Item 9 - DC23.223.S36 - Proposed wind farm
West Dunbartonshire Council · 6 August 2025
Back to Planning Committee — 6 August 2025 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Page 1
WEST DUNBARTONSHIRE COUNCIL Report by Planning, Building Standards and Environmental Health Manager Planning Committee: 6th August 2025 ___________________________________________________________________ Subject: DC23/223/S36: Proposed wind farm development comprising up to ten wind turbines of approximately 7 megawatts (MW) each, with a maximum blade tip height of up to 250m, and Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) with a capacity up to 20 MW at the Site of the Proposed Vale of Leven Windfarm, Kilpatrick Hills, East of Alexandria by Vale of Leven Wind Farm Limited 1. Purpose 1.1 To agree an updated consultation response following the receipt of a revised proposal reducing the height of the proposed turbines together with updated supporting documents from the Scottish Government Energy Consents Unit, on behalf of the Scottish Ministers, in connection with a proposed wind farm development comprising up to ten wind turbines of approximately 7 megawatts (MW) each, with a maximum blade tip height of up to 250m, and Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) with a capacity up to 20 MW at the Site of the Proposed Vale of Leven Windfarm, Kilpatrick Hills, East of Alexandria by Vale of Leven Wind Farm Limited. 2. Recommendations 2.1 It is recommended that this Committee Report is forwarded to the Scottish Ministers as presenting the Council’s updated response to the consultation and that it is highlighted that the Council maintains its objection to the application in respect of the reasons set out in paragraph 4.21 of this report. 2.2 As per Committee’s previous decision, it is further recommended that all matters arising in respect of any Public Local Inquiry are delegated to the Planning, Building Standards and Environmental Health Manager. 3. Background 3.1 The Scottish Ministers received an application under section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989 for the construction and operation of windfarm of up to ten wind turbines of approximately 7 megawatts each with a maximum blade tip height of up to 250m as well as a battery storage system (BESS) with a capacity of up to 20 megawatts. The application site is located within the West Dunbartonshire local authority area however the assessment of the submitted application is undertaken via the Scottish Government Energy Consents Unit for the Scottish Ministers. In Scotland, any proposal to construct and operate an onshore electricity generating station with a capacity of over 50 megawatts (as is the case with this proposal) requires the consent of Scottish Ministers under Sections 36 of the Electricity Act. Such applications are processed on behalf of the Scottish Ministers by the Scottish Government Energy Consents Unit. Due to the Scottish Ministers being the decision makers, ITEM 9
Page 2
representations from members of the public and other agencies are made directly to the Energy Consents Unit. The application is referred to under the project name of the Vale of Leven Windfarm. The location of the site is shown in Appendix 2. 3.2 The proposal was considered by the Planning Committee on 7th August 2024 and the Council issued a consultation response to the Scottish Ministers on 9th August 2024. The Council recognised that the contribution of up to 70mw renewable energy generating capacity, with the potential for an additional 20mw if the applicant proceeds with the Battery Energy Storage System element of the proposed development, would draw strong support in term of renewable energy targets and supporting the overarching aims of NPF4 to achieve net zero targets. Notwithstanding this, by their very nature wind farms are major pieces of infrastructure which often require exposed upland sites which tend to be environmentally sensitive and relatively conspicuous within the landscape. In assessing this particular proposal, it was therefore necessary for the Council to consider whether the acknowledged impacts upon the environment and landscape were sufficiently great to outweigh the benefits of expanding renewable energy generation and/or any economic benefit which would be brought to West Dunbartonshire. 3.3 In previously considering the proposal, it was recognised that Policy 11 of NPF4 is one of the primary policies for the assessment of the development type proposed. Wind farms have the potential to impact on a wide range of features which is evident from the above assessment. The turbines proposed as part of the Vale of Leven wind farm were noted as being extremely large with a blade tip height of up to 250m. With a proposal of this scale, together with associated infrastructure inclusive of Battery Energy Storage System, significant adverse landscape and visual impacts were considered inevitable. However, Policy 11(e)ii. of NPF4 explicitly accepts localised significant landscape and visual impacts and in this respect the position is thus weighted towards development’s contribution to renewable energy targets. Notwithstanding this policy position, the Council considered that the proposed development would have a significant adverse impact upon the landscape and the visual amenity of the Loch Lomond and the Trossachs National Park, the Loch Lomond National Scenic Area, and the Kilpatrick Hills Local Landscape Area. It was not considered that the at the benefits of the development would outweigh these significant impacts. 