A pre-determination hearing was held by Aberdeenshire Council to gather views on the proposed onshore infrastructure for the Bowdun Offshore Wind Farm. Concerns were raised by local residents and community councils regarding landscape and visual impacts, cumulative effects with other energy projects, and potential impacts on private water supplies, noise, and traffic. The applicant, Thistle Wind Partners, presented their proposals, highlighting the project's importance for renewable energy targets and economic benefits, while also outlining mitigation measures to address local concerns.

Bowdun Offshore Wind Farm Onshore Infrastructure

The meeting focused on the planning permission in principle application for the onshore infrastructure associated with the Bowdun Offshore Wind Farm. This includes the landfall point for export cables, the construction of a substation within Fetteresso Forest, and the installation of underground cabling to connect to the national grid. The project is considered a national development under the National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) and is crucial for meeting Scotland's renewable energy targets and supporting the transition from oil and gas.

Arguments in Support:

• Russell Borthwick, Chief Executive of the Aberdeen and Grampian Chamber of Commerce, spoke in support of the project, emphasizing its strategic importance for the region's economy. He highlighted the opportunity for Aberdeenshire to transition to new clean energy solutions and attract investment. Borthwick stated that the project could support over 100 long-term jobs and 700 construction jobs, which are desperately needed as the oil and gas sector declines. He also noted Thistle Wind Partners' commitment to investing in the region and their supply chain pathways program, which aims to help local businesses secure contracts. Borthwick urged councillors to look beyond a small amount of temporary disruption and see the strategic value of this project and sees the once in a lifetime economic opportunity.

Objections and Concerns:

Several objectors raised significant concerns about the project's potential impacts:

• Scott Stratton, whose farm is the closest affected property to the proposed substation, expressed concerns about the impact on his private water supply, noise pollution, visual impact, construction traffic, and the cumulative impact of multiple energy developments in the area. He stated, I object to the application as submitted. Although I do realise the difference between plan of permission and principle and a detailed application. But there's red flags that are causing me great concern. Stratton requested that the council refuse the application or defer determination pending more detailed consideration and robust mitigation.
• Andrew Ritchie, representing residents of the Rickerton area, echoed concerns about the cumulative impact of energy infrastructure in Fetteresso Forest, the lack of detailed information on site layout, drainage, and noise mitigation. He argued that the application lacks the basic information needed for a proper planning judgment. Ritchie also highlighted poor consultation with local residents and the potential for significant adverse impacts on landscape, traffic, public access, ecology, and private water supplies.
• George Thompson, a local resident, stated that his concerns were the same as those raised by previous speakers, particularly regarding substations and their cumulative impact.
• Brian Wade, speaking on his own behalf, raised concerns about the proximity of the development to high-pressure gas pipelines and the potential risks to pipeline integrity. He questioned why mandatory topics like major accident hazard pipelines were scoped out of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). Wade also argued that the cumulative impact assessment was inadequate, failing to consider all proposed energy developments in the area. He also raised concerns about potential World War II aircraft wreckage in the area, stating that elected members had been misdirected by planning officers regarding this issue.
• Mark Ansell, representing the Crathes, Drumoak and Durris Community Council, formally objected to the application. He highlighted concerns about the landscape and visual impact of the substation, the industrialisation of the countryside, and the loss of valuable agricultural land. Ansell also questioned the evidence for biodiversity net gain and the understated ornithological impacts. He emphasized that the proposal cannot be assessed in isolation and the cumulative impact of this proposal and adjacent infrastructure must be reviewed holistically.

Applicant's Response (Thistle Wind Partners):

• Hannah Page and Marianne Patterson from Thistlewind Partners addressed the concerns raised. They emphasized that the application is for Planning Permission in Principle (PPP), meaning detailed designs will be developed later. They stated that the project is crucial for meeting Scotland's carbon reduction commitments and securing economic benefits for the North East.
• Regarding local impacts, they highlighted that most infrastructure will be underground, except for the substation. Mitigation measures include a maximum height restriction for the substation, retention of surrounding forestry, and specific technologies to limit its footprint. Noise mitigation has been incorporated, with no significant residual effects predicted, even cumulatively with the Hurlie substation.
• They acknowledged that construction would cause temporary disruption but committed to a robust Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP) to minimize impacts. They also highlighted extensive engagement with local communities, landowners, and statutory consultees over three years.
• Thistle Wind Partners stated their commitment to community wealth building and creating a lasting legacy through STEM education programs. They believe the project represents a carefully considered and responsible way of delivering the infrastructure requirement.

Council Officer's Report:

• Stuart Newlands and Elizabeth Tully, Planning Officers, presented an overview of the application, outlining the proposed infrastructure, the policy context, and the responses received from consultees and representations.
• They noted that while the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) identified potential significant negative effects, particularly during construction, mitigation measures were proposed. These included impacts on land use, agriculture, public access, landscape and visual effects, hydrology, and noise.
• Consultees, including the Council's Landscape Consultant, raised concerns about the scale of the substation and cumulative landscape and visual impacts, recommending further design and landscape information. However, no formal objections were raised by most statutory consultees, including SEPA, NatureScot, and Historic Environment Scotland, subject to conditions.
• The report highlighted that the application is for PPP, meaning detailed designs will be subject to further assessment through Matters Specified in Conditions (MSC) applications.

Key Issues Discussed:

• Cumulative Impact: A significant concern raised by objectors and noted by the Council's Landscape Consultant was the cumulative impact of the Bowdun substation alongside other proposed energy infrastructure in Fetteresso Forest, such as the Hurlie Substation. Objectors argued that this would lead to the industrialisation of the countryside.
• Landscape and Visual Impact: Concerns were raised about the scale and visual prominence of the substation, particularly its impact on the rural character of the area and recreational routes.
• Private Water Supplies: Several objectors highlighted the potential impact on private water supplies due to excavation and hydrological changes, with concerns about the adequacy of mitigation and the applicant's responsibility.
• Construction Traffic and Noise: The potential for disruption from construction traffic, noise, and dust was a recurring concern for local residents.
• Site Selection and Alternatives: Objectors questioned the site selection process and the lack of detailed consideration of alternative sites.
• Consultation: Some objectors felt that community engagement had been inadequate.

The pre-determination hearing concluded with councillors indicating they had received the information required. The application will proceed to the Kincardine and Mearns Area Committee for views before a final determination by the Infrastructure Services Committee.