but also have infrastructure on the jetty to load ships. Loading of cable at this jetty in the past has caused noise disturbance. The owners of the jetty consider they can do whatever they want at that site. Any environmental benefits of the cable, in transferring electricity, will be offset by the carbon footprint of constructing the development. Following a public meeting with the applicant in the week beginning 9th May 2022, FCC provided more comments from members of the public. These comments include a further 21 objections from members of the public, on the grounds of viability, the proposal only providing low-skilled jobs/jobs for those outwith the area, restoration, noise, visual impact, including on tourism, impact on wildlife, flooding, pollution, safety and traffic. Response: NAC is not currently preparing a report on the future of Hunterston. However, the report mentioned by FCC is a report by NAC Growth & Investment outlining the socio-economic analysis of the impact of the decommissioning of Hunterston B. A final draft has been provided to FCC. It should be noted that the report is not a material planning consideration in the determination of this planning application. The application was subject to the statutory Pre-application Consultation by the applicant. The steps taken by the applicant are sufficient to meet the requirements of the regulations. There are no toxic air or sea discharges proposed by the development. The effect on air quality has been considered. The applicant has confirmed that no odours etc will be emitted by the site when in operation. NAC Environmental Health has been consulted and has no objections. Noise and other potential amenity impacts are considered further below. Fire
Page 23
safety would be a matter for the operator and the fire brigade. Access and transport are considered further below. NatureScot has been consulted and has no objections. The visual impact is considered further below. However, it is noted this is an allocated industrial site and large industrial towers have a history in this part of the Clyde, including the 236m at the former Inverkip power station. There are no works in the marine environment proposed and subject to suitable mitigation the SSSI should not be adversely affected. The further public comments which FCC provided after 9th May repeat issues raised by Community Councils or during the public consultation period and have been addressed above. The proposal is likely to give rise to a wide range of job types including highly skilled. The economic impact on the area is considered further below. The applicants have also provided a response to FCC's comments. In summary, they reiterate their position that noise impact would be negligible and that conditions could be imposed to mitigate any noise issues; they have gathered feedback on colour and material for the tower at their meetings which were held w/b 9th May, this could be dealt with through condition; they are also preparing further photos of the site from Fairlie as requested at the meetings; there are no objections from SPEA in terms of flooding and issues of drainage can be mitigated by conditions; they will be happy to provide a bond for decommissioning if required by condition; all building will be built to comply with fire safety regulations; air quality effects will not be significant and there would be no toxic discharges; traffic can be dealt with through a management plan and they are looking at rail and sea as delivery routes; there will be a wide range of jobs created, from unskilled to highly skilled, and they intend to partner with local colleges; they consider the project to be a boost to the renewables industry in Scotland, the facility will produce the most up-to-date cable and it is projected to operate for at least 25 years. They consider that most of the issues raised can be dealt with at the matters specified by conditions stage, as the majority of the site would be receiving permission in principle only. West Kilbride Community Council (WKCC) - WKCC acknowledge that the site is a Strategic Asset, and the principle of the proposed development is within the definition of potential uses of the site. WKCC also acknowledges the economic benefits the proposal could bring to the local economy. WKCC comment that there does not appear to have been significant investigation of ground conditions. The 185m high tower should be disguised to blend in in both landward and seaward views. There are concerns over increased traffic through West Kilbride. Materials should be accessed by rail and sea. The A78 south of West Kilbride is at risk of closure due to flooding. More information is required on the infrastructure benefits the development would invest in. There is also no indication of the quantities of material required for the construction. Largs Community Council (LCC) - LCC is concerned that there appears to be a lack of awareness about the proposal in the area. LCC considers the tower will be a dominant feature. It should be clad green/grey to match the surrounding landscape with top parts, seen against the sky, to be light grey. There should be prohibition on heavy traffic through Fairlie.
Page 24
Light pollution should be minimised given the proposed 24hour operation. It is suggested
loading of ships only takes place during the day. The economic impacts are noted.
