C - 23-0622-EB - Houston Solar Farm
Renfrewshire Council · 26 August 2025
Back to Planning and Climate Change Policy Board — 26 August 2025 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Page 1
Planning and Climate Change Policy Board: 26 August 2025 Report by Chief Planning Officer Reference No 23/0622/EB Application Type Electricity Undertaking Determination Proposal Installation of a solar farm and battery energy storage system and associated infrastructure with a generating capacity of up to 100mw (Energy Consents Unit consultation request) Location Site Between Turningshaw Farm and Knowes Farm, Houston Road, Houston, Johnstone Ward 10 – Houston, Crosslee and Linwood Community Council Houston Community Council Applicant Energy Consents Unit (ECU) Scottish Government Recommendation No objection subject to the suggested planning conditions listed below and to the conclusion of a legal agreement to secure appropriate funding for the decommissioning of the development and the restoration of the site All plans, reports, documents, and representations relating to this application can be viewed in full online at https://www.energyconsents.scot/ApplicationDetails.aspx?cr=ECU00004825 The purpose of this report is to present for the consideration of the Planning and Climate Change Policy Board a formal consultation from the Energy Consents Unit (ECU) on an application made under Section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989 for a 100MW solar farm and battery energy storage system and associated infrastructure on land between Turningshaw Farm and Knowes Farm, Houston Road, Houston, Johnstone. The Section 36 application includes an application for deemed planning permission for the same development under Section 57(2) of The Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997. Scottish Ministers are responsible, under Section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989, for the authorisation of any new, or extensions to existing, electricity generation schemes with a generation capacity in excess of 50 Megawatts (MW). As the proposed solar farm and battery energy storage system would have a maximum installed capacity of 100MW, Renfrewshire Council has been formally consulted on the proposed development by the ECU in terms of Section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989. The Council is a formal consultee in this process and not the determining or consenting authority. Scottish Ministers are the determining authority. In procedural terms the Council, as Planning Authority, requires to provide a consultation response to the ECU that would then be taken into consideration as part of the overall consenting process. The consultation request from the ECU was received on 31st October 2023, with an initial response deadline of 29th February 2024. The deadline was subsequently extended to 29 March 2024, 28 May 2024, and 30 August 2024 due to several deficiencies within the submission which required to be addressed before the Council could consider finalising a consultation response. These deficiencies were identified following the Councils own consultation process which included an audit of the submission by Ironside Farrar Ltd (IFL) acting as the Council’s Independent Consultants.
Page 2
A report was presented to the Planning and Climate Change Policy Board at its meeting on 27 August 2024. The Board decided that consideration of the consultation request be continued subject to confirmation of a further extension of the deadline for responses. In the event that a further extension of the deadline was not granted by 30 August 2024, an objection to the consultation request would be submitted on behalf of the Council for the reasons outlined within the report and the information deficiencies within the submission. A further extension to this deadline was not granted, and an objection to the development was submitted to the ECU. The ECU thereafter advised that the applicants would be provided with an opportunity to address the deficiencies within the submission (and outstanding objections from NatureScot, Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB), Scottish Gas Networks (SGN) and Glasgow Airport), and a timeline on the applicants submitting the information required to address the deficiencies was imposed. The deficiencies previously identified are summarised as follows: ▪ No detailed information has been provided on the potential impact of the development, namely the access track, on the Linwood Moss Wood Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC). ▪ There is a lack of survey data within the ecological assessment, and no mention of the impact of panel glint and glare on breeding birds. ▪ There is no detailed assessment of the development in general against NPF4, namely policies 3 on biodiversity, 8 on green belts and 11 on energy. The submission requires updating to fully respond to the policies within NPF4. ▪ Further information is required on measures to limit impact on prime quality agricultural land and carbon rich soils in line with Council guidance and NPF4 policy requirements. ▪ The Transport Statement requires updating to take cognisance of walkers, cyclists, and equestrian use of the road network within the site, that North Mains Road is a publicly maintained road, crash data prior to the last three years, and traffic count data which is not representative. ▪ There is a holding objection from Glasgow Airport Safeguarding and on this basis, it has not been demonstrated that the development is compatible with the safe and efficient operation of Glasgow Airport. ▪ There is a holding objection from Scottish Gas Networks and on this basis, it has not been demonstrated that the development is compatible with the safe operation of the high-pressure gas pipeline network. It was noted within the report presented on 27 August 2024 that the proposed development is compliant with the development plan in principle, and also with policies 1, 2, 6, 7, 14 and 22 of NPF4 and ENV3, ENV4, and I3 of the LDP. However, the deficiencies within the submission mean that it is not possible to definitively determine whether the development complies with policies 3, 4, 5, 8, 11 and 13 of NPF4 and ENV1, ENV2, ENV6, I1 and I4 of the LDP. On the 29 January 2025 the applicants submitted a suite of updated documents which sought to address the deficiencies identified by the Council, and also the outstanding objections from other consultees. In response to the submission of updated documents a further round of consultation was undertaken. On this basis the foregoing report has been updated from that which was presented to the Planning and Climate Change Policy Board at its meeting on 27 August 2024 and now includes a summary of all consultation undertaken by the Council, and a response within the planning assessment to the deficiencies previously identified including those which have ben addressed and any matters which remain outstanding.
Page 3
In response to the ECU consultation the Council can either: ▪ Offer no objections to the Section 36 application as submitted; ▪ Offer no objections subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions and/or legal obligations it considered neccesary to make the development acceptable (it should be noted that responsibility for discharging conditions and/or the legal obligations would fall upon the Council), or; ▪ Object to the application, stating the grounds on which the objection is made. Members should note at this point that a decision to object to the application would trigger a public local enquiry in terms of Section 62 and schedule 8 of the Electricity Act 1989. While the consultation response would normally fall within the scheme of delegation to be determined by officers, the scheme of delegation allows for officers to refer applications to the Board. The application has been refered in this instance to allow the proposed development to be fully considered given the scale of the development and the potential environmental matters associated with solar farms and battery energy storage facilities. Proposal and Site Description The proposed development is for a solar farm and battery energy storage system and associated infrastructure with a generating capacity of up to 100MW. It comprises of solar PV panels with associated sub stations, cctv cameras and permitter post and wire fencing, the battery energy storage facility, and the associated internal service tracks. The application site boundary extends to approximately 129 hectares of land to the east of Houston which is bisected by the B790. Approximately three quarters of the solar panels will be positioned on land to the north of the B790 either side of Turningshaw Road. This area predominantly comprises of flat agricultural land with pockets of woodland to the west and east. Approximately one quarter of the solar panels will be positioned on land to the south of the B790 either side of Moss Road. This part of the development is also proposed to accommodate the battery storage area. Again, this area predominantly comprises of flat agricultural and grassland with pockets of woodland to the south. Pre-Application Consultation with Officers The Scottish Government strongly encourages constructive pre-application discussions between prospective applicants and the planning authority. Pre-application discussions seek to identify key planning considerations at an early stage and help inform what supporting information is required to support a subsequent application. Pre-application discussions have taken place, focusing on the following matters: ▪ The visual impact of the proposals, and the consenting process. Negotiated Improvements Following submission, the following changes have been negotiated between officers and the applicant: The suite of supporting information has primarily been updated to address the audit comments made by IFL as part of the Councils own consultation on the proposed development. This has resulted in changes to the proposed biodiversity enhancement plan including the type of grassland being proposed, adoption of a conservation grazing regime, and identification of an area for sacrificial crops. It is also noted that an enhanced landscaping and mitigation scheme has been sought by other consultees (namely Glasgow
Page 4
Airport), and this would be managed by the Council via the conditions recommended to the ECU as set out below. Site History (if applicable, site history will be listed here) None. Consultations undertaken by the Council ▪ Glasgow Airport Safeguarding – No objection subject to conditions relating to submission of a Bird Hazard Management Plan, details of soft and water landscaping works, and a mitigation scheme to prevent glint and glare from impacting Glasgow Airports air traffic control tower. ▪ Environment, Housing & Infrastructure (Env. Protection) – No objection subject to condition relating to noise from plant, machinery, and equipment. ▪ National Air Traffic Services (NATS) – No objection. ▪ Chief Executive's Service (Roads Development) – No objection subject to conditions relating to provision of sightlines during the construction phase, access to the substation at Moss Road/Auchans Road, and reinstatement of Moss Road/Auchans Road post construction. ▪ Scottish Power Networks (Transmission Sites) – No comments. ▪ Scottish Power Networks (Distribution Sites) – No objections. ▪ West of Scotland Archaeology Service (WoSAS) - No objection subject to condition relating to the implementation of a programme of archaeological works. ▪ Scottish Gas Networks (SGN) – No objection subject to condition. ▪ Ironside Farrar Ltd (IFL) (Council’s Independent Consultants) - IFL were initially asked to review and provide a stage 1 audit comment on the following aspects of the project. A summary of their considerations is set out below: Glint and Glare Study Ref: 11710A, October 2023, (Rev: 03) – IFL consider the applicant’s assessment of the potential glint and glare impact to be robust, and agree that if the landscape mitigation plan and recommendations set out within the assessment are followed, there will be sufficient screening between the proposed arrays and the affected ground- based receptors which are neighbouring residential properties and the local road network. It is advised that Glasgow Airport are consulted to confirm if the predicted glare toward the air traffic control tower can be accommodated. Glasgow Airport Safeguarding have been consulted on the application and as noted above have no objections subject to conditions Decommissioning, Restoration and Aftercare Plan – The documentation submitted in support of the application has been reviewed to determine the areas which are relevant to and may have implications for the decommissioning of the development. A list of matters to be considered within a decommissioning plan is provided for inclusion within an appropriately worded condition. Ecology Impact Assessment Report version 2 dated 29th June 2023 and Shadow Habitats Regulations Appraisal version 2 dated 29th June 2023 – IFL advise that the Ecological Impact Assessment is a competent Preliminary Ecological Appraisal however several matters require attention including lack of survey data, no mention of the impact of panel
