SgurrEnergy Ltd Linfairn Wind Farm Environmental Statement: Chapter 4

Transcription

1 4 THE EIA PROCESS 4.1 OVERVIEW The purpose of an EIA is to provide a systematic analysis of the impacts of a project in relation to the existing (baseline) environment. The findings of an EIA are presented in an Environmental Statement (ES) and the ES is used to support an application for authorisation to develop a project. In this function the ES allows the consenting authorities to evaluate the environmental impact of a project and incorporate the ES findings into the decision making process. The ES is also used by project stakeholders, including the public, to assess the acceptability of the development and its potential impact. As a process, the methodology adopted for the project EIA will incorporate a number of steps which can be summarised as follows: a) Baseline studies as necessary, to establish the state of the environment and socioeconomic conditions prior to the implementation of the Project; b) Impact assessment in consideration of the potential effects of the Project on the established baseline conditions; c) Assessment of cumulative impacts to identify those combined impacts which may arise from other existing or planned developments in the area; d) Mitigation design involving the development of measures aimed at reducing any negative impacts; e) Assessment of residual effects following the application of mitigation measures; f) ES report preparation detailing the EIA process undertaken; and g) Public consultation performed throughout the EIA process. The following sections describe each step of this methodology in more detail. Baseline studies describe the current condition of those elements of the environment which are likely to be significantly affected by the Project. The baseline environmental conditions have been evaluated according to their importance and sensitivity. This was achieved through reference to the Scoping Report in addition to relevant designations and standards. Baseline conditions are described and evaluated using existing data with some additional surveys undertaken to supplement this data. 4.2 ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY All chapters within the ES for the Project will address the construction, operational and decommissioning phases. To ensure a consistent assessment and promote the understanding of the ES, each of the assessment chapters will, where feasible, follow a standard assessment structure BASELINE DATA COLLECTION The assessment of potential effects has been undertaken in comparison with baseline conditions. The baseline information describes the existing environmental conditions on the site and the wider area where applicable (for example, landscape). Baseline data were collected from a wide range of sources involving desk-based studies, field surveys and consultation with statutory and non-statutory consultees. Where information is available, the baseline information also details future trends in the absence of the Project. 11/6267/001/GLA/O/R/002 Revision B1 Page 1 of 7

2 4.2.2 ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS The EIA regulations require a description of the likely significant effects of the development on the environment, which should cover the direct effects and any indirect, secondary, cumulative, short, medium and long-term permanent and temporary, positive and negative effects of the development. Short-term effects are those considered to extend over a short period. In the context of this report, short-term relates typically to the construction and decommissioning periods. Effects lasting less than the life of the Project are considered to be medium-term whilst those exceeding the life of the Project are permanent. Initially, the relevant specialist will determine the quality and sensitivity of the receiving environment or potential receptor. The sensitivity of the receptor (high / medium / low) depends upon the relative importance (international / national / regional / authority area) of existing environmental features on or in the vicinity of the site or the sensitivity of receptors which have the potential to be affected by the Project. The criteria for determining sensitivity or importance are based on existing guidance, legislation, statutory designation and / or professional judgement. Details of each specific assessment are set out within the individual technical chapters. Following the assessment of receptor sensitivity, the predicted magnitude of change (also referred to as the magnitude of impact) will be identified (i.e. the scale or degree to which the environment is affected from the existing situation). The assessment of magnitude of change will be completed using the framework identified in Error! Reference source not found. Once the magnitude of change has been established this will be combined with the evaluation of the sensitivity (as set out above) to identify the overall significance of effect. It should be noted that there are certain environmental disciplines where predetermined thresholds for identifying the significance of effects already exist. Such predetermined thresholds are predominantly for a magnitude of change that can be measured quantitatively and have generally been developed through the adoption of recognised industry standards, EIA best practice and professional judgement. These environmental disciplines may deviate from using the magnitude of change criteria as shown in Table 4-1 but this will be made clear within the specific assessment. Table 4-1: Magnitude of Change Magnitude of Change (positive or negative) Major Moderate Minor Negligible Definition Fundamental change to the specific environmental conditions assessed resulting in temporary or permanent change. Detectable change to the specific environmental conditions assessed resulting in non-fundamental temporary or permanent change. Detectable but minor change to the specific environmental conditions assessed. No perceptible change to the specific environmental conditions assessed. Evaluating magnitude of change and environmental sensitivity together will allow the significance of each potential effect to be established using the matrix shown in Table 4-2. Potentially significant effects can then be identified for further analysis. 11/6267/001/GLA/O/R/002 Revision B1 Page 2 of 7