3.4 In further considering the proposal, the Council assessed the potential for build and cultural heritage assets to be impacted upon and concluded that, subject to appropriate mitigation, there would not be significant detrimental impact on the majority of the designations and assets. However, the impact upon the setting of the scheduled monument of Dumbarton Castle/Rock, a national asset, was of significant concern and it was concluded that the impact cannot be considered acceptable. 3.5 The proposal has the potential to impact upon biodiversity matters including the designated sites, habitat, peatland, ecology, protected species and ornithology it was concluded that with suitable mitigation measures. A variety of habitats will be impacted including blanket bog and wet modified bog. It was considered that subject to suitable mitigation measures including a habitat management plan together with the following recommendations from NatureScot, notably with reference to peatland restoration, the impact of the proposal upon habitats would be acceptable. In terms of protected and other species, the Council expected that the Scottish Ministers in determining the application would fully consider the points highlighted by the Council’s Biodiversity Officer, ensure identified mitigation measures secured, follow the recommendations set out in NatureScot’s consultation response and require the implementation of a suitable Habitat Management Plan to ensure any effects of the development are
Page 3
minimised. Species protection plans would also be required. With this approach, the Council concluded the impacts of the proposed development upon protected species and wider ecology could be considered acceptable. Notwithstanding this, in terms of the consideration of the impact upon designated sites, the applicant failed to consider or assess local designations relative to the proposed site. It is identified that there are five Local Nature Conservation Sites (LNCS) which would be impacted by the development, either directly or indirectly. It therefore could not be concluded that the development proposal would not result in any adverse impacts upon locally designated sites. 3.6 A wide range of other matters were considered as part of the assessment of proposal including residential amenity, impact upon tourism, aviation safety, electro-magnetic interference to communications systems, impact upon ttraffic, transport and the road network, health and safety and decommissioning. In respect of these matters, it was either concluded that no concerns arose or that any issues arising were matters for the Scottish Ministers should they be minded to grant consent for the development. 3.7 In submitting a full formal consultation response to the Scottish Ministers, the Council set out the following position: The Council objects to the proposal as the introduction of a wind farm into the Kilpatrick Hills could have a significant adverse impact upon the National Park / National Scenic Area together with the Kilpatrick Hills Local Landscape Area. Accordingly, the proposal is not considered to be supported by Policies 4 and 11(e)ii and iii of NPF4 together with a range of policies within the adopted West Dunbartonshire Local Plan including GN1, GD1, and DC6. The proposal is also not supported with reference to Policy KH1 of the Proposed West Dunbartonshire Local Development Plan 2. The Council also objects to the proposed windfarm as it could have a significant adverse impact upon the setting of Dumbarton Castle as a scheduled monument and it would therefore be considered contrary to Policies 7 and 11(e)vii of NPF4 together with Policy BE5 of the West Dunbartonshire Local Plan and Policy BE2 of the proposed Local Development Plan. The Council further submits a holding objection to the proposal in respect of the failure of the applicant to consider or assess local nature conservation site designations relative to the proposed site. In the absence of this, it therefore cannot currently be concluded that the development proposal would not result in any adverse impacts upon locally designated sites in accordance with Policies 3, 4(d) and 11(e)ix of NPF4 together with Policy E3A if the Local Plan and Policy ENV1 of the proposed Plan. 3.8 The applicant has submitted a revised development proposal to the Scottish Ministers which sees the reduction in the tip height of the proposed turbines from 250 metres to 220 metres. No other alteration to the development is proposed by the applicant. In support of the amended proposal, the applicant has submitted an Additional Information Report (AIR) which it is advised should be read in conjunction with the original Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). The AIR considers and assesses the difference between the environmental effects assessed in the EIA Report and sets out the changes to any likely significant effects resulting from the revised proposal. 3.9 The AIR comprises the following:
Page 4
Volume 1: Written Text – this provides a written update and comprises new assessment where applicable. It is not set out in the same chapter numbering format as the original 2023 EIA Report; Volume 2: Figures – updated and/or new figures; Volume 3: Additional Information Appendices – updated and/or new technical appendices to complement the assessments undertaken within Volume 1. Addendum to Design Statement. Updated Planning & Sustainable Place Statement. The application documents are available to view via the Energy Consents Unit website: https://www.energyconsents.scot and the following direct link: Scottish Government - Energy Consents Unit - Application Details . A date of 8th August has been agreed with the Energy Consents Unit for the submission of an updated response. 4. Main Issues 4.1 The application site is located in the western part of the Kilpatrick Hills between Bonhill and Gartocharn. The nearest settlement to the site is Bonhill, which is located just over 2 km to the west, of the nearest proposed turbine, and approximately 600m to the northwest of the site boundary and proposed access track. Alexandria and Dumbarton are approximately 4 km to the west and south-west of the site respectively. The Loch Lomond and Trossachs National Park and the Loch Lomond National Scenic Area (NSA) lie a minimum of 1.7 km and 3.5 km respectively to the north of the northern site boundary. 4.2 The site comprises part of Auchenreoch Muir to the east of Pappert Hill, and primarily consists of upland open moor which is currently used for sheep grazing. The topography within the site undulates, and it contains several hills including Knockshannoch and Hill of Standing Stones. These form part of a gently sloping ridge of land which drops down from the higher Doughnot Hill and Meikle White Hill (to the south of the site). This ridge forms the watershed between the Endrick Water (a tributary of the River Leven) and the River Leven itself. A number of small burns originate within the site, flowing northeast and west respectively. The surrounding land comprises open moorland with some patches of coniferous plantation, while Auchencarroch landfill site borders the site to the northwest. Dumbarton Muir Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), designated for bog habitats, is located to the east of the Site. Auchenreoch Glen SSSI, designated for its lowland calcareous grassland and springs (including flushes), lies to the south-west. 4.3 Except for the reduction in the height of the turbines by 30 metres from 250 metres to blade tip to 220 metres to blade tip, the development remains as set out in paragraphs 4.3 to 4.13 of the original Committee report (appendix 1). In assessing the amended proposal and additional and updated supporting documentation, it must be considered to whether the Council’s previous objections to the proposal have been addressed. The assessment therefore considers landscape and visual impact, impact on built and cultural heritage, and biodiversity and ecology. Landscape and Visual Impact 4.4 It remains that the application site is located around 1.7km from the edge of the National Park boundary, which is one of only two National Parks in Scotland. In their consultation responses to the Scottish Ministers, both the National Park Authority and NatureScot objected to the proposal. Both the National Park Authority and NatureScot considered that the location, size and scale of the proposed development represents
Page 5
a step change in respect of the proximity and prominence of wind farms to the National Park, and the scale of the wind turbines. 4.5 The AIR submitted by the applicant in support of the amended proposal concludes that the reduction in the height of the proposed turbines results in a reduction in the vertical impact of the turbines particularly when they are seen on the skyline and the proportion of the turbines seen rising above the skyline is reduced and this results in a lesser impact and improvement in overall appearance from a variety of viewpoints and visual receptors. It is accepted that any reduction in the height of the proposed turbines has the potential to reduce the visual impact of the development. However, any reduction in the impact is considered to be very slight and significant adverse visual effects would remain including from key viewpoints within the Park such as Conic Hill and from the Loch itself. It remains that the applicant’s AI identifies significant effects will remain in respect of two SLQ of the National Park, these being ‘wild and rugged highlands contrasting with pastoral lowlands’ ‘immensity of loch and landscape’. In their original consultation responses, both the National Park Authority and NatureScot consider the applicant’s assessment of the Special Landscape Qualities (SLQ) of the National Park underplays the significance of effects with concerns regarding potential significant effects on an additional eight SLQs highlighted across both consultation responses. 