Page 5
glint and glare on breeding birds, and no mention of NPF4 and particularly the policy 3 on biodiversity. The Habitat Regulations Assessment (HRA) report is well written and well evidenced but does not concur with advice given by NatureScot in their consultation response with regard to the assessment of the development within the context of the Black Cart SPA conservation objectives and does not use NatureScot’s HRA proforma. The report requires to be updated in this regard. Land Capability for Agriculture version 2 dated July 2023 - The submission requires updating to refer to relevant planning guidance, review of the carbon and peatland map 2016, further detail regarding potential impact on peat and the Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC) on the southern boundary which is crossed by a track, and further details on measures to limit impact on prime quality agricultural land and carbon rich soils in line with council guidance and NPF4 policy. Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment version 4 dated 3rd July 2023 – IFL advise that the conclusion of the LVIA is reasonable, in that higher/potentially significant effects would be relatively limited in extent and close to the site due to the low-lying topography and screening by surrounding woodland and hedges. IFL agree with the applicant’s conclusion that more distant views and effects would be very limited in extent and magnitude. The proposed landscape measures are appropriate but could be strengthened in places to reduce effects on the closest receptors. IFL then undertook a Stage 2 audit on the following updated documents. A summary of their considerations is set out below. Ecological Impact Assessment (ECIA) Report version 3 dated 4th December 2024 and Shadow Habitats Regulations Appraisal version 3 dated 4th December 2024 – IFL advise that the ECIA addresses some of the issues raised in the first audit however it remains incomplete as it omits relevant Scottish legal obligations and lacks a secure surveyed ecological baseline. Specific concerns relate to acknowledgment of local conservation sites, out of season habitat survey, lack of survey data on bats and the potential impact on foraging and commuting, and lack of survey date on breeding birds. The shadow HRA still does not address the likely significant effect of the development on the conservation objectives of the Black Cart SPA. The HRA should be presented in the format prescribed by NatureScot to reach a robust conclusion, and to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the conservation objectives will be met during construction, operation and decommissioning. Biodiversity Enhancement Report version 2 dated 3rd December 2024 – IFL advise that the report uses the English DEFRA metric to calculate the rate of enhancement, and that this system has not been adopted in Scotland. There are also key omissions such as assessing potential impacts and mitigation provision with regard to the SINC. Badger and Otter Survey dated 10th October 2024 – IFL advise that the survey would benefit from enhancements in relation to clarification of ecological expertise, acknowledgement of survey limitations and suggestions for further supplementary survey methods, camera monitoring, licensing requirements and a comprehensive species protection plan, and evaluation of proximity to otter resting sites and disturbance thresholds. Implementing these measures will strengthen the reports compliance with industry best practice. IFL then undertook a Stage 3 audit on the following updated documents. A summary of their considerations is set out below.
Page 6
Biodiversity Enhancement Report version 3 dated 26th May 2025 – Note that the DEFRA metric can be used following guidance from the Scottish Government however further survey work is still required on the SINC woodland (this has not been provided) and associated update to the Phase 1 mapping area. This must also include reference to connecting nature networks within and beyond the site. Ecology Impact Assessment Report version 4 dated 26th May 2025 – IFL advise that the updated document largely responds to the previous comments except on the matter of bats. Further in season foraging and commuting surveys are required. A refresh of the bat roost survey is also required as the current work has expired. Consultations undertaken by the ECU The ECU consulted widely on the Section 36 application and a list of those who have responded (and who have not also been consulted by the Council), along with a summary of their comments, as shown on the ECU website, are provided below. ▪ Houston Community Council - No objections to the principle of the application, subject to recommendations in relation to screening and biodiversity gain. The Community Council also advise that they welcome collaboration with the developers with respect to potential community benefits. ▪ Scottish Forestry – No objections. Recommend that commitment to design mitigation measures is formalised via condition. ▪ Transport Scotland – No objection. ▪ Historic Environment Scotland (HES) – No objection. ▪ Scottish Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA) – No objection. ▪ NatureScot – No objection subject to conditions relating to the timing of the works outwith the wintering period from October to April being imposed. ▪ Health and Safety Executive (HSE) – No comment. ▪ Scottish Water – No objections. ▪ Ministry of Defence (MoD) – No objection. ▪ Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) – No objection subject to condition relating to the submission of a Habitat Management Plan. Representations The consultation request was published on the Council’s weekly list of applications. Two letters of representation have been received. It is noted that they were received after the application was presented to the board in August 2024. The letters raise the following points: - Impact on ecology and protected species. - Economic impact, loss or property values, and viability of proposed tourist accommodation developments. - There are alternative sites that are preferable. - Proposal does not comply with green belt policies. - Impact on residential amenity.
Page 7
- Impact from construction traffic and activities. - Air and water pollution from construction activities and degradation of solar panels over time impacting human health. - Impact on quality of the soil and loss of fertile agricultural land. - Exposure to EMF and associated health risks. - Impact of glint and glare on roads and residential properties. - Visual impact and loss of view. - Fire risk. The ECU, as the determining authority, publicise the consent application, and representations can be submitted directly to them via their website. At the time of writing there are five letters of representation, four of which object to the development and one in support of the development. Policy Context As noted above the Council is a consultee in the consenting process and not the determining authority. To inform the Council’s consultation response an assessment against the Development Plan is required. In this instance the Development Plan consists of National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) and the Renfrewshire Local Development Plan (2021) (LDP). The following provisions of the Development Plan are considered relevant to this submission. National Planning Framework 4 ▪ Policy 1 – Tackling the climate and nature crisis ▪ Policy 2 - Climate mitigation and adaptation ▪ Policy 3 – Biodiversity ▪ Policy 4 - Natural places ▪ Policy 5 - Soils ▪ Policy 6 - Forestry, woodland and trees ▪ Policy 7 - Historic assets and places ▪ Policy 8 - Green belts ▪ Policy 11 - Energy ▪ Policy 13 - Sustainable transport ▪ Policy 14 - Design, quality, and place ▪ Policy 22 - Flood risk and water management ▪ Policy 23 – Health and safety principles Full details relating to the policies of the NPF4 can be found online. Renfrewshire Local Development Plan ▪ Policy ENV1 - Green Belt ▪ Policy ENV2 - Natural Heritage ▪ Policy ENV3 - Built and Cultural Heritage ▪ Policy ENV4 - The Water Environment ▪ Policy ENV6 - Soils ▪ Policy I1 - Connecting Places ▪ Policy I3 - Flooding and Drainage ▪ Policy I4 - Renewable and Low Carbon Energy Developments Full details relating to the policies of the LDP can be found online. New Development Supplementary Guidance
Page 8
Delivering the Environment Strategy – Green Belt Development Criteria, Natural Heritage, Built and Cultural heritage, The water Environment and Soils Delivering the Infrastructure Strategy – Connecting Places, Flooding and Drainage and Renewable and Low carbon Energy Developments Other relevant policies and guidance Planning Advice Note – Solar Farm developments in Renfrewshire Submitted Reports and Assessments The following reports and assessments were submitted in support of the application: ▪ Ecology Impact Assessment Report version 2 dated 29th June 2023 – Assessment considers the likely impact of the development on ecological receptors across the development site and in neighbouring areas. Ecological receptors identified include designated sites and habitats, badgers, water voles, bats, breeding birds and wintering geese. A number of measures have been incorporated into the design of the development to minimise impact on these receptors. This includes buffer zones around trees and water courses, raising deer fencing off the ground to permit movement of small animals, and no permanent lighting is proposed. ▪ Ecology Impact Assessment Report version 3 dated 4th December 2024 – Report has been updated to include results from additional field surveying undertaken in 2024 and includes additional mitigation measures for Whooper Swans and details of further consultation undertaken to inform the updated report. ▪ Ecology Impact Assessment Report version 4 dated 26th May 2025 – Report has been updated to include reference to updated biodiversity action plans for Renfrewshire and the Scottish Governments Scottish Biodiversity Strategy. These documents provide additional context however do not alter the conclusions within the report. Clarification on the timing for habitat surveys is also provided, noting that habitat surveys were undertaken in June which is in season. It is also noted that additional breeding bird surveys would be undertaken in May and June 2025. ▪ Flood Risk Assessment version 3 dated June 2023 – Report notes that development has been set out to avoid functional flood plains and medium to high risk areas. A buffer of between 5m and 10m has been used in the siting of the panels either side of any watercourse or drain. The proposals will not increase the rate of discharge from the current pre-development surface water run-off rates, and no formal drainage system will be installed. The development is at low risk of flooding and will not increase flood risk elsewhere. ▪ Addendum to Flood Risk Assessment – Addendum to the FRA is provided to take account of a clime change scenario in accordance with the principles of NPF4. ▪ Glint and Glare Assessment Issue 3 dated October 2023 – Assessment notes that solar reflections are possible on sections of Houston Road, Bridge of Weir Road and the B790. However existing vegetation and buildings will obstruct views from Houston Road and Bridge of Weir Road and no impact is predicted. Mitigation is recommended for a 200m section of the B790. For eight dwellings a low impact is predicted, and mitigation is not proposed. Screening is proposed for two dwellings as per the landscape mitigation
Page 9