However, consideration should be given to negative impacts on tourism. The developer
should assess the courses on offer at local colleges, in order to ensure school leavers of the
near future can benefit from jobs and the employment opportunities can be filled locally.
Cumbrae Community Council was also consulted but no comments have been received.
Response: The concerns of the Community Councils are noted as is the acknowledgement
of the strategic importance of the site. The external finish of the tower could be governed by
condition so that it is recessive in order to mitigate visual impact. The Roads Authorities
have been consulted and have no objection in terms of traffic. A Construction Management
Plan could be required if permission is granted. Most of the development is sought in
principle only and further applications would be required for elements other than the tower.
The port is a lawful existing use and the Council, as Planning Authority, has no control over
its operations including loading of ships.
3. Analysis
All planning application require to be assessed against the relevant polices of the North
Ayrshire Local Development Plan (LDP) adopted November 2019 and all other material
considerations.
Although in draft NPF4 may also be considered to be a material consideration. The
re-purposing of the port as a strategic location for the port and energy sectors is supported
by NPF4. The NPF4 draft further states that new development in the area will need to work
within the capacity of the transport network, including active travel lines and be compatible
with the adjacent nuclear uses. Designated biodiversity sites will require protection and
enhancement where possible, and sustainable flood risk solutions will be required.
Investment in this area will support a wellbeing economy by opening up opportunities for
employment and training for local people. Whilst the NPF4 identification of Hunterston is a
broad allocation, it is considered that this allocation aligns with the Strategic policies of the
LDP and Strategic Policy 1 and Strategic Policy 3 in particular.
Strategic Policy 1 of the LDP states that the Council wants to direct the right development to
the right place. The Coastal Objective states that a range of uses will be supported in
principle, including development that assists to develop and strengthen North Ayrshire's
coastal economy and marketability and provide jobs to North Ayrshire communities.
Strategic Policy 3 of the LDP identified the site as part of the Hunterston Strategic
Development Area. It states that support will be given in principle to uses including
renewables generation, manufacture, maintenance research and development, testing, and
training; maritime construction and decommissioning; bulk handling facilities; and other
storage, processing, and distribution uses. The Council wants to support the retention of
high value jobs in the energy industry at Hunterston. Hunterston is an area where
co-ordinated action and a master planned approach is required.
In terms of the co-ordination required by Strategic Policy 3, the Hunterston Development
Framework ("the Framework") was approved by the Planning Committee on the 1st of
December 2021. The Framework is a material consideration for any planning application in
the area covered by the Framework. The Framework identifies the application site asPage 25
suitable for industrial development. It acknowledges the existing lawful port use and the transport connections which the site offers. The application site is identified as an area for buildings of varying height with potential for isolated taller process structures. The Framework states that proposals should undertake an assessment on the potential sensitive receptor of Fairlie. Any proposal should minimise its impact in terms of noise, dust, odour, and traffic. Noise should be considered through the planning application process. The design and layout of any proposal should create a nice place to work. Visual impact should be assessed through scale, massing, and siting as part of the planning process. Proposals for drainage should align with the Council's requirements. Contaminated land should be considered through planning applications. Policy 7 of the LDP states that support will be given in principle to development of sites identified for business and industry. The site is part of an area identified for business and industry. The proposal is for an industrial development which will develop the coastal economy and provide jobs. The applicants advise that those jobs would include high value jobs similar to the nuclear power plants. The industry will comprise of manufacture to support energy sector, namely cables for transport of electricity. The proposal therefore accords with Strategic