4.6 In an updated consultation response, the National Park is of the view that the reduction in the height of the turbines by 30 metres would only have a very negligible change to the landscape and visual effects of the proposal. The Park does not concur with the applicant’s assessment that there will be a considerable reduction in the vertical impact of the turbines, that there will be an improved relationship between the turbines and the landform a d there will be a reduction in the perceived scale of the turbines. The Park considers that the reduction in turbine height does not result in any reduced visibility from with the national park. NatureScot also note in their update consultation response that whilst there may be a very marginal reduction in visibility of the proposed development from within the park, significant adverse effects would remain on the following SLQs: Immensity of Loch and Landscape A world-renowned landscape famed for its rural beauty Wild rugged highlands contrasting with pastoral lowlands Settlement nestled within a vast natural backdrop Tranquillity The easily accessible landscape splendour 4.7 The applicant’s AIR concludes that the reduction in the height of the proposed turbines will lessen the visual impact and vertical impact of the turbines. The AIR advises that the significant effects on two of the Park’s SLQs as predicted by the original EIA would remain. Notwithstanding this and as concluded in the Council’s previous consultation response, it is considered that the actual impact will be far greater. This was a view strongly supported by both NatureScot and the National Park Authority in their objections to the Scottish Ministers, a position which both organisations advise they maintain. Being guided by the detailed assessment undertaken by both the National Park Authority and NatureScot, it is considered that the proposal will have a detrimental and unacceptable impact due to the significant adverse impacts on the landscape setting of the National Park and it is concluded that the potentially significant impacts on the Park resulting from the proposal are not addressed by the reduction in the height of the turbines by 30 metres.
Page 6
National Scenic Areas (NSA) 4.8 Loch Lomond NSA is located within National Park. Whilst it was previously accepted that the proposed wind farm would not be visible from large parts of the NSA, the Council’s previous consultation response concluded that would be highly visible from some of the most important, iconic and popular areas within the NSA. It was considered that due to the extent of the area that the wind farm will be visible from and the importance of these locations such as on the Loch itself, Balmaha Harbour and Luss within the NSA, the proposal would impact upon this area. With the concerns regarding the impact upon the National Park itself, it follows that there were also concerns regarding the potentially detrimental and unacceptable impact on the landscape setting of Loch Lomond NSA. As the significant adverse impacts on the landscape setting of the Park are not addressed by the amended proposal reducing the height of the turbines, it must be concluded that the concerns regarding the potentially detrimental and unacceptable impact on the landscape setting of Loch Lomond NSA remain. Kilpatrick Hills 4.9 The proposed windfarm is located within the Kilpatrick Hills Local Landscape Area (LLA) which will result in direct changes to the landscape. Within West Dunbartonshire, the following special landscape qualities of the Kilpatrick Hills are identified as being of special interest: Strong sense of remoteness, wildness and open horizons; Distinctive landforms; and A unique diversity of views. The proposed wind farm will be located within the Kilpatrick Hills LLA and will result in direct changes to the landscape. The site is readily visible from a wide area and the EIA concludes that there would be significant effects on these SLQs. Whilst the reduction in the height of the turbines may reduce the visibility of the turbines within the LLA, it is considered that this would be negligible. It remains that the turbines would continue to be located within the LLA and the visual impact would be significant. The AI acknowledges that significant effects on the SLQs of the LLA would remain despite the amended proposal. 