plan. Glare towards the air traffic control tower at Glasgow Airport is possible but indicate that it could be accommodated. ▪ Glint and Glare Assessment Issue 5 dated December 2024 – updated to further analyse and examine the possible effects of glint and glare on road users including local roads in response to queries raised by the Roads Development Officer. ▪ Shadow Habitats Regulations Appraisal version 2 dated 29th June 2023 – The assessment concludes that there is no potential for adverse effects on site integrity for any European/Ramsar sites either alone or in combination with other plans and projects. The development can be undertaken in adherence with the requirements of the Habitat Regulations. ▪ Shadow Habitats Regulations Appraisal version 3 dated 4th December 2024 – Updated to provide information on the additional mitigation measures for whooper swans and details of further consultation undertaken to inform the updated report. ▪ Shadow Habitats Regulations Appraisal version 4 dated 26th May 2025 – The shadow HRA has been reformatted so that the information is presented in the format requested by IFL. ▪ Heritage Assessment version 2 dated June 2023 – The passement identifies one designated heritage asset in the site, the category B listed Fulwood Bridge. A listed building consent application will be submitted if the bridge is used as a cable crossing. Considered to be low potential for unrecorded archaeology to be present. Proposed that an archaeological programme of works targeting an area of higher ground with moderate potential for archaeological assets is undertaken. ▪ Land Capability for Agriculture Assessment dated July 2023 – The report notes that the majority of the site is assessed as class 3.2 or lower, which does not comprise prime land. Approx 2.4 hectares (8%) of the site is assessed as class 3.1 which is defined as prime land. Mitigation for the use of this land is that the land can continue to fulfil an agricultural purpose during the operation of the solar farm, there would be no permanent loss of the resource, and the land would be restored to agricultural use following completion of the solar farm operations. Development would not compromise the local supply of prime agricultural land in this regard. ▪ Land Capability for Agriculture Assessment dated September 2024 – Updated to address comments from ironside Farrar Ltd and to provide further information regarding potential impacts on prime quality agricultural land and measures to limit the potential impact. ▪ Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment version 4 dated 3rd July 2023 – The assessment notes that development will be perceived as a medium addition locally and will not be apparent or obvious at all within large parts of the wider context within this landscape character area. Landscaping is proposed on the western and north eastern field boundaries within the Houston North Parcel, and along Moss Road at the South Parcel. This will strengthen hedgerows and site boundaries. Predicted effects are limited in extent by the low-lying nature of the site, surrounding woodlands, hedgerows and other vegetation, and undulating topographical changes in the surrounding landscape. A total of 13 viewpoints have been assessed. Two viewpoints are predicted to have moderate to major effects however these will be mitigated by landscape planting. Landscape planting is also proposed to mitigate effects on residential properties.
Page 10
▪ Noise Impact Assessment version F01 dated 29th September 2023 – The assessment notes that noise monitoring was undertaken at two locations representative of noise sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the site. Predicted operational noise was compared with the measure of background noise, and the results show no noise impact is expected due to the operation of the proposed development. ▪ Planning Support Statement version 03 dated 2nd August 2023 – The statements notes that the development will generate approx. 75,000,000 kilowatt hours of electricity per annum. The development site is not within a sensitive location in respect of critical environmental designations. There are a limited number of sensitive receptors in the vicinity, none of whom will suffer significant adverse impacts. Overall, it is considered that the proposed development complies with the relevant policies of the statutory development plan and other material considerations. ▪ Planning Support Statement version 4 dated December 2024 – Updated to provide a full assessment of the development against the criteria listed in NPF4. Statement concludes that the development accords with NPF4 generally and Policy 11 in particular. ▪ Pre-application Consultation Report version 02 dated !3th June 2023 – The developer has undertaken a meaningful and effective voluntary period of pre-application consultation. This includes provision of a dedicated website, a letter drop to local residents within the immediate vicinity of the site, and a public consultation event. The applicant has also met with Houston Community Council. ▪ Transport Statement version F01 dated July 2023 – The assessment considers traffic generation associated with the most onerous week of the construction phase and concludes that the construction phase will not have a significant impact upon the surrounding highway network. The operational phase will have an insignificant impact upon the surrounding road network, with anticipated generation of 2-3 vehicle trips per week for general maintenance. ▪ Transport Statement Version 2 dated December 2024 – Updated to provide a response to the queries raised by the Roads Development Officer. Appendix B of the statement provides a direct response to the 31 points that were raised. ▪ Biodiversity Enhancement Plan version 2 dated December 2024 – Provided in accordance with the requirements of Policy 3(b) of NPF4. The plan outlines a net gain in biodiversity through on site grassland and woodland creation and proposed hedgerow creation. It is also noted that gaps within existing hedgerow will be filled, and that shade tolerant species of grassland will also likely grow beneath the solar panels. These are additional benefits which were not quantified within the assessment. It is the intention to graze sheep within the site when it is operational, and it is recommended that a conservation grazing plan is produced to outline the measures to maximise biodiversity value. ▪ Biodiversity Enhancement Report version 3 dated 26th May 2025 – Additional explanation provided to describe how the proposed planting will enhance biodiversity, and MG5-type grassland is proposed following recommendation from IFL, a conservation grazing regime will be adopted, and an area has been identified for sacrificial crop for wintering geese and swans details of which can be provided via a pre-commencement condition. ▪ Badger and Otter Survey Report version 1 dated November 2024 – The report details the results from additional field surveying undertaken in 2024. Concludes that badgers and otters are present in the wider area and are using the site and the survey area. The
Page 11
mitigations outlined in the Ecology Impact Assessment are considered appropriate for the construction and operation of the development. ▪ Bat Survey Data Suitability for Ecological Impact Assessment – This technical note was provided in response to comments from IFL on the potential impact of the development on bats, and to outline the survey work that has been undertaken at the site. Field surveys were undertaken in June 2023 focussing on identifying potential roost locations and describing suitable habitats for foraging and commuting bats. Impact on bat habitats was considered within the EcIA, and suitable buffer zones were incorporated into the development layout. It is acknowledged within the technical note that there is recent literature which outlines negative associations between solar panels and foraging and commuting bats. The updated EcIA reinforces the mitigations within the development layout with regard to separation distance between the solar panels and the exiting hedgerows and burns which could be used as foraging or commuting routes, and that the survey work undertaken and mitigations being proposed are in line with NatureScots current guidance. Scottish Ministers Direction Any Direction made by Scottish Ministers under Regulation 30 (Directions requiring consultation), Regulation 31 (Directions requiring information), Regulation 32 (Directions restricting the grant of planning permission) and Regulation 33 (Directions requiring consideration of condition) of The Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2013, or under Regulation 50 (that development is EIA development) of The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (Scotland) Regulations 2017 would be a matter for the ECU and Scottish Ministers to consider as the determining authority. None. Planning Assessment The application for the solar farm and battery energy storage system has been submitted to the ECU under Section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989. Unlike a planning application, there is no requirement that the application be determined in accordance with the development plan. Instead, the development plan is one of a number of material considerations which require to be taken into account by the ECU in their determination of the application. The Council is one of a number of consultees in this process. To inform the Council’s consultation response to the ECU, the development plan represents the appropriate document against which to base the Council’s assessment of the application. The development plan comprises of the National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) and the adopted Renfrewshire Local Development Plan 2022 (LDP). The application site is located within the green belt. Policies ENV1 of the LDP and 8 of NPF4 both consider renewable energy developments to be an acceptable form of development within the green belt in principle. The proposal must thereafter be assessed against the detailed development criteria set out within the green belt policies. This includes the green belt development criteria set out within the New Development Supplementary Guidance which will be assessed as follows. The New development Supplementary Guidance states that there will be no loss of prime quality land or agricultural land of lesser quality that is locally important. The supporting information indicates that part of the site would be classified as prime quality agricultural
Page 12
land. NPF4 defines prime quality agricultural land as that identified within Class 1, 2 or 3.1 of the Macaulay land capability classification. In this instance, the applicants Land Capability for Agricultural Report indicates that 8% of the solar farm layout will be on agricultural land falling within Class 3.1. Most of the solar farm layout (72%) will be on agricultural land falling within Class 3.2, with 14% on land within class 4.2, 4% on land within class 5.1, and 2% within Class 5.2. The LDP does not identify the site as being of cultural or local importance. The applicant has sought to justify development of the prime quality agricultural land on the basis that it can still fulfil an agricultural use while the solar farm is operating, the soils will remain in situ insofar as is possible, and as the solar farm is temporary there would be no permanent loss of the resource. Additionally, the land would be restored to the pre-working agricultural use following completion of the operation and associated decommissioning of the development. Policy 5 of NPF4 states that proposals on prime quality agricultural land will only be supported where it is for one of four specific uses. This includes essential infrastructure where there is a site specific locational need and no other suitable sites. Policy ENV6 of the LDP primarily relates to peat and carbon rich soils. However, the provisions of the new development Supplementary Guidance on prime quality agricultural land have been noted above. On balance it is noted while part of the solar farm is on land classified as prime agricultural it will not result in the permanent loss of this resource. The operational span of the solar farm will be restricted by condition at which point it will be decommissioned and the site restored. Financial provisions will be put in place to ensure the Council can access funds to undertake the decommissioning and restoration if neccesary, and ultimately the land will be restored back to its current condition. Additionally, the area of prime quality land impacted by the development is small in comparison to the site as a whole and some areas of prime quality land within the application site boundary have been avoided (there are 8.7 hectares of class 3.1 land within the red line however only 2.4 hectares will be covered by the solar farm layout). Additionally, it is noted that during the operation of the solar farm the land can also still fulfil an agricultural function. On balance therefore the development is considered to be in general accordance with the relevant policies on prime quality agricultural land. There is no impact on wild land. The Roads Development Officer initially issued a suite of comments with regard to both the submitted Transport Statement and the implementation of the development. The applicants provided a response to these comments and submitted an updated version of the Transport Statement accordingly. In response to the updated Transport Statement the Roads Development Officer has confirmed no objection to the development subject to conditions relating to provision of sightlines during the construction phase, access to the substation at Moss Road/Auchans Road, and reinstatement of Moss Road/Auchans Road post construction. These conditions can be recommended to the ECU. It is noted that no other off site works or potential enhancements have been identified for this application, with the focus for continuing it to date relating to addressing the deficiencies identified. It is not anticipated that the development would give rise to significant effects on public water supply or water courses from pollution risk. It is noted that SEPA, Scottish Water and Environmental Protection have not objected to the development on these grounds. A condition relating to the submission of a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) to mitigate risk during the construction phase can be recommended to the ECU. The application site includes two core paths, LIN/1 along Moss Road and BBH/1 at North Mains. A condition could be recommended to ensure these paths (and any other existing active travel routes) are kept open at all times through the construction and operation of the