3 Table 4-2: Establishing Level of Effect Magnitude of Change Sensitivity of Receptors Negligible Low Medium High Negligible Insignificant Insignificant Insignificant Insignificant Minor Insignificant Insignificant Minor Minor Moderate Insignificant Minor Moderate Moderate Major Insignificant Minor Moderate Major Effects are considered to be significant in the context of the EIA regulations where results indicate Moderate or higher. Unless otherwise stated, all reported effects are considered to be adverse. Where there is uncertainty as to significance, this is highlighted and an explanation provided. Assessment using these criteria will provide a clear and concise guide for the reader of the ES as to the severity of any identified change. Throughout the assessment, the results of consultation with appropriate statutory and non-statutory bodies as well as the general public will form an important part of the EIA process THE ROCHDALE ENVELOPE The case of R v Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council 1 established the principle that the applicant must include a description of the proposed development, which must comprise, at the minimum, information as to the "design and size or scale of the project", as well as the data necessary to identify the main effects which that development is likely to have on the environment. It was argued that, inter alia, without information as to the scale of the development, the siting, design, means of access and landscaping et al., it will not be possible to assess the effect of the proposed development on the environment. What has to be assessed is the development which is proposed to be constructed, not some abstract concept or illustration of what might be constructed, or indeed the time period when it might be constructed. This will have particular relevance in terms of the number and height of WTGs proposed as part of the Project. Therefore, in order that an informed decision can be made on the application, SgurrEnergy will undertake the EIA based upon the Rochdale Envelope the realistic worst case scenario. 4.3 ASSESSMENT OF CUMULATIVE IMPACTS Cumulative impacts are an important issue to be considered for the Project, following feedback including Scoping responses from the planning authority and Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH). Cumulative impacts are those effects that may result from the combination of past, present or future actions of existing or planned activities. While a single activity may itself result in an insignificant impact, it may, when combined with other impacts (significant or insignificant) in 1 Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council Ex Parte Andrew Tew, George Daniel Milne and Steven Gardner, R v. [1999] EWHC Admin /6267/001/GLA/O/R/002 Revision B1 Page 3 of 7

4 the same geographical area and occurring at the same time, result in a cumulative impact that is significant. Scottish Planning Policy (SPP) states that: When considering cumulative impact, planning authorities should take account of existing wind farms, those which have permission and valid applications for wind farms which have not been determined The weight that planning authorities attach to undetermined applications should reflect their position in the application process. The ES will include an assessment of the cumulative impact of the Project with other planned developments and specialist assessments will address potential cumulative impacts. When considering cumulative impacts of other planned development in the area, the worst case scenario was considered for all sites. Developments included within the cumulative assessment for each individual specialism have been identified in line with relevant methodologies and following consultation as appropriate. Details are set out within the individual technical chapters. A full list of operational and consented developments along with those at application stage within 60 km of the Project can be found within Appendix 6.3 of this ES. A cut-off date of 23 August 2013 was used as the number of wind farm applications made and withdrawn change frequently. All new applications, applications withdrawn and addendums to current projects taken place since the cut-off date have therefore not been considered in the assessments. In addition several Scoping stage projects have been included within the cumulative impact assessment at the request of South Ayrshire Council in the pre-gateway meeting of 13 August It is noted that Policy ECON7D of the Ayrshire Joint Structure Plan requires wind farms that are subject to valid applications to be included within the cumulative impact assessment but that wind farms at earlier stages in the planning process are not referenced. As sites at Scoping do not require to be considered as part of the cumulative assessment requirements defined in ECON7D, the significant effects identified as a result of the addition of Scoping sites into the cumulative situation have been provided for illustrative purposes only and should not be considered in the determination of this Project. The cumulative assessment will be undertaken using Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (IEMA) EIA guidance and the Guidelines for the Assessment of Indirect and Cumulative Impacts as well as Impact Interactions, prepared for the European Commission MITIGATION DESIGN As specified in Schedule 4, Part II, section 4 of the EIA Regulations, appropriate mitigation measures will be identified to eliminate, minimise or manage identified potential significant environmental effects. The following will be considered: Embedded mitigation mitigation which is built in to the project during the design process. Mitigation of significant effects. Mitigation of non-significant effects. Enhancement measures. 2 Hyder (on behalf of the European Commission), 2009, Guidelines for the Assessment of Indirect and Cumulative Impacts as well as Impact Interactions, EC DG XI, report accessed at: 11/6267/001/GLA/O/R/002 Revision B1 Page 4 of 7