4.10 Even with the 30 metres height reduction, the scale of the turbines proposed is such that there are no existing features in the landscape which are of a similar size or scale. At 220 metres in height, the proposed turbines will be a dominant feature within the LLA, particularly from areas close to the turbine locations. This includes Doughnot Hill where the turbines will remain a very significant feature. It remains that the overall experience of recreational receptors at Doughnot Hill and the surrounding area would be significantly changed by the development with the overall sense of isolation being lost. The AIR confirms that the significant effects at Doughnot Hill (viewpoint 1) remain despite the amended proposal. The Kilpatrick Hills are a key backdrop which help to define the identity of nearby settlements and provide a setting for the nearby nationally important landscapes. Given the Kilpatrick Hills are visible across a large part of the southern extent of the National Park and National Scenic Area and the contribution they make to the setting of these areas, it remains that locating a windfarm within the Kilpartick Hills would have a significant impact on their setting and the setting of nearby designations. Built and Cultural Heritage 4.11 It remains that no historic buildings or monuments are located within the site, although it does contain areas of archaeological interest. With the extension of Dumbarton Castle / Rock, whilst there is the potential for the development to impact upon a variety of scheduled monuments, category A listed buildings and Garden and Designed Landscapes which lie in the vicinity of the site, it was concluded that no impact where of such significance as to warrant an objection. Historic Environment Scotland (HES) in their original consultation response noted that the EIA recognises that the presence of turbines in views of Dumbarton Castle from the south would challenge the
Page 7
dominance of the monument. The EIA went on to suggest that views of the Castle from the south would only be impacted across a relatively small area and subsequently concludes that the proposed development would result in an adverse effect which is not significant. HES did not agree with this assessment and considered the impact to be underestimated. 4.12 The AIR further considers the impact upon Dumbarton Castle in detail and includes a new viewpoint from Westferry which lies approximately 1 mile to the east of Langbank. The applicant sets out that there are several historic images of Dumbarton Castle which depict views looking towards the monument from the south of the River Clyde, however, it is the view from Westferry that most closely resembles the portrayal of Dumbarton Castle in many of these illustrations, not the view in which the monument would be backdropped by the proposed turbines as it would appear from Langbank. Whilst it is accepted that there are locations and viewpoints where the turbines would not impact on the key views towards and the setting of Dumbarton Castle, it remains that that it is considered that proposed development would have a significant adverse impact on the setting of the monument, adversely affecting key views from directly to its south with the turbines appearing above and being framed in wider views of monument. In some of these key views from the south the turbines would appear directly behind the monument creating a very large visual distraction and become the most dominant features in these views. The reduction in the height of the turbines does not address this impact. HES advise in their further consultation response that they do not consider that the revised proposal would mitigate the significant adverse impacts on the integrity of the setting of Dumbarton Castle and their objection is maintained. Being guided by the position of HES, the impact upon the setting of Dumbarton Castle as a scheduled monument and key historic national asset within West Dunbartonshire is therefore clearly remains of significant concern. Designated sites, habitat, ecology and biodiversity 4.13 Subject to suitable mitigation measures being secured in respect of a variety of matters, the Scottish Ministers ensuring that proposed biodiversity enhancement proposals are both secured and appropriate if minded to grant the proposed development and the expectation that the Scottish Ministers in determining the application will fully consider the points highlighted by the Council’s Biodiversity Officer, the Council was largely content that no adverse impacts would occur. However, the applicant failed to consider or assess local designations relative to the proposed site. It was identified that there are five Local Nature Conservation Sites (LNCS) which would be impacted by the development, either directly or indirectly. These are Murroch Glen, Blairvault Burn and Pappert Muir, Auchenreoch Muir, Bonhill Muir and Pappert Hill, and West Dumbarton Muir. In the absence of any consideration of these sites, it therefore could not be concluded that the development proposal would not result in any adverse impacts upon locally designated sites. 