Page 13
development, with any proposed closures requiring the prior written permission of the Council. With regard to impact on local landscape character, the supporting information includes 13 viewpoints from which the potential impact of the development has been assessed. The predicted effects at the majority of these viewpoints are limited in extent by the low-lying nature of the site, surrounding woodlands, hedgerows and other vegetation, and undulating topographical changes in the surrounding landscape. Of the two viewpoints whereby moderate to major effect is predicted, landscaping is proposed as mitigation. Landscaping is also proposed to mitigate potential impact on residential properties. The Council’s independent consultant has advised that the conclusions within the applicant’s supporting information are reasonable, in that higher/potentially significant effects would be relatively limited in extent and close to the site due to the low-lying topography and screening by surrounding woodland and hedges. More distant views and effects would be very limited in extent and magnitude. The proposed landscape measures are appropriate but could be strengthened in places to reduce effects on the closest receptors. An enhanced landscape strategy will be sought via a recommended condition to the ECU. The development has been designed to respect important landscape features such as woodlands, water courses and field boundaries. It is noted that some field boundaries will be reinforced as part of the landscape strategy. Where field boundaries require to be removed to accommodate sight lines at the access points, the landscape strategy would seek replanting of the hedgerow in an alignment that accommodates the sight lines. This requirement will form part of a Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP) which could be sought via a recommended condition. It is noted that Scottish Forestry have offered no objections to the development and have recommended a condition to ensure mitigations included within the proposed landscape design are delivered. This includes buffer zones between the development and adjacent woodland. In addition to the woodland adjoining the site, the panels have also been set back from all watercourses. The proposed deer stock boundary fencing is acceptable at this location. There is no security lighting proposed at present, with CCTV cameras utilising infra-red technology. Conditions could be recommended to ensure the final design and location of all boundary treatments and any lighting strategies for the site are agreed with the Council. In addition to the solar panels which are the primary infrastructure component, the development also includes invertor containers and battery storage infrastructure. While the invertor containers are dispersed throughout the layout, the battery element is concentrated in the southeast corner of the site to the south of the B790. It is noted that the battery storage area does not include any specific landscape screening. While wider external views of this area are mitigated by woodland, in the interest of visibility from Moss Road it is considered that this area would benefit from landscape screening. This requirement will be built into a landscaping condition. With regard to servicing, the connection between the development and the national grid is ultimately a matter for the applicant to agree with Scottish Power Energy Networks (SPEN). It is noted that SPEN have not objected to the development. NatureScot have offered no objections to the development with regard to its impact on nationally designated sites, namely the Black Cart Special Protection Area (SPA). This is subject to a condition relating to construction works taking place outwith the wintering period
Page 14
from October to April. If works have to be undertaken within the wintering period, no such work will take place when whooper swans are feeding within 200m of the development site boundary. The location of the swans must be confirmed by a suitably qualified ecological clerk of works. These conditions will protect the qualifying interest of the Black Cart SPA. It is noted that IFL have also advised the Council that the HRA report is acceptable. In addition to the above condition which will protect the whooper swans during any winter working, the proposal also now includes provision for an area of sacrificial crops which would provide a feeding resource for the Whooper Swans which overwinter at the Black Cart. Further detail on the implementation and management for the area of sacrificial crops can be requested via submission of an updated landscape strategy and accompanying Habitat Management Plan (HMP) and Biodiversity Enhancement Plan (BEP). It is noted that the RSPB have withdrawn their previous objection to the development on the basis that the HMP and associated sacrificial crops are planted on site. With regard to local designations, the site is bound by Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC) designations at Barochan Moss to the north and Linwood Moss Wood to the south. The development is set back from Barochan Moss, and significant impact on this SINC is not anticipated. While no component infrastructure is located within Linwood Moss Wood, the layout includes an access track which cuts through the SINC boundary. IFL have advised the Council that further information on the potential impact of the access track on the SINC is required in specific reference to the impact on biodiversity. IFL have advised that the BEP requires to be updated to ensure the impact on the SINC is quantified and included within the calculation on biodiversity gain. Further recommendations on enhancing nature connectivity and networks both within and outwith the site are also made. It is considered that an updated BEP can be requested via a suitably worded planning condition. The condition would also ensure that a timetable for the implementation of the biodiversity enhancements is provided along with a scheme of monitoring to ensure implementation and any interim arrangements where planting may have failed. With regard to ecology and protected species, the applicants have submitted an updated Ecological Impact Assessment (EcIA) in response to the comments raised by the Councils external consultants. IFL have advised that the latest version of the EcIA responds to all the comments that had previously been made with the exception of the potential impact of the development on bats. IFL have advised that in season foraging and commuting surveys are required, and that the bat roost surveys also require to be redone as they have expired. The EcIA and associated bat survey data technical note outline the survey work the applicant has undertaken to date, and the mitigations that have been put in place to protect existing commuting and foraging routes and trees or buildings with bat roost potential. The applicant asserts on this basis that further survey work is not required. On balance it is noted that the potential impact of the development on bats has been considered by the applicants, and that the layout has been configured to mitigate the impact of the development on foraging and commuting routes and bat roosts. However, notwithstanding this it is considered that further in season survey work as recommended by IFL would be beneficial to establish current bat activity at the site and to ensure the proposed mitigations are appropriate. It is noted that further survey work may not alter the mitigations currently being proposed however it would ensure the mitigations are best suited to the site and current bat activity. In addition to the above IFL have also advised that the bat roost survey is out of date. Additional comments have also been made with regard to the survey work on badgers,
Page 15
otters and breeding birds and recommendations have been made to strengthen the reports compliance with industry best practice. In view of the above it is considered that a condition should be recommended requiring the submission of an updated EcIA along with a species protection plan to ensure the potential impact of the development on protected species is mitigated. This is considered to be a proportionate position for the Council to adopt given our role as a statutory consultee and not the determining authority. While impacts on protected species should be fully understood before planning permission is granted, this would be a matter for the ECU to consider as they are the competent and determining authority and ultimately it would be a matter for the ECU to decide whether thresholds in terms of protected species survey and mitigation have been met. In view of the recommendations made by IFL the Council would strongly advise that the ECU address these matters before a determination is made. However, should the ECU decide to progress with the application prior to these matters being addressed, the Council would ask for the imposition of the conditions as listed below. With regard to biodiversity and habitats, the applicants state that the removal of intensive farming practices and reversion to grazing by livestock will result in ecological benefits at the site. This is in addition to the ecological enhancement measures set out within the EcIA which include the landscaping, grassland management, bat, and bird boxes. The developers have also now submitted a Biodiversity Enhancement Plan (BEP) which quantifies the biodiversity gain associated with the development. The BEP notes that the site is currently composed primarily of arable fields and improved grassland which provides little biodiversity benefit to most species. Proposed biodiversity enhancements include creation of species rich grassland under and between the solar panels, woodland creation and hedgerow enhancement, and an area for sacrificial crops. It is proposed that a conservation grazing regime is developed. Woodland planting will replace the woodland lost to accommodate the development. Overall, the BEP is anticipated to deliver an increase of 113.32 habitat units resulting in a net gain of 49.27%, and 4.49 hedgerow units resulting in a net gain of 32.16%. IFL have reviewed the BEP and note that the matrix used to calculate biodiversity gain is acceptable. However, there are key omissions within the plan with respect to the impact of the development on the SINC designations at Barochan Moss to the north and Linwood Moss Wood to the south. Additionally, the plan should also consider nature networks and nature connectivity within and beyond the site. On balance it is considered that the BEP proposes sufficient measures to ensure biodiversity gain is delivered at the site in accordance with NPF4 policy 3. However, it is considered that the comments from IFL still require to be addressed to ensure the biodiversity gain is accurately quantified and maximised with regard to potential impact on the SINC, and that nature connectivity within and out with the site is considered. An updated BEP can be submitted via condition, and a suitably worded condition is recommended in this regard. It is noted that only a small area of the development comprising of an access track is located within the Linwood Moss Wood SINC. No part of the development is located within the Barochan Moss SINC. It is not considered that the impact of the access rack will be significant, and it is proportionate for a detailed design and alignment to be submitted via an updated BEP to ensure that any impact on the SINC is accurately quantified and mitigated with regard to delivery of biodiversity gain across the site as whole. Additionally, and as noted above the updated BEP should also consider delivering enhancements to areas within and outwith the site (including the SINCs) even if they will not be directly impacted by the development.