Policy 1 and Policy 7 of the LDP as well as the principles of Strategic Policy 3 and the draft NPF. The specific areas highlighted by the draft NPF4, and the requirements of the Framework are assessed as part of the other LDP policies below. Strategic Policy 2 of the LDP sets out the six qualities of a successful place. The qualities are 'distinctive' where a proposal draws on the positive characteristics of the surrounding area and creates places with a sense of identity; 'safe and pleasant,' where a proposal respects the amenity of existing and future users; 'resource efficient' where a proposal maximises the efficient use of resources; 'welcoming,' where a proposal helps users find their way around and creates safe places; 'adaptable,' where the future users of a site are considered; and 'easy to move around and beyond,' where the development considers the connectedness of a site. Visual Policy 15 of the LDP states that support will be given to development which protects and/or enhances landscape/seascape character avoiding unacceptable adverse impacts on designated and non-designated landscape areas. For development affecting a National Scenic Area (NSA), this will only be supported where the objectives and overall integrity of the NSA will not be compromised. For Special Landscape Areas, development will only be supported where it would not have an unacceptable impact on their character, qualities and setting. For Wild Land Areas, development will only be supported within such areas where any significant effects can be overcome by mitigation. Development should also take account of local landscape features including settlements, transport routes and natural features of interest. Policy 17 of the LDP states that proposals that affect CMRP must have regard to the Park's statutory purpose of providing recreational access to the countryside. Part of the proposal is for permission in principle for manufacturing facility, with associated factories, research and testing laboratories, offices, stores etc. A masterplan has been provided which suggests likely siting of such buildings and indicative heights of between 20m and 45m. The exact details of any such buildings are not yet known. However, they
Page 26
would be industrial in appearance and scale. The site is identified for industrial use and such types of buildings would be acceptable in principle. The site is largely screened from the nearby A78 by mature woodland, much of it protected by a Tree Preservation Order. The exact details of such buildings could be governed by condition and determined through subsequent detailed applications. Therefore, this part of the development is acceptable in principle and the proposal accords with the 'adaptable' quality of Strategic Policy 2. Detailed planning permission is sought for the construction of a 185m high extrusion tower. A Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) has been provided as part of the application. The site is not itself within any special designated landscape. However, the LVIA assess the impact of the tower on such areas. The LVIA finds any effect on the North Arran and Watershead Moor Wild Land Areas would be negligible to moderate and not significant. This is also the same for any effect on the North Arran National Scenic Area, Kyles of Bute National Scenic Area and Loch Lomond National Park. There would be a moderate impact on the CMRP and Special Landscape Area, but this would not be significant. NS was consulted and did not object on visual impact grounds. NS considers that from the North Arran NSA the site is viewed in the context of existing industrial and wind farm development. Views of the North Arran NSA from the CMRP and Special Landscape Area would be altered but those views are already taken in the context of the existing industry and post-industrial land of the coastal edge. NS does not consider the North Arran NSA, or the Kyles of Bute NSA would be significantly impacted. The development would be visible on the western fringes of the CMRP. Given relative proximity there would be significant localised adverse impacts from those locations, whilst the majority of the CMRP would be unaffected. The development would further increase cumulative human influence throughout the CMRP and lead to a reduction in opportunities for quiet enjoyment. Notwithstanding, the Waterhead Moor-Muirshiel Wild Land Area (WLA), which sits within the CMRP, would not be significantly affected. NS's comments are noted, and it is agreed that there would be no significant impacts on nationally important designated landscapes. Parts of the CMRP and Special Landscape Area would be impacted by the intrusion of the tower. It is considered that the tower would be viewed in an industrial context, although it would be significantly higher than existing buildings and the others likely associated with this development. The CMRP is approx. 