New Renewables Planning Legislation - 1 Dec 2011

[Ivan]

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2011/2056/made

(thanks to Gordon for alerting me to this)

[martin]

High "dimboid" rating there - a swift scan suggests that roof-mounted chocolate teapots are allowed (which don't sodding work!), and you can erect a turbine on a pole if it's "MCS"... abso-bloominglutely brill!

[wookey]

I'm astonished that external sockets for EVs are covered by planning legislation at all. I had naively thought that I could put an external socket whever the hell I liked on my property (subject to tedius electrical regs). Indeed - Anyway, now that they are permitted development that means the world is a little more like how it ought to be anyway. As I already put on in some time ago, I'm glad to see it's OK now :-)

The heat-pump section lists a whole load of permitted deveopment excetptions, which generally seem reasonable, but they don't say anything about noise of proximity to next door (which I would have thought was about the most important proviso they could have) and they do say you can't have an ASHP _and_ a wind turbine on the same building. What on earth is that about?

[Ted]

Its about cumulative noise levels. Noise has been what has delayed this legislation for the past 2 years. I believe the max will be 42dB - but I'm waiting to hear from MCS on the new standards they are publishing to coincide with this.

[Eleanor]

"Development not permitted
H.1. Development is not permitted by Class H unless the wind turbine complies with the MCS Planning Standards or equivalent standards."


It was always going to happen but it's the first time I've seen an explicit statement to the effect that MCS is required for planning approval  
Equivalent standards  

[desperate]

Hallo Eleanor,

I don't think it means no MCS no approval, rather than, no MCS not permitted developement, it should still be possible to gain approval for non MCS gear, but you would have to go through the application process. Of course that may mean it is tricky to get non MCS gear approved, but then the council would be open to many appeals, which could be fun.

Lets hope the MCS fiasco implodes when a GOVT realises what a crock of bull it is.

Desp

[Eleanor]

Desp, the point I was trying to make and not very well is that MCS has made it's way into the planning process. As far as I can see the only thing covered by MCS that should be of interest to Planners is noise and just because a turbine is MCS approved doesn't mean it would meet the noise requirements at the curtilege of the nearest property as set down by the local council's Environmental Health Department. The EHO goes to every site and assesses each individually and estimates how audible the particular turbine will be. They are using a limit of 40 dB(A) at the moment. I think this is why, as far as I know, every turbine here (Highland) goes through the full planning application process and the PD rights passed in Scotland may as well not exist. It probably will be possible to get non-approved equipment through but the cost of commissioning all the noise studies may be out of proportion to the cost of smaller turbines. It seems that the only way non-approved turbines (unless they have the relevant noise data) will get through is to be a very long way from anything. I'm not saying it's all a bad thing, just that from what's been happening here I can't see how the PD rights legislation will make any difference to how applications are dealt with.

[Ivan]

The BRE stated a few years ago that they were keen to get MCS as a pre-requisite for Planning Permission Approval. Looks like their campaign has finally paid off. It's such a shame that MCS is all about manufacturers that have paid a lot of money to get listed, rather than about the quality of the product itself.

Hopefully, the new MCS standards that Ted mentioned won't be the product of GCSE projects, this time!

[Outtasight]

And a MCS or any other turbine will only be assessed on manufacturers noise figures when brand new.  Any machine will stand a chance of getting more whiney as it gets old.

It's bad enough now with new builds going up with token windmills on the roof to tick the renewables box on the planning form.  I've not seen one work (on the new estate surrounded by trees  ) and the scaffold has been up on the block within a year of completion for no doubt very expensive "maintenance" on the turbines at the leaseholders cost (at gunpoint).

Curious that the wording of the turbine clause is "Development is not permitted by Class I unless the stand alone wind turbine complies with the MCS Planning Standards or equivalent standards."  What is an "equivalent standard" to MCS?  Does MCS even cover "planning"?  I thought it only approved of the hardware as being "suitable"...

At least I won't have to fight with the neighbours about their stand alone turbine shading my PV.  The restriction on any part of the turbine being within it's total height (including blades) + 10% distance of any property boundary means they are banned from all but the biggest gardens (unless you're going to install a 1m high one in the middle of your lawn  )

I'm just lucky that they didn't decide to make non MCS PV subject to planning permission.

[Ted]

There is a new MCS 020 Planning Standards document - but MCS haven't actually published a copy yet.

But it is an entirely moot point for wind turbines in any case, as there are no MCS accredited wind turbines that also meet the GPDO size criteria.

[CWatters]

I'm astonished that external sockets for EVs are covered by planning legislation at all. I had naively thought that I could put an external socket whever the hell I liked on my property (subject to tedius electrical regs).

Existing planning regs would mean an EV socket needed planning permission in some cases. This is just to make sure they are allowed.

For example in theory anything you add to the front of your house such as a bird box or an EV socket in a weather proof box could be considered an extension. Extensions forward of the principal elevation/fronting a highway require planning permission. I believe the same rule already prevents some people installing external wall insulation. In practice something as small as bird box or EV socket would probably be considered inconsequential (I forget the proper Latin legal term) but this is just to avoid any doubt. 

[Justme]

In practice something as small as bird box or EV socket would probably be considered inconsequential (I forget the proper Latin legal term) but this is just to avoid any doubt. 

De minimis?

[Ted]

MCS Planning Standards for small wind turbines and ASHPs in England is now available:

http://www.microgenerationcertification.org/admin/documents/MCS%20020%20Planning%20Standards%20Issue%201.0.pdf

The document details the procedure for calculating the noise levels that apply for a particular planned installation.

[mysterons]

So are these rules now in force? Are there any MCS certified wind turbines that are size/noise compliant yet?
I saw mentioned 'Skystream' 2.4kw earlier, any use?
How close to any neighbour are we talking for permitted development?

[Ted]

Yes, the new legislation applied from 1st December in England.

To comply with permitted development the turbine must have a swept area no greater than 3.8m² - which is 2.2m diameter. The Skystream 3.7 has a swept area of 10.87m² and a diameter of 3.7m so way too big.

Acceptable distance from neighbours is determined by the noise levels.