Page 16
The development does not include the conversion of any buildings. The criteria set out within Policy 8 of NPF4 that have not already been addressed above can be considered as follows. The scale and nature of the development necessitates a green belt location. The applicant has advised that the site selection is based on several criteria including predicted solar resource, landscape constraints, proximity of dwellings, nature conservation and environmental constraints, access and availability of land. While alternative sites were considered, these were discounted due to grid connection issues, lack of land, unsuitable topography, and incompatible planning policies and ecological designations. The purpose of the green belt and its long-term environmental quality would not be undermined. The operational lifespan of the project is 40 years, at which point it would be decommissioned and the land returned to its current use. Conditions could be recommended to safeguard this. Landscape character and visual impact has been assessed above. Policies I4 of the LDP and 11 of NPF4 seek to support development proposals for renewable and low carbon energy developments in principle. This includes energy storage. Policy I4 includes several detailed assessment criteria which will be considered in turn as follows. The potential impact of the development with respect to local environment, landscape character and the natural environment has been discussed above. It is noted that Historic Environment Scotland have not objected to the development with regard to its potential impact on above ground built heritage assets. The West of Scotland Archaeology Service have recommended a condition with respect to the implementation of a programme of archaeological works. Potential impact on the water environment can be mitigated through the incorporation of a strategy to manage surface water and pollution control. A condition can be recommended with respect to the sustainable drainage of surface water. With regard to the amenity of neighbouring residential properties, the principal matters identified in the applicant’s submission relate to visual impact and glint and glare. With regard to visual impact, moderate to major effects are anticipated at two semi detached cottages at North Mains and a two storey farmhouse on Turningshaw Road. However proposed mitigation in the form of landscape planting will ensure these impacts are not significant. The Council’s independent consultant has advised that the proposed landscape measures could be strengthened to reduce the impact on these closest receptors. An enhanced landscape strategy could be sought via a recommended condition. This could also include the application of privacy netting to the boundary fencing to provide immediate screening while the landscaping matures. The species and density of planting would also require to be clarified. The glint and glare assessment indicates that views of the reflecting panels are possible towards ten of the eighty-two dwellings assessed. For eight of these a low impact is predicted. For the remaining two the impact will be mitigated by the proposed landscaping scheme.
Page 17
The Council’s independent consultants conclude that the applicant’s assessment of glint and glare is robust, and the conclusions appear reasonable if applied conservatively. It is noted above that an enhanced landscape strategy and the application of privacy netting could be sought via condition to further mitigate glint and glare impact. The solar panels would also be required to incorporate an anti-reflective coating. Environmental Protection have recommended a condition to limit noise from plant and machinery. There are no concerns raised from any consultees regarding air quality or pollution control. Shadow flicker is not relevant to the proposed development. There is no lighting scheme proposed as part of the development. CCTV cameras will use infra-red technology. The development will not have a detrimental impact on outdoor sport or recreation interest. The Roads Development Officer has offered no objections to the development with regard to potential glint and glare impact on the local road network. The landscape strategy will mitigate this issue, and privacy netting can be employed where required to ensure screening is immediate. Transport Scotland have offered no objection to the development with regard to potential impact on the trunk road network. Glasgow Airport Safeguarding have confirmed that they have no objection to the development subject to the imposition of conditions relating to bird hazard management, landscaping, and glint and glare mitigation. The site is not within a potential heat network opportunity area. With regard to the relevant criteria within the New Development Supplementary Guidance on renewable and low carbon energy developments (not already discussed above), conditions will be recommended to ensure arrangements are in place to restore the site to an acceptable standard after the operation of the solar farm and battery storage development has ceased. This would include removal of all above and below ground elements. A decommissioning and restoration strategy, and also a bond or other financial guarantee to ensure funds are set aside for decommissioning and that the Council can call upon these funds to undertake the work if neccesary, would be negotiated via planning conditions. The advice from the Council’s independent consultant is noted with regard to the key considerations associated with the decommissioning and restoration of the development. These considerations could be included within the recommended conditions. The development will contribute to renewable energy generation and carbon emission reduction targets. The solar farm element would have the capacity to generate up to approx. 75MW of renewable energy per annum. The battery storage element would have the capacity to provide approx. 25 MW of generating capacity through storage of excess energy. The applicant states that the development as a whole would make a “significant contribution to the delivery of Scotland’s ambitious renewable energy targets and assist in enhancing the efficiency and security of energy supply”. Policy 11 of NPF4 sets out various criteria to be assessed when considering energy developments. In terms of maximising net economic benefit, in addition to the renewable energy generation noted above the applicants planning statement advises that the development will also result in the creation of 10 full time equivalent jobs during the operational period and approx. 200 full time equivalent jobs during the construction phase.
Page 18
The consultation provided by Houston Community Council refers to a community benefit package. This would ultimately be a matter for the community council to negotiate with the developer, and is not a material consideration within the planning process. There will be no significant impact on international or national designations subject to imposition of the recommended conditions. Impact on communities and residential dwellings with regard to amenity have been addressed above. Impact on landscape has been addressed above. It is noted that policy 11 recognises that such impacts are to be expected for some forms of renewable energy. Where impacts are localised and/or appropriate design mitigations have been applied, they will generally be considered to be acceptable. Public access has been addressed above, as have impact on aviation and the local and trunk road network. It is not anticipated that the development would have a detrimental impact on telecommunications or broadcasting installations. It is noted that the MOD have not objected to the development. Impact on the historic environment has been addressed above. It is noted that SEPA have not objected to the development with regard to flood risk, hydrology and the water environment. Impact on trees, woodland and forestry has been assessed above. The applicant advises that the proposed development will have no impact on the existing woodland resource, and is accompanied by a comprehensive package of landscaping proposals which will deliver biodiversity enhancement at the site. It is noted that this can be managed via conditions relating to biodiversity enhancement and landscaping. Proposals for decommissioning including the availability of finances have been discussed above. Finally with regard to cumulative impact, it is noted that two solar developments have been granted on land approximately 2km to the east of the proposed development. These are applications 22/0746/PP at Glasgow Airport and 23/0431/PP between Greenock Road and Houston Road. It should also be noted that a solar farm at the Scottish water site on Middleton Road has also been approved (application ref: 24/0248/PP), and a further solar farm development at Middleton Road is under consideration (application ref: 25/0232/PP) both of which are approximately 1.3km to the south. Finally, a solar farm at Bridge of Weir Leather works approximately 3.5km to the south west has also been approved (application ref: 24/0139/PP). However given the separation distance and intervening land form and land uses (including woodland, the M8 motorway, railway line and urban areas), the cumulative impact of these development is not considered to be significant. The development is considered to comply with policies 1 and 2 of NPF4 relating to climate mitigation and tackling the climate crisis. The development will generate both renewable energy, and also store excess energy during times of surplus generation. The development will contribute to the decarbonisation of the electricity grid, and the transition towards greater electricity generation from renewable sources.