28000ha in area and the Special Landscape Area comprising some 16250ha. The tower would be visible in the very western fringes of the CMRP and Special Landscape Area and therefore any impact would be limited. Similarly, the tower and factory would be visible from the Great Cumbrae Special Landscape Area. This view would be primarily from the eastern side of the Island, where the view towards the development is already dominated by development including the industrial developments at Hunterston. The purpose of the CMRP for providing recreational access to the countryside would not be impacted by the proposal. The tower would be visible from some parts of nearby settlements, mainly on Millport and in Fairlie. From Millport the development would be highly visible from the town centre and western end of the town, which includes part of Millport Conservation Area. Similar to the Great Cumbrae Special Landscape Area, views towards the mainland from those areas are already dominated by development and the industrial land of Hunterston. In this context, it is not considered the setting of Millport Conservation Area would be significantly harmed by
Page 27
the proposed development. The visual impact when viewed from parts of Millport would be adverse during construction but this will lessen over time following completion. The tower would be visible from most of the village of Fairlie. Objections have been made at the inclusion of only one viewpoint from Fairlie. However, this viewpoint is considered representative as the tower would be visible from all but a few areas near the burn, near the primary school and at the northern end of the village. The majority of houses in Fairlie are aligned to the coast, i.e., to the west. The proposed development sits to the south or south-south-west of the village which would limit any visual impact. However, it is considered the visual impact when viewed from most of Fairlie would also be adverse during construction but, again, this impact would lessen over time following completion. There will be a similar impact on parts of Largs to the north but at a greater distance. Individual residences outwith the settlements would also experience adverse visual impact. Some of these would be within a few hundred metres of the tower but existing landscaping and mature woodland would lessen these impacts. In order to lessen the long-term visual impact a condition could be attached to any permission requiring the tower to be removed should the site become disused. As the landowner would be ultimately responsible for any conditions, details of financial considerations for removal could also be required by condition. In summary it is not considered that there would be any significant impacts on any designated landscapes or landscape characters. There would be impact upon landscape features including settlements. There will notably be visual impact when viewed from Fairlie and Millport. The initial impact of the tower is considered to be significant. It will be highly visible and will have a major visual impact particularly during construction. However, it is considered that the impact would lessen over time and the tower would mainly be viewed in the context of the industrial landscape. It is noted, in context, that the former Inverkip Power Station, which was some 16km to the north, and demolished in 2013, had a 236m high chimney. The visual impact of the tower is considered the context of other material considerations set out below. Subject to conditions, the proposal is considered to accord with the 'distinctive' and 'welcoming' qualities of Strategic Policy 2, Policy 15, and Policy 17 of the LDP. Natural Environment/Flooding/Drainage Policy 16 of the LDP states that support will be given to development which would not have an unacceptable adverse effect on our natural environment. Development affecting Sites of Special Scientific Interest will not be permitted unless it can be demonstrated that the overall objectives of the site would not be compromised. Policy 23 of the LDP states that support will be given to development which is in accordance with relevant flood risk strategies. Development should avoid locations of flood risk and should not lead to a significant risk of flooding elsewhere. The site is adjacent to the Southannan Sands SSSI. This area was first notified as a SSSI in 1971 and re-notified in 2013 with a reduced area. The SSSI is notified for its intertidal marine habitats and saline lagoons: sandflats. The sandflats extend for over 4km of coast, divided into three areas by the Hunterston Construction Yard and the jetty of the former coal terminal.