5 A key feature of our EIA approach will be to ensure a robust assessment which will address significant issues and provide workable mitigation. 4.5 ASSESSMENT OF RESIDUAL EFFECTS Following the identification of mitigation measures to address significant adverse effects, an assessment of the significance of any residual effects (i.e. those remaining after mitigation) will be completed. 4.6 PROPOSED MONITORING Subsequent to the completion of the assessment, proposals for monitoring requirements will be put forward where relevant. Proposals for monitoring will be designed to evaluate the accuracy of the impact prediction and the success of any implemented mitigation measures. 4.7 ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITATIONS Any assumptions specific to a certain topic are documented within the relevant chapter. Assumptions which have been made for the purposes of the ES include: The specialist assessments have been based on the application plans as submitted with this ES. The baseline conditions are as identified at the time of the assessment through desktop and site surveys. It is noted that conditions may change over the period to construction and subsequent operation. Assumption that all surrounding land uses remain unchanged except where planning permission has been granted for development. Information obtained from third parties and other publicly available information is correct at the time of writing. The Project will be constructed and operated in accordance with the details set out in Chapter 3 (Project Description). 4.8 CONSULTATION STRATEGY STATUTORY AND NON-STATUTORY CONSULTEES Consultation with statutory and non-statutory bodies is a key component of the EIA process and forms an important part of the assessment which is undertaken. Face-to-face consultations with key stakeholders have also been carried out. The EIA Scoping Report was submitted to the Scottish Government ECDU in January Responses from consultees were received on 21 June The full Scoping Opinion can be found within Appendix 4.1 of this ES. Consultation was undertaken with statutory consultees, Scottish Government bodies and other non-statutory consultees. The full consultee list for the Section 36 application can be found in Appendix 4.2. Consultation has been on-going throughout the EIA process to agree the methodology and scope of the assessments and to obtain relevant information to help guide the technical assessments. Details of consultation undertaken for the specialist assessments, including at the scoping stage, can be found in the relevant chapters of this report. A table is provided within each technical chapter setting out details of how issues raised through consultation have been addressed. 11/6267/001/GLA/O/R/002 Revision B1 Page 5 of 7

6 Prior to submission of the Section 36 application, consultation was undertaken and a meeting held with statutory consultees to discuss the application. Comments received during this consultation have been taken into account within this ES where appropriate PUBLIC CONSULTATION As part of the commitment to early and effective communication with stakeholders, prior to submission of the Scoping Report, a programme of early consultation was undertaken with local councillors, community council representatives and politicians to raise awareness of the proposals, where possible to arrange face-to-face meetings, and to invite initial feedback. The Developer appointed a PR company to develop and maintain an open dialogue with the local media, to ensure key landmark stages of the project were conveyed in the Carrick Gazette and Ayrshire Post. Contact was made in late December 2011 / early January 2012 with the seven councillors in Wards 7 and 8 of South Ayrshire Council (Maybole, North Carrick and Coylton and Girvan and South Carrick). The Developer made initial contact with Sandra Osborne MP and Adam Ingram MSP. Contact was also made in early January 2012 with Crosshill, Kirkmichael and Straiton Community Council. The meetings identified potential local concerns / issues and a series of potential community benefit projects. Key areas of concern were identified around access routes, visual impact, financial backing, radar signals as well as a request to investigate further the possibility of a community WTG. Following submission of the Scoping Report, a full public consultation exercise was undertaken to present the Project and to identify and discuss the key issues of local concern. A key benefit of such a consultation exercise was to indicate public attitude towards the proposals. The definitive appreciation of public opinion should rest on the final proposals. Therefore a public exhibition was held on 17 January 2013 following the design freeze of the Project. The purpose of the exhibition was to inform the local communities of the proposals and provide the opportunity for individuals to make comment and raise any concerns. Comments received during the public exhibition and through questionnaires provided to attendees have been taken into consideration. Of the responses received, 75 people objected to the Project, seven were unsure, 14 were in favour and one declined to comment. The main concerns raised at the public exhibition related to potential noise issues, landscape and visual effects, devaluation of properties, effects on the natural beauty of the village of Straiton and creation of traffic problems through the village. As a result of the responses received, the developer undertook a further site design exercise to optimise the layout in order to minimise the visual impact of the Project. This is described in more detail in Chapter 2 (Site Selection). Following the creation of Save Straiton for Scotland (SSfS) group, the Developer initiated a number of meetings with the chair and committee to advise them of progress with the project and to seek early engagement over issues such access and community benefits. In addition, Meetings were arranged with Mr Chic Brodie MSP on the following occasions: 1 May 2013 at the PR consultant s offices in Edinburgh; 23 May 2013 at the PR consultant s offices in Edinburgh; and 23 August 2013 with Mr Brodie, together with Bill Steven and Whirly Marshall of SSfS in Mr Brodie s offices in Ayr. The PR company also facilitated the distribution of an e mail newsletter to all parties (totalling including residents, councillors and community councillors) who had expressed an 11/6267/001/GLA/O/R/002 Revision B1 Page 6 of 7

7 interest in the project to announce the Developer's early indication of a revision of the numbers and locations of the WTGs. 11/6267/001/GLA/O/R/002 Revision B1 Page 7 of 7