Page 19
The visual impact of the development will be mitigated by the landscape strategy in line with the above assessment. This will reduce the impact of the development on the character of the place with respect to the requirements of Policy 14 of NPF4. With regard to Policy 23 of NPF4, it is noted that Scottish Gas Networks (SGN) have not objected to the development subject to the imposition of a condition relating to the submission of a phase to earth study to determine any potential interference on the SGN pipeline network. Regarding the considerations set out within the solar farms guidance note which have not already been discussed above, a post construction road survey can be requested via condition. Additionally, it is not anticipated that significant site levelling works would be required. The solar panels are mounted on frames which are either pushed into the ground or mounted on shallow concrete shoes. Localised site levelling may be required to accommodate some of the component infrastructure, and details of existing and proposed ground levels can be requested as part of the landscape strategy. Representations The points raised in the representations made directly to the Council relating to ecology and protected species, green belt policies, residential amenity, construction traffic and activities, pollution risk, glint and glare, loss of agricultural land and visual impact have been discussed in the foregoing assessment. Matters relating to loss of property value, EMF and other health risks, and fire risk are not considered to be material planning considerations. It is noted that the ECU as determining authority would be required to formally address the representations submitted directly to them. Section 75 Obligations The Council is required to provide a summary of the terms of any planning obligation which is required to be entered into under Section 75 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act in relation to the grant of permission for the proposed development: A legal agreement to secure decommissioning and restoration of the site would be required. Conclusion The approach to the assessment and recommendations within this report reflect the fact that the Council is a consultee under the Electricity Act 1989 and that the ECU are the determining authority. In conclusion, the information submitted in support of the application has been updated in response to the matters raised during the Councils own consultation on the development. The deficiencies identified in the report which was presented to the Planning and Climate Change Policy Board at its meeting on 27 August 2024 have been addressed as follows. No detailed information has been provided on the potential impact of the development, namely the access track, on the Linwood Moss Wood SINC. Matters relating to the potential impact of the development on the SINC have been discussed above, and a condition is recommended which would require an updated EcIA and BEP to be provided to ensure any potential impact on the SINC is mitigated.
Page 20
There is a lack of survey data within the ecological assessment, and no mention of the impact of panel glint and glare on breeding birds. Matters relating to survey data have been discussed above, and a condition is recommended which would require an updated EcIA and associated species protection plan to be provided. Regarding the impact of panel glint and glare on birds, the applicants acknowledged that this has not been assessed on the basis that NatureScot guidance for solar developments states that the main impacts are through habitat loss, displacement and disturbance. NatureScot advise that collision risk for solar PV panels is low and have advised that no collision risk assessment is neccesary. It is noted that both NatureScot and the RSPB have not objected to the development. There is no detailed assessment of the development in general against NPF4, namely policies 3 on biodiversity, 8 on green belts and 11 on energy. The submission requires updating to fully respond to the policies within NPF4. An updated Planning Statement has been provided which includes a detailed assessment of the development against NPF4. Further information is required on measures to limit impact on prime quality agricultural land and carbon rich soils in line with Council guidance and NPF4 policy requirements. An updated Land Capability for Agricultural Report has been provided. The Transport Statement requires updating to take cognisance of walkers, cyclists, and equestrian use of the road network within the site, that North Mains Road is a publicly maintained road, crash data prior to the last three years, and traffic count data which is not representative. An updated Transport Statement has been provided, and the Chief Executive's Service (Roads Development) have offered no objections to the development subject to conditions. There is a holding objection from Glasgow Airport Safeguarding and on this basis, it has not been demonstrated that the development is compatible with the safe and efficient operation of Glasgow Airport. This holding objection has now been removed. There is a holding objection from Scottish Gas Networks and on this basis, it has not been demonstrated that the development is compatible with the safe operation of the high- pressure gas pipeline network. This holding objection has now been removed. All other consultation responses noted to date indicate that the proposed development would be acceptable. It is acknowledged that the Councils external consultants have identified two remaining matters that require further consideration namely survey data within the EcIA and the scope of the BEP. It is not considered that these matters being unresolved at this time would preclude the Council from issuing a consultation response. However it is noted above that while the Council would advise the ECU to resolve these matters prior to issuing a decision on the consent ultimately it is a matter for them to decide as the competent and consenting
Page 21
authority. If the ECU decide to favourably determine the application with these matters outstanding, then the Council would insist that the conditions listed below are applied to the decision to allow the matters to be addressed at a later date. It should be noted that a further extension of time for the Council to issue a consultation response has not been agreed with the ECU at this time. It is therefore recommended that the Council raises no objections to the development subject to the suggested planning conditions listed below and to the conclusion of a legal agreement to secure appropriate funding for the decommissioning of the development and the restoration of the site. Recommendation No objection subject to the conditions listed below being applied to any decision should the ECU be minded to approve the S36 application. If these conditions were not to be applied and/or applied in an alternative wording then the Council reserve the right to make further comments. Reason(s) for Recommendation 1. The proposed development is compliant with the development plan subject to planning conditions and a legal agreement to secure appropriate funding for the decommissioning of the development and the restoration of the site. All other consultation responses noted to date indicate that the proposed development would be acceptable. Condition(s) 1. The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of three years from the date of its grant. Reason: This condition is for the purpose of the good planning of the area, to ensure that the permission will lapse if it is not implemented within three years. 2. The development is hereby approved for a temporary period of 40 years from the date of final commissioning of the development. Written confirmation of the date of first commissioning shall be provided to the Planning Authority no later than one calendar month after that date. Reason: In order to retain effective planning control. 3. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, an outline decommissioning, site restoration and aftercare strategy shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. The strategy shall, without limitation, detail proposals for: (a) The removal of all above and below ground elements of the development; (b) The treatment of all ground surfaces, including any sub surface areas, hard standing and access tracks which would restore the site to its former condition or other such condition as agreed by the Council as Planning Authority; (c) The phasing and timing of the works, including any environmental management provisions; (d) Details relating to how and when the strategy will be reviewed.
Page 22
Reason: To ensure the decommissioning and removal of the development is in an appropriate and environmentally acceptable manner and the restoration and aftercare of the site, in the interests of safety, amenity and environmental protection. 4. No later than 3 years prior to decommissioning of the development or the expiration of this consent (whichever is the earlier) a detailed decommissioning, restoration, and aftercare plan, based upon the principles of the approved outline decommissioning, restoration, and aftercare strategy, shall be submitted to the Planning Authority for written approval. The detailed decommissioning, restoration and aftercare plan shall include (but not be limited to the) provisions in respect of the following matters: - Removal of any in-situ foundations including removal to a depth of at least 1m underground - Removal of above ground infrastructure extending to Substations, PV panels and mountings, inverters/ inverter containers, fencing, lighting masts, internal tracks, equipment and hard standings and battery storage containers - Cable removal - Provision of a Decommissioning Environmental Management Plan (DEMP) to be based on relevant elements of the Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) - A Traffic Management Plan (TMP) related to activities for decommissioning, demolition, and removal of infrastructure - Locations of temporary stockpiles for decommissioned materials and equipment - Treatment of disturbed ground surfaces resulting from decommissioning of infrastructure including cable removal and any sub-surface elements to restore the land to its pre-construction status or such condition as agreed in writing with the LPA - Restoration proposals including ecological and biodiversity enhancement works such as (but not limited to) provision of bird boxes, insect refuge and use of native seed mixes to deliver biodiversity gains and measures to safeguard all landscaping on the site which for the avoidance of doubt shall be retained. - An aftercare plan to monitor success of restoration measures with scope for interventions if required - A Decommissioning Timetable Thereafter the detailed decommissioning, site restoration and aftercare plan shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved plan, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure the decommissioning and removal of the development in an appropriate and environmentally acceptable manner and the restoration and aftercare of the site, in the interests of safety, amenity and environmental protection. 5. That prior to the commencement of development on site, a financial guarantee to cover the costs of decommissioning, site restoration and aftercare, as required by conditions 3 and 4 of this consent, shall be submitted for the written approval of the Planning Authority. The acceptability of such financial guarantee shall be at the sole discretion of the Planning Authority. The financial guarantee must: A) be granted in favour of the Planning Authority and shall be maintained in favour of the Planning Authority throughout the duration of this consent and until the completion of all decommissioning, site restoration and aftercare obligations as required by conditions 3 and 4 of this consent.