Page 28
The site is not identified as being at risk of coastal or river flooding on SEPA's flood maps. Parts of the site are at risk of surface water flooding. NS was consulted and has no objections in terms of the natural environment. NS states that the mitigation measures detailed in the application would mean there is no impact on the SSSI which would also protect the Priority Marine Features. A Habitat Management Plan (HMP) should be developed for the site. SEPA was consulted and also has no objection to the development. SEPA note that the development would be limited to land which is unlikely to be at risk of fluvial or coastal flooding. A Construction Management Plan (CMP) should be submitted in order to mitigate risk of pollution. NAC Flooding states that the principle of the surface water flood risk mitigation is acceptable. The EIA has discovered no evidence of protected species within the site and as further details would be required, a requirement for updated habitat surveys, as necessary, could be added to any permission. Conditions could also be added to any permission to require a CMP, including a Code of Construction Practice and appointment of an Ecological Clerk of Works (ECoW) to oversee those elements. Details of drainage for the site could also be secured by condition. Subject to appropriate conditions, it is considered that the proposal would not have an unacceptable impact on the natural environment including the adjacent SSSI. The site is not at risk of coastal or river flooding and drainage and surface water can be dealt with by condition whilst not adversely impacting on the environment. The proposal therefore accords with Policy 16 and Policy 23 of the LDP. Traffic/travel Policy 27 of the LDP states that development will be supported which provides safe and convenient sustainable transport options; reduces the need to travel or appropriately mitigates adverse impacts of significant traffic generation; enables the integration of transport modes and facilitates movement of freight by rail or water. The EIA states that from the operation of the development there would be long-term adverse effects in terms of traffic, simply by virtue of increased vehicle movements. However, the impact on the A78 would be negligible. This is noted, as is the location of the site on the core path and cycle network. The site is some 1km from Fairlie Train Station and is on bus routes. Both Transport Scotland and NAC Active Travel and Transportation (Roads) have no objections. Within the site is the railhead which would allow the use of the rail network for the construction and/or operation of the proposal. The ongoing requirements of the EDF whilst Hunterston B is being decommissioned are also noted. The applicant is aware of those needs. However, the railhead means the possibility of integration of transport modes with the road network and the existing port. The applicant states that the site has been specifically chosen due to the proximity of the existing port. The proposal would seek to use the port as a primary means of exporting cable manufactured on site. Details of any equipment required to achieve this aspect could be addressed through any further detailed permissions. However, it is noted the port is a lawful existing use and the Council, as Planning Authority, has no control over the use of the port for the docking of ships or the loading or unloading of ships.
Page 29
Conditions could be attached to any permission requiring details of improvements to active travel access and ways to mitigate impact on the cycle/core path network during construction. Any permission could also be subject to a condition requiring a Construction Traffic Management Plan including specific roads to be prohibited to construction traffic. Subject to such conditions the proposal is considered provide safe and sustainable transport options, mitigates against impact on the road network and enables integration of transport modes. The connectedness of the site has been considered, and the opportunities to minimise road use. The proposal therefore accords with Policy 27 of the LDP and the 'easy to move around and beyond' quality of Strategic Policy 2. The proposed factory would not when in operation emit odour, gaseous or particulate emissions. During construction there could be impacts from dust although the EIA considers these to be negligible in terms of air quality. NAC Environmental Health was consulted and has no objections. A dust management plan could be required by condition of any permission. The applicant has provided an assessment of noise from the proposed development. NAC Environmental Health is satisfied with this assessment and has suggested a condition to control the rated noise at background level at noise sensitive receptors. Such a condition could be attached to any permission if granted. NAC Environmental Health also has powers to control statutory noise nuisance should this occur during the construction period. However, an appropriate Construction Management Plan could also mitigate noise during that phase. The applicant has provided a shadow calculation for the tower at the summer and winter equinox. The calculation confirms that the closest residential property, some 100m distant, would be slightly to the south and therefore unaffected by the shadow. The shadow from the tower would also fall short of Fairlie and the houses at Southannan. The only residential property which could potentially be affected by the shadow would be Southannan South