4.14 The Council’s Biodiversity Officer has considered the applicant’s additional and updated information which now includes an assessment of the effects on the five LNCS. Three were scoped out of the assessment as it was not considered there was any potential to be impacted with the remaining two sites (Auchenreoch Muir and West Dumbarton Muir), which cover the main footprint of the development and access route, being scoped in and their important ecological features examined. The assessment concludes that the effects for both sites are minor adverse and not significant. The Council’s Biodiversity Officer offers no disagreement with this conclusion. However, the Biodiversity Officer goes on to highlight that there are direct and indirect habitat losses to both LNCS including the loss of blanket bog on West Dumbarton Muir. The impact upon habitat including blanket bog was fully considered in the Council’s original assessment (paragraphs 8.59 to 8.64 of appendix 2) and it was concluded that subject
Page 8
to suitable mitigation measures including a habitat management plan together with the following the recommendations from NatureScot being followed, specifically with reference to peatland restoration, and the Scottish Ministers ensuring that the impact upon peatland is fully understood taking account of the comments of the Council’s Biodiversity Officer and minimised as much as possible, the impact of the proposal upon habitats would likely be acceptable. 4.15 It can therefore be concluded that the applicant has now adequately considered local designations, and it has been demonstrated that subject to suitable mitigation, adverse impacts would not occur. Conclusions 4.16 It was previously acknowledged that the contribution of up to 70mw renewable energy generating capacity, with the potential for an additional 20mw if the applicant proceeds with the Battery Energy Storage System element of the proposed development, would draw strong support in term of renewable energy targets and supporting the overarching aims of NPF4 to achieve net zero targets. Notwithstanding this, by their very nature wind farms are major pieces of infrastructure which often require exposed upland sites which tend to be environmentally sensitive and relatively conspicuous within the landscape. 4.17 In further considering the impacts it was previously concluded that the proposed development would have a significant adverse impact upon the landscape and the visual amenity of the Loch Lomond and the Trossachs National Park, the Loch Lomond National Scenic Area, and the Kilpatrick Hills Local Landscape Area. Loch Lomond and the surrounding area is a landscape asset of national importance, which is currently relatively unspoiled by major man-made development within the landscape. Whilst it is proposed to reduce the height of the turbines by 30 metres, it remains that the turbines would be extremely large and occupy a prominent position within the setting of the National Park. Any reduction in the impact arising from the 30 metre height reduction is considered to be very slight and it remains that the proposal would result in the introduction of a significant man-made element on the horizon could significantly detract from the setting of the National Park / National Scenic Area, the Lomond and the Trossachs National Park being only one of two National Parks in Scotland. Both the National Park Authority and NatureScot continue to object to the proposal on this basis and do not consider that the amended proposal addresses their concerns. Despite the amended proposal, it is also considered that it remains the proposed wind farm would also detract from the sense of remoteness and wildness provided by the Kilpatrick Hills and locating a wind farm in this location would have a significant impact on their setting. The existing landscape affords the opportunity for recreational use and users of existing paths for example and the wider landscape will also experience a significant and adverse impact which is not addressed by the amended proposal. 4.18 The revised proposal is not considered to address the Council’s previous objection in respect of the significant impacts upon the National Park, National Scenic Area together with the Kilpatrick Hills Local Landscape Area. It remains that it is not considered that the benefits of the development would outweigh these significant impacts. Accordingly, the proposal is not considered to be supported by Policies 4 and 11(e)ii and iii of NPF4 together with a range of policies within the adopted West Dunbartonshire Local Plan including GN1, GD1, and DC6. The proposal is also not supported with reference to policy KH1 of the Proposed West Dunbartonshire Local Development Plan 2. Whilst Policy RE2 of the proposed Plan relates to the Spatial
Page 9