Page 23
B) must be provided by an independent financial body with at least an A - rating who will be capable of fulfilling the obligations set out within the financial guarantee. C) be for an amount which covers the value of all decommissioning, site restoration and aftercare liabilities, such amount to be determined by the Planning Authority prior to energisation of the development. D) be subject to a review every five years from the date of this consent, or other such intervals as agreed by the Planning Authority. Each review shall be undertaken by a suitably qualified independent professional who has relevant experience in such matters, the identity of whom has been agreed in writing by the Planning Authority prior to the review of the financial guarantee commencing. The review of the financial guarantee shall be submitted no later than three months prior to the expiry of the existing financial guarantee, for the written approval of the Planning Authority. Thereafter and at least 28 days prior to the expiry of the existing financial guarantee, the replacement financial guarantee in favour of and in terms acceptable to the Planning Authority and for the value advised by the review noted above, shall be submitted for the written approval of the Planning Authority. E) come into effect on or before the energisation date, and expire no earlier than 24 months after the end of the aftercare period. The development shall not be energised until both: - written approval of the Planning Authority has been given to the terms of such financial guarantee and; - the validly executed guarantee has been delivered to the Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of amenity and in order to retain effective planning control 6. In the event that the financial guarantee becomes invalid, has expired, or is terminated for any reason following the commencement of operations at the site, all operations at the site shall cease no later than three months from the date the financial guarantee became invalid, expired or terminated. If a replacement financial guarantee, which meets the requirements of condition 5, is approved by the Planning authority and duly executed before the end of the three-month period, the operations may continue. If the operations have ceased due to this clause, they may recommence only upon the approval and execution of a replacement financial guarantee. Reason: In the interests of amenity and in order to retain effective planning control. 7. That no development shall take place within the development site until the developer has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological works in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted by the applicant, agreed by the West of Scotland Archaeology Service, and approved by the Planning Authority. Thereafter the developer shall ensure that the programme of archaeological works is fully implemented and that all recording and recovery of archaeological resources within the development site is undertaken to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority in agreement with the West of Scotland Archaeology Service. Reason: To ensure suitable investigations are undertaken in the interests of safeguarding archaeological heritage.
Page 24
8. That prior to the commencement of development on site, the developer shall submit a Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP) for the written approval of the Planning Authority. The CTMP shall include (but not be limited to) details in respect of; ▪ Details of the design, layout, geometry and surface finish of all the site access points including geometry for the construction and post construction phase of the development. ▪ Provision of sightlines at the access points. ▪ The additional signage on both public roads where access will be taken to inform drivers of the construction vehicles. ▪ Details of proposed temporary site compound for storage of materials, machinery, and designated car parking. ▪ A timetable for the construction phase including confirmation of site operating times on each day of the week. • Confirmation of the construction traffic route. • Confirmation of the construction and post construction arrangements for access to the substation at Moss Road/Auchans Road. • Confirmation of the arrangements for the reinstatement of Moss Road/Auchans Road post construction. The details set out within the approved CTMP shall thereafter be implemented on site during the construction phase. Reason: To ensure traffic impacts are mitigated during the construction phase, and that the construction phase is undertaken safely. 9. That prior to the commencement of construction works on site, the developer shall submit for the written approval of the Planning Authority a specification detailing the pre and post construction road condition survey to be undertaken on the local road network identified as part of the construction traffic route set out in the CTMP approved under condition 8. The specification shall detail the survey scope and methodology, the timings of the survey, provision for selection of an alternative construction traffic route and notification to the Council of an alternative construction traffic route, provision for survey of the alternative construction traffic route, the methodology for identifying any extraordinary damage to the road (damage to the construction traffic route attributable to construction vehicles serving the development between the pre and post construction condition surveys but excluding fair wear and tear attributable to general vehicle use of the route over the same period) and the means by which any extraordinary damage will be repaired including timescales for completion of the works.
Page 25
The pre and post construction road condition survey shall thereafter be undertaken in accordance with the approved specification, and all extraordinary damage repaired to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure any damage to the local road network arising from the construction of the development is repaired. 10. That prior to the commencement of development on site, full details of all landscaping works shall be submitted as part of a landscape strategy for the written approval of the Planning Authority in consultation with Glasgow Airport. The landscape strategy shall include (but not be limited to) provisions in respect of: ▪ all existing trees, hedgerows, and boundary treatments both within and on the edge of the site to be retained including the management of these features and protection measures to be implemented during the construction phase (particularly in relation to a protection zone for all new and existing planting to the north east and north west of the site), ▪ confirmation of any hedgerows or trees that need to be removed including any to form the visibility splays associated with the access sightlines, ▪ all proposed trees, shrubs, hedgerows, areas of grass/wildflower seeding, turfing including size, species, number, spacing and location noting that all planting shall be a maximum of 2m centres. ▪ all areas of hard standing including location and materials (including the initial 5m of any access track taken from the public road which shall be finished in a bituminous material), ▪ all areas of surface water including ponds, and measures for the sustainable management and drainage of surface water where applicable, ▪ the implementation of all biodiversity and habitat enhancements including (but not limited to) those set out within section 4.6 of the Ecology Impact Assessment Report version 3 dated 4th December 2024. ▪ details of all earthworks including existing and proposed ground levels and all associated platforms and retaining walls. ▪ a Conservation Grazing Plan to ensure the existing and proposed areas of grassland are grazed in a manner which supports and promotes biodiversity. ▪ details of an area for provision of sacrificial crops including the exact crop type and a management plan for this area. ▪ a timetable for the implementation of the landscape strategy, ▪ a strategy for the future management and maintenance of all landscaped areas including provision for replacement of trees, shrubs, hedgerows and areas of grass/wildflower seeding and turfing if they were to become diseased, die, become seriously damaged or are removed within 5 years of being planted.
Page 26
The approved landscape strategy shall thereafter be implemented on site in accordance with the approved timetable and shall be managed and maintained thereafter for the duration that the solar park is operational. No subsequent alterations to the approved landscaping scheme are to take place unless submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority in consultation with Glasgow Airport. The scheme shall be implemented as approved. Reason: To ensure a robust landscaping strategy is implemented in the interests of visual amenity, landscape character and biodiversity. 11. That prior to the commencement of development on site, the developer shall submit for the written approval of the Planning Authority a detailed drainage strategy for the site. The strategy shall set out the SUDS measures to be implemented at the site to ensure that surface water is managed sustainably and shall include a maintenance plan for all SUDS features. The drainage strategy as approved in writing by the Planning Authority shall thereafter be implemented on site and maintained thereafter for the life of the development. Reason: To ensure effective drainage infrastructure is installed on site and maintained appropriately in the interests of effective surface water management. 12. That prior to the installation of any lighting and associated columns at the site, the developer shall first provide for the written approval of the Planning Authority a specification detailing the final design and location of the lighting and the associated columns. The lighting shall be located and designed to avoid any statutory nuisance to residential properties, and shall be developed in accordance with the Bat Conservation Trust’s Guidance Note 08/23 Bats and Artificial Lighting at Night. Only the lighting and associated columns within the approved specification shall thereafter be implemented on site. Reason: To ensure any proposed security lighting is suitably designed and located in the interests of visual and residential amenity. Landscaping including Biodiversity alignment with recommendations within ecology report and maintenance programme. 13. That prior to the commencement of any works on site, a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. The CEMP shall include (but not be limited to) provisions in respect of: o Project Title Page – Defines the project and applicant details o Distribution List – Includes external recipients chiefly LPA and internal distribution such as contractors; to ensure familiarity with the consented requirements o Introduction – Project overview, site description, scope of proposed works, programme of works, details of any previous environmental assessments o Roles and Responsibilities – Organisational Chart of project personnel and key contacts plus training and competencies and communication procedures
Page 27
o Environmental Management Policy Statement – To include any accreditations or EM Systems followed o Regulations and Requirements – Legislation, Regulations and Technical Guidance applicable to the nature and scope of the development o Identification of Environmental Assets and Impacts: o Emissions to air – dust, noise, vibration, traffic/ vehicle movements on site and to/ from site o Land and Water (extends to surface and ground water) – discharges from construction activities, i.e. pollution, substance contamination, damage, waste management o Archaeology and heritage features o Ecological features including habitats and species o Environmental Mitigation Measures and control plans with regard to identified environmental assets and the potential impacts arising from construction; to take cognisance of relevant Legislation and Regulations and follow appropriate Technical Guidance/ best practice o Inclusion of an Emergency/ Incident Response Plan o Monitoring and Auditing – Procedures for audits (internal and external), monitoring and inspections, environmental performance monitoring e.g. KPIs, monitoring/ inspection reporting o The measures set out within the approved CEMP shall thereafter be implemented on site during the construction phase. Reason: To ensure environmental impacts are mitigated during the construction phase, and that the construction phase is undertaken safely. 14. The design, installation and operation of any plant, machinery or equipment shall be such that noise associated with the development does not exceed Noise Rating Curve NR25 between the hours of 2300 to 0700 hours and NR 35 at all other times, when measured within any dwelling in the vicinity of the development. Structure borne vibration from the proposed development shall be imperceptible within any dwelling in the vicinity of the development. For an explanation of noise rating curves, refer to BS 8233:2014 Sound insulation and noise reduction in buildings- code of practice, Annex B Reason: To mitigate potential noise impact on sensitive receptors within the vicinity of the site boundary. 15. That prior to the commencement of development on site, the developer shall submit a specification for the written approval of the Planning Authority which details the final design and finishing colour of all above ground elements of the development including (but not limited to) buildings, containers, plant, batteries and other component infrastructure, and all boundary fencing and gates to be developed at the site. The