Cottage, some 500m north-east of the proposed tower. The shadow from the tower may fall on that property for periods either side of the winter equinox, however, it is likely to only be for short periods in the late afternoon and in certain weather conditions. There are mature trees between the site, both in the Hunterston TPO and in the fields and railway, and at Southannan South Cottage. The property also sits to the east, and therefore behind, the railway embankment. Given this, it is not considered that any shading caused by the tower would lead to a significant impact on any sensitive property. The proposed tower has also been considered in terms of air traffic safety. All relevant bodies concerned with aviation safety were consulted and no objections raised. The specific requirements in respect of aviation lighting could be controlled by condition. It is not considered that such lighting would in itself have a significant impact on visual amenity. Given all of the above, and subject to suitable conditions, the proposal is considered to respect the amenity of existing and future users. The proposal therefore accords with the 'safe and pleasant' quality of Strategic Policy 2. Policy 29 of the LDP states that support will be given to energy infrastructure developments where they contribute positively to a low carbon economy. All new buildings will be required to demonstrate that at least 10% of the current carbon emissions reduction set by Scottish
Page 30
Building Standards will be met through the installation and operation of low and zero carbon technologies. This will not apply to building which will not be heated or cooled. Policy 31 of the LDP states that proposals for development that constitute substantial development should include provision for on-site heat recovery or a heat network plan or demonstrable evidence that district heating has been explored but is not feasible for technical or economic reasons. The proposal is not for energy generation, but it is noted that the cable produced would be for the transmission of electricity including from renewable sources. The EIA assesses the potential impact of the proposal on climate change. The operational phase of the development would have greenhouse gas emissions equivalent to approx. 15% of North Ayrshire's carbon budget. This would be in the context of providing approx. 900 full time equivalent jobs at the site and in the wider North Ayrshire economy. As stated above only detailed permission is sought for the tower. The other buildings would require to be subject to further detailed permissions. Conditions could be attached to any permission which required the details set out in Policies 29 and 31. Given all the above, and subject to suitable conditions it is considered the proposal accords with Policies 29 and 31 of the LDP and meets the 'resource efficient' quality of Strategic Policy 2. The benefits to the local economy including the potential for approx. 900 full time equivalent jobs are welcomed. There are concerns that the development could impact on the local tourism economy by way of visual impact. There would be a notable visual impact when viewed from Fairlie and Millport. However, this would lessen overtime and the visual impact in the wider area and from designated landscapes is not considered to be significant. It is not considered that the tourist economy would be significantly affected. The proposal would produce high value jobs and be a net benefit to the local economy. Given all of the above, and that the proposal accords with Strategic Policy 2 and the other relevant policies of the LDP, the proposal is also considered to accord with the Framework for Hunterston and therefore Strategic Policy 3. In so far as it has weight, the proposal is also considered to accord with draft NPF4. The proposal is held to accord with the relevant polices of the LDP. Accordingly, the application should be approved subject to the conditions referred to in this report. 4. Full Recommendation Approved subject to Conditions Reasons for Decision Condition 1. That the approval of North Ayrshire Council, as Planning Authority, with regard to the siting, design and external appearance of all building and external plant or machinery, including landscaping, means of access, internal roads, external lighting, sustainable travel plan and low and zero carbon technology, shall be obtained before the development permitted in principle is commenced.
Page 31
Reason In order that these matters can be considered in detail. Condition 2. That further application(s) for approval under the terms of Condition 1 shall be accompanied by an assessment of on-site heat recovery and re-use, or a heat network infrastructure plan, or demonstrable evidence that such schemes have been explored but are not feasible for technical or economic reasons. Reason In order that the future proofing of the site for heat networks is properly considered as required by Policy 31 of the LDP. Condition 3. That further application(s) for approval under the terms of Condition 1 shall be accompanied by a Construction Management Plan and Code of Practice, including details for monitoring and action against non-compliance. For the avoidance of doubt this shall include an assessment of use of the rail and port connections as a first principle and the prohibition of the use of the A78 through Fairlie, the B780/B781, the C26 and all local non-classified roads by construction vehicles and details of management of impact on the core path and