Framework for Wind Energy and would previously have been relevant, it conflicts with the approach set out in Policy 11 of NPF4. Policy 11 of NPF4 therefore has primacy. 4.19 The impact upon the setting of the scheduled monument of Dumbarton Castle/Rock, which is a national asset, was also previously of significant concern. Notwithstanding the revised proposal reducing the height of the turbines and the additional assessment of the potential impact upon the setting of the Castle/Rock, it remains that that it is considered that proposed development would have a significant adverse impact on the Historic Environment Scotland advise in a further consultation response that they do not consider the reduction in the height of the turbines would mitigate the significant adverse impacts on the integrity of the setting of Dumbarton Castle. With a continuing objection from the government agency responsible for the care and promotion of Scotland’s Historic Environment, it remains that the impact cannot be considered acceptable and is therefore not supported by Policies 7 and 11(e)vii of NPF4 together with Policy of the West Dunbartonshire Local Plan and Policy BE1 of the proposed Local Development Plan. 4.20 In terms of the previous concerns regarding the failure of the applicant to consider or assess local nature designations relative to the proposed site, the Council’s Biodiversity Officer has reviewed the additional information provided by the applicant and is satisfied that the AIR adequately considers local nature conservation designations and with suitable mitigation, any impacts can be considered acceptable. It can therefore now be concluded that the proposal is acceptable with reference to Policies 3, 4(d) and 11(e)ix of NPF4 together with Policy E3A if the Local Plan and Policy ENV1 of the proposed Plan. The previous holding objection in this regard is now addressed. The Council’s updated position on the application 4.21 It is recommended that this Committee Report is forwarded to the Scottish Ministers as presenting the Council’s updated response to the consultation and that it is highlighted that the Council maintains its objection to the application in respect of the following reasons: The Council maintains its objection to the proposal as the introduction of a wind farm into the Kilpatrick Hills could have a significant adverse impact upon the National Park / National Scenic Area together with the Kilpatrick Hills Local Landscape Area. Accordingly, the proposal is not considered to be supported by Policies 4 and 11(e)ii and iii of NPF4 together with a range of policies within the adopted West Dunbartonshire Local Plan including GN1, GD1, and DC6. The proposal is also not supported with reference to Policy KH1 of the Proposed West Dunbartonshire Local Development Plan 2. The Council also maintains its objection to the proposed windfarm as it could have a significant adverse impact upon the setting of Dumbarton Castle as a scheduled monument and it would therefore be considered contrary to Policies 7 and 11(e)vii of NPF4 together with Policy BE5 of the West Dunbartonshire Local Plan and Policy BE2 of the proposed Local Development Plan. 5. People Implications 5.1 None. 6. Financial and Procurement Implications
Page 10
6.1 Financial implications may arise in respect of costs associated with defending the Council’s position at a Public Local Inquiry. 7. Risk Analysis 7.1 No risks have been identified. 8. Equalities Impact Assessment (EIA) 8.1 Not required. 9. Environmental Sustainability 9.1 Matters relating to environmental sustainability are fully considered via the application assessment. 10. Consultation 10.1 Responsibility for wider consultation on the submitted application rests with the Scottish Ministers and Energy Consents Unit as part of the application process. 11. Strategic Assessment 11.1 The following strategic priorities of the Council are relevant: Our Communities - Resilient and Thriving Our Environment - A Greener Future Our Economy - Strong and Flourishing Michael Mulgrew Planning, Building Standards and Environmental Health Manager Date: 6th August 2025 Person to Contact: Michael Mulgrew, Planning, Building Standards and Environmental Health Service Manager Email: Michael.Mulgrew@west-dunbarton.gov.uk James McColl, Development Management Team Leader Email: James.McColl@west-dunbarton.gov.uk Appendix 1: Report to Planning Committee dated 7th August 2024 Appendix 2: Location Plan Background Papers: 1. Application documents 2. National Planning Framework 4 3. West Dunbartonshire Local Plan 2010 4. Proposed West Dunbartonshire Local Development Plan 2 2020, as amended
Page 11
5. Kilpatrick Hills Local Landscape Area – Statement of Importance 6. Renewable Energy Local Development Plan (Proposed Plan) Planning Guidance November 2016 7. Naturescot - Decommissioning and Restoration Plans for Wind Farms Guidance 8. Scottish Government Draft Planning Guidance: Biodiversity 9. Scottish Government’s Policy on Control of Woodland Removal Wards affected: Ward 2 (Leven)