Page 28
development shall thereafter be undertaken in accordance with the details within the approved specification. Reason: To ensure the colour of all built elements within the site is reflective of the landscape setting in the interests of visual amenity. 16. That prior to the commencement of development on site, the developer shall submit for the written approval of the Planning Authority a further revised version of the Ecological Impact Assessment Report ref 794-NI-P7E-NI2575 which includes in season foraging and commuting surveys for bats, and a refreshed bat roost survey, breeding bird survey, otter and badger survey including appropriate recommendations (including any changes to the development layout) to ensure any impact of the development on these protected species is mitigated. This shall include a Species Protection Plan completed in accordance with NatureScot guidance. All mitigations and recommendations identified within the approved Ecological Impact Assessment and Species protection Plan shall thereafter be implemented during the design, construction and operation of the development as required. Reason: In the interests of safeguarding protected species. 17. That prior to the installation of any fencing, walls, gates or other forms of enclosure at the site, the developer shall first submit for the written approval of the Planning Authority and plan and specification showing the location and final design of the fencing, walls, gates or other forms of enclosure to be installed. This shall include provision for an enhanced boundary treatment, such as green privacy netting, along key boundaries to ensure the development is screened from the local road network and neighbouring properties. Only the approved fencing, walls, gates or other forms of enclosure within the plan and specification shall thereafter be installed at the site. Reason: To control the final location and design of all fencing, walls, gates or other forms of enclosure in the interests of visual amenity. 18. Energisation of the development shall not occur until the applicant has provided assessment of the following to the Local Planning Authority. - The risk of any AC and DC interference from the proposed development on Scottish Gas Networks pipeline G04. - A phase-to-earth study to determine any interference levels from the electrical infrastructure from the proposed development on the Scotland Gas Networks pipeline G04. A written strategy for the mitigation of the impacts identified by the assessment shall also be provided and agreed in writing with Scotland Gas Networks and the Local Planning Authority. The mitigation measures identified and agreed shall be implemented in full prior to Energisation of the approved development. Reason: To protect the adjacent pipeline in the interests of health and safety. 19. That prior to the commencement of any works on site, the developer shall first submit for the written approval of the Planning Authority a strategy and associated measures to ensure that core paths LIN/1 and BBH/1 remain open and useable during both the construction and operational phase of the development. The strategy shall thereafter be
Page 29
implemented on site during the construction and operational phases of the development, and retained thereafter for the life of the development. Reason: To ensure access to the core path network is retained. 20. That prior to the installation of any solar panels, the developer shall first provide confirmation for the written approval of the Planning Authority of the make, modal, design, and power rating of the solar panels to be used, the incorporation of an anti- reflective coating on the surface of the panels, and evidence to confirm the overall maximum generation capacity (output) of the development. Only the approved solar panels shall thereafter be used in the development of the site. Any changes to the approved design or layout of the development shall require the prior written approval of the Planning Authority. Reason: To define the consent. 21. Development shall not commence until a Bird Hazard Management Plan has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority in consultation with Glasgow Airport. The submitted plan shall include details of: - Management of the ground mounted solar panels which may be attractive to nesting, roosting and loafing birds. The management plan shall comply with Aerodrome Safeguarding Advice Note 3 – Wildlife Hazards Around Airports (available from https://www.caa.co.uk/combined-aerodrome-safeguarding-team-cast/cast- publications/cast-advice-notes/ ) - monitoring of any standing water within the site temporary or permanent - earthworks, soil stripping or excavation works during construction - maintenance of planted and landscaped areas. The Bird Hazard Management Plan shall be implemented as approved, prior to commencement of development, and shall remain in force for the life of the development. No subsequent alterations to the plan are to take place unless first submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority in consultation with Glasgow Airport Reason: It is necessary to manage the development in order to minimise its attractiveness to birds which could endanger the safe movement of aircraft and the operation of Glasgow Airport. 22. That prior to the commencement of development on site, the developer shall submit for the written approval of the Planning Authority a further revised version of the Biodiversity Enhancement Report ref 794-NI-P&E-NI2575 by RPS. The revised version shall include a review of the impact of the development on the Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC) designations at Barochan Moss to the north and Linwood Moss Wood to the south to ensure any biodiversity loss in these designated areas is included within the enhancement calculations and that suitable compensation is provided within the biodiversity plan. Additionally, the plan should also consider nature networks and nature connectivity within and beyond the site. The revised report shall also include a timetable for the implementation of all biodiversity enhancements, and a strategy for monitoring the implementation and management of all biodiversity enhancements for the life of the development including details of measures where planting may fail and details for interim mitigation measures before planting is replaced. This shall include provision
Page 30
for written updates to be provided to the Council throughout the life of the development to ensure all biodiversity measures are being managed in accordance with the approved strategy. Reason: To ensure all approved biodiversity measures are implemented at the site and managed for the life of the development in the interests of delivering biodiversity gain. 23. That all construction works shall take place out with the wintering period which is from October to April inclusive when whooper swans are likely to be feeding in the area around the Black Cart Special Protection Area. If construction works must unavoidably have to be undertaken during the wintering period, no work of any kind associated with the development shall take place while any whooper swans are feeding within 200m of the planned site works. The locations of whooper swans must be confirmed by a suitably qualified and empowered ecological clerk of works in order to ensure that any whooper swans are more than 200m from the planned site works before any work related to this proposal proceeds during the wintering period. The appointed Ecological Clerk of Works, the terms of their appointment, role and scope of work must be submitted for the written approval of the Planning Authority prior to any work being undertaken within the wintering period. Records shall be kept of all decisions to proceed or postpone made by the appointed Ecological Clerk of Works as well as the reasons for these decisions, and these records shall be provided to the Planning Authority and NatureScot on completion of all construction works. Reason: To safeguard the qualifying interest of the Black Cart Special Protection Area. 24. Prior to the commencement of development, a Habitat Management Plan (HMP) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority in consultation with NatureScot and RSPB Scotland. The HMP shall set out proposed habitat management of the Site during the period of construction, operation and decommissioning and restoration of the Site. The approved HMP shall include (but not limited to) - a minimum of 10ha of annually-sown wild bird cover/ unharvested crop (e.g Wild bird cover – CFE Online) to provide a food source for wintering Whooper Swans and other farmland birds; - detailed plan of hedge planting and gapping up around the Development site including details on species, and minimum height of planting; - consideration of mitigation to ensure a minimum of period before planting will be established; - programme of maintenance for duration of operational period in line with best practice guidance; - to include details of measures where planting may fail and details for interim mitigation measures before planting is replaced; - monitoring of species using the site and protocol for recording and reporting any collisions with the solar panels to NatureScot and RSPB;
Page 31
- and timescales for the implementation of each requirement within the HMP. The approved HMP shall be implemented within the approved timescales and in full for the lifetime of the Development. Reason: In the interests of good land management and the protection of habitats. Advisory Notes Given the nature of the proposed development it is possible that a crane may be required during its construction. We would, therefore, draw the applicant’s attention to the requirement within the British Standard Code of Practice for the safe use of Cranes, for crane operators to consult the aerodrome before erecting a crane in close proximity to an aerodrome. This is explained further in Advice Note 4, ‘Cranes and Other Construction Issues’ (available at http://www.aoa.org.uk/policy-safeguarding.htm. Schedule of Plans and Documents Reviewed Drawing Number Revision Drawing/Document Title version 4 Ecology Impact Assessment Report dated 26th May 2025 version 3 Flood Risk Assessment dated June 2023 Issue 5 Addendum to Flood Risk Assessment Glint and Glare Assessment dated December 2024 version 4 Shadow Habitats Regulations Appraisal dated 26th May 2025 version 2 Heritage Assessment dated June 2023 version 4 Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment dated 3rd July 2023 Land Capability for Agriculture Assessment dated September 2024 version F01 Noise Impact Assessment dated 29th September 2023 version 4 Planning Support Statement dated December 2024 version 02 Pre-application Consultation Report dated 13th June 2023 Version 2 Transport Statement dated December 2024 version 3 Biodiversity Enhancement Report dated 26th May 2025 version 1 Badger and Otter Survey Report dated November 2024 Bat Survey Data Suitability for Ecological Impact Assessment ELGIN-BESS-001 A Typical BESS Unit ELGIN-BESS-002 A Typical Power Conversion System Unit ELGIN-FENCE&CCTV-001 A General Fence & CCTV Detail ELGIN-INVERTER-001 H Typical Invertor Detail ELGIN-PANEL-001 E Solar Panel Sections
Page 32
1101-ELDERSLIE-005 B Site Context Plan 1101-ELDERSLIE-002 K Site Layout Plan 1101-ELDERSLIE-001 C Site Location Plan 1101-BESS-003 - Typical Storage Container - - Typical 33kv Substation Elevations 2575.5.01 D Landscape Mitigation Plan ELGIN-75x75COMPOUND-001 A Typical 75m x 75m Construction Compound 2575.5.02 - Proposed Sections (Woodland Planting) For further information please contact James Weir, Development Standards Team, Email: james.weir@renfrewshire.gov.uk.