cycle rout network. Reason To ensure proper management of the construction process, including impact on the road network. Condition 4. That further application(s) for approval under the terms of Condition 1 shall be accompanied by details of an appointed Ecological Clerk of Works (ECoW). The details shall include contact details, the scope and responsibilities of the ECoW as well as confirmation of their power to halt or otherwise stop works which are not in accordance with the mitigation measures identified in the EIA or others, as may be approved. Reason To ensure appropriate oversight of the construction of the development Condition 5. Prior to development commencing the applicant shall implement the measures detailed under Mitigation Measures Adopted as Part of the Project in Chapter 9 Hydrogeology, Geology and Ground Conditions of the submitted EIA report dated February 2022. All documentation be verified by a suitably qualified Environmental Consultant and submitted to the satisfaction of North Ayrshire Council, as Planning Authority. Reason To ensure proper consideration is given to ground conditions and ground water. Condition 6. That further application(s) for approval under the terms of Condition 1 shall be accompanied by a Dust Management Plan. This shall include the measures detailed under
Page 32
Mitigation Measures Adopted as Part of the Project in Chapter 13 Air Quality of the submitted EIA report dated February 2022. All documentation be verified by a suitably qualified Environmental Consultant and submitted to the satisfaction of North Ayrshire Council as Planning Authority. Reason To ensure proper management of dust throughout the construction period. Condition 7. That further application(s) for approval under the terms of Condition 1 shall be accompanied by an assessment of the details in terms of the rated noise level, as defined in `BS4142:2014+A1:2019, from the operation of the facility. The assessment must demonstrate that the noise from the operation of the facility will not exceed the background noise level at the curtilage of any existing or consented noise sensitive property at the time of application. Reason To ensure proper consideration of potential noise from the development. Condition 8. That further application(s) for approval under the terms of Condition 1 shall be accompanied by a scheme to treat surface water arising from the or otherwise affecting the site, prepared in accordance with the principles and practices contained in 'The SuDS Manual' (CIRIA report C7453, published November 2015) and the requirements of The Water Environment (Controlled Activities) (Scotland) Regulations 2011, and certified by a suitably qualified person, shall be submitted to North Ayrshire Council, as Planning Authority, for written approval. Any scheme approved shall include details of proposed ground levels, finished floor levels, and pre & post development overland flows that shall demonstrate that people and property would not be put at flood risk during the designed storm event (1 in 200 return period plus an allowance for climate change and urban creep) when the capacity of the proposed infrastructure is exceeded. In accordance with the recommendations of the submitted FRA, finished floor levels shall be set a minimum of 6m AOD, threshold levels shall be raised a minimum of 150mm above external ground levels and all key external infrastructure shall be elevated by at least 150mm or protected by bunds Reason To ensure proper consideration of surface water drainage. Condition 9. That further application(s) for approval under the terms of Condition 1 shall be accompanied by a habitat survey dated not more than 1 year prior to the date of the submission of the application. Reason To ensure habitat and protected species considerations are of an appropriate date. Condition 10. Prior to commencement of the development of the tower, details of a financial bond to be secured with the landowner for the removal of the tower in the event of redundancy
Page 33
shall be submitted to North Ayrshire Council, as Planning Authority, for written approval. Any such bond shall be retained through the life of the development with confirmation to be provided to North Ayrshire Council, as Planning Authority, on a yearly basis following completion of the tower. Reason To ensure steps are in place to remove the tower should the site become redundant, in the interest of visual amenity, and in recognition of the landowner being ultimately responsible for compliance with any conditions. Condition 11. Should the tower become redundant, it shall be removed within 6 months of redundancy. For the avoidance of doubt, redundancy means the factory not becoming operational within 3 years of construction of the tower or the factory ceasing to operate for a period of more than 1 year after first becoming operational. Reason To ensure the timely removal of the tower should the site become redundant, in the interest of visual amenity. Condition 12. The prior to commencement of the development of the tower, details of the external finish shall be submitted to North Ayrshire Council, as Planning Authority, for written approval. The development will thereafter be undertaken in accordance with any details as may be approved and the tower maintained with those details unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority. Reason To ensure an appropriate external finish for the tower in the interest of visual amenity. Condition 13. The prior to the commencement of the