PLANS for a wind farm with 10 turbines near Ardrishaig have been recommended for objection by council officials.
High Brenfield Wind Farm Ltd’s proposal is currently subject to a section 36 consultation by the Scottish Government’s energy consents unit.
The turbines planned would have a blade tip height of up to 200 metres, but Argyll and Bute Council is proposing to object on several grounds including visual and landscape impact.
The council’s planning, protective services and licensing committee will consider its response to the consultation at its meeting on Wednesday, February 18.
A report ahead of the meeting quoted a NatureScot official as saying: “The site comprises part of a wider area of open upland summits and plateaux which plays an important role forming in part skylines experienced from within the Knapdale NSA (national scenic area), Kilmartin Glen and across much of Loch Fyne and associated shores.
“The location, size and scale of the proposed development represent a step change in prominence and proximity of wind farms to the Knapdale NSA, Kilmartin Glen and Loch Fyne.
“The proposal would significantly adversely affect two SLQs (special landscape qualities) of the Knapdale NSA and would significantly adversely affect the experience of areas of Kilmartin and extensive landscapes and seascapes of Loch Fyne.
“These impacts would be to a degree that would result in an evident and noticeable material change to the SLQs of the Knapdale NSA such that the objectives of this designation and overall integrity would be compromised.
“While the turbine height and number could be reduced, accounting for the site’s location within the western hills of Loch Fyne close to the sensitive coast which is intervisible from highly sensitive areas of the Knapdale NSA, Kilmartin and across a widespread extent of Loch Fyne it is considered unlikely that significant adverse effects identified could be notably reduced.
“We therefore consider that given the proposed siting, scale and type of development, it would not be feasible to overcome the significant adverse effects identified within the site parameters.”
A council official then added: “As NatureScot are expert and authoritative advisors on landscape impacts and in respect of national scenic areas, significant weight must be given to their objections to the proposal in the balance of judgement.
“Although the planning authority is only a consultee and not the determining authority , there is still a need to come to a planning judgement on the merits of the case having regard to competing policy objectives and whether the planning authority should raise objection to the proposals.
“Given the objection by NatureScot, it is concluded that the proposal , on does not comply with the provisions of policies 11 – energy and 4 – natural places of NPF4 (National Planning Framework 4), and policy 30 – the sustainable growth of renewables of ABLDP2 (Argyll and Bute Local Development Plan 2).”