development of the tower, a Dust Management Plan for the control of dust from the construction of the tower shall be submitted to North Ayrshire Council, as Planning Authority, for written approval. Thereafter the development shall be undertaken in accordance with any Plan as may be approved. Reason To ensure proper management of dust throughout the construction period. Condition 14. That prior to the commencement of the development of the tower, a Construction Management Plan and Code of Practice, including details for monitoring and action against non-compliance shall be submitted to North Ayrshire Council, as Planning Authority, for approval. Thereafter the construction shall be carried out only as approved by the Plan and Code of Practice. For the avoidance of doubt this shall include an assessment of use of the rail and port connections as a first principle and the prohibition of the use of the A78 through Fairlie, the B780/B781, the C26 and all local non-classified roads by construction vehicles and details of management of impact on the core path and cycle rout network. Reason
Page 34
To ensure proper management of the construction process, including impact on the road network Condition 15. That prior to the commencement of the development of the tower, details of an appointed Ecological Clerk of Works (ECoW) shall be submitted to North Ayrshire Council, as Planning Authority, for approval. The details shall include contact details, the scope and responsibilities of the ECoW as well as confirmation of their power to halt or otherwise stop works which are not in accordance with the mitigation measures identified in the EIA or others, as may be approved. The development will thereafter be undertaken only with the oversight of the appointed ECoW. Reason To ensure proper oversight of the construction of the tower. Condition 16. The rated noise level, as defined in `BS4142:2014+A1:2019, from the operation of the tower must not exceed the background noise level at the curtilage of any existing or consented noise sensitive property at the time of application. Reason To ensure the operation of the tower does not cause undue noise disturbance or sterilise the wider area for further development. Condition 17. The prior to the commencement of the development of the tower, that a scheme to treat surface water arising from the or otherwise affecting the site of the tower, prepared in accordance with the principles and practices contained in 'The SuDS Manual' (CIRIA report C7453, published November 2015) and the requirements of The Water Environment (Controlled Activities) (Scotland) Regulations 2011, and certified by a suitably qualified person, shall be submitted to North Ayrshire Council, as Planning Authority, for written approval. Thereafter, the certified scheme shall be implemented prior to the completion of the development of the tower and maintained thereafter to the satisfaction of North Ayrshire Council, as Planning Authority. Any scheme approved shall include details of proposed ground levels, finished floor levels, and pre & post development overland flows that shall demonstrate that people and property would not be put at flood risk during the designed storm event (1 in 200 return period plus an allowance for climate change and urban creep) when the capacity of the proposed infrastructure is exceeded. In accordance with the recommendations of the submitted FRA, finished floor levels shall be set a minimum of 6m AOD, threshold levels shall be raised a minimum of 150mm above external ground levels and all key external infrastructure shall be elevated by at least 150mm or protected by bunds Reason To ensure the proper treatment of surface water. Condition 18. Prior to the commencement of the tower, confirmation that the basement proposals are sufficiently flood resilient/resistant, including an accompanying certified flood management plan suitably addresses residual flood risk at the site from all sources of
Page 35
flooding, certified by a suitable qualified person, shall be submitted in writing for the written approval of North Ayrshire Council, as Planning Authority. Reason To ensure the risk of flooding to basement level proposal is suitable addressed. Condition 19. In the event that the works to commence the tower are not undertaken within 1 year of the date of this permission, an updated habitat survey dated not more than 1 year prior to the date of commencement shall be submitted to North Ayrshire Council, as Planning Authority, for written approval prior to the commencement. Reason To ensure habitat and protected species considerations are of an appropriate date. Condition 20. Prior to the commencement of the development, details of omni-directional red aviation warning lights to be fitted to the tower shall be submitted to North Ayrshire Council, as Planning Authority, for approval in consultation with Prestwick Airport, Air Traffic Control and the Ministry of Defence. The lighting will thereafter be fitted and retained thereafter in accordance with any details as may be approved. Reason To meet the requirements of the relevant Air Authorities. James Miller Chief Planning Officer For further information please contact Mr Iain Davies on 01294 324320.
Page 36
Appendix 1 – Location Plan DO NOT SCALE Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey mapping with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office © Crown Copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. North Ayrshire Council Licence Number 100023393.