HOPSRIG WIND FARM SCOPING REPORT - buccleuch.com · Scoping Report Hopsrig Wind Farm...

On behalf of

Hopsrig Wind Farm Ltd

Date

April 2016

Project Number

UK12-22427

HOPSRIG WIND FARM SCOPING REPORT

HOPSRIG WIND FARM SCOPING REPORT

Ramboll Environ 5th Floor 7 Castle Street Edinburgh EH2 3AH United Kingdom T +44 131 297 2650 www.ramboll-environ.com

Project No. UK12-22427 Issue No. 3Date 01/04/2016 Made by Demos Demosthenous / Rachael Martin Checked by Peter Bruce Approved by Nathan Swankie

Made by: Rachael Martin

Checked/Approved by: Peter Bruce

This report has been prepared by Ramboll Environ with all reasonable skill, care and diligence, and taking account of the Services and the Terms agreed between Ramboll Environ and the Client. This report is confidential to the Client, and Ramboll Environ accepts no responsibility whatsoever to third parties to whom this report, or any part thereof, is made known, unless formally agreed by Ramboll Environ beforehand. Any such party relies upon the report at their own risk. Ramboll Environ disclaims any responsibility to the Client and others in respect of any matters outside the agreed scope of the Services.

Version Control Log

Revision Date Made by Checked by Approved by Description

3 01/04/2016 RM PB Final Issue for Scoping Opinion

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm

RUK12-22427_3_Scoping Report

CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION 11.1 Consenting Regime 11.2 Purpose of this Report 11.3 Structure of this Report 22. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 32.1 Site Description and Context 32.2 Policy Considerations 32.3 The Proposed Hopsrig Wind Farm 42.4 Construction 42.5 Decommissioning 43. SCOPE OF THE EIA 53.1 Design and Alternatives 53.2 Impact Assessments 53.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 63.4 Ecology 83.5 Ornithology 123.6 Historic Environment 163.7 Hydrology, Hydrogeology and Geology, 193.8 Traffic, Transport and Access 213.9 Noise 243.10 Forestry 264. ISSUES SCOPED OUT OF THE EIA 284.1 Aviation and Defence 284.2 Socioeconomics 284.3 Air Quality 284.4 Shadow Flicker 294.5 Ice Throw 295. NEXT STEPS 30

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Site Location Figure 2: Cumulative Context Figure 3: Landscape Character Types Figure 4: Landscape Designations and Classifications Figure 5: ZTV and Viewpoint Locations Figure 6: Ecological and Ornithological Designations Figure 7: Cultural Heritage Assets within the Site Figure 8: Cultural Heritage Assets within 5 km Study Area Figure 9: Hydrological Constraints Figure 10: Peat Probe Locations and Recorded Peat Depth Figure 11: Abnormal Load Route Options Figure 12: Site Layout with 15 km Eskdalemuir Seismic Monitoring Station Buffer

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm


APPENDICES

Appendix A Figures

Appendix B Consultee List

Appendix C LVIA Supporting Information

Appendix D Ecology Supporting Information

Appendix E Ornithology Supporting Information

Appendix F Cultural Heritage Supporting Information

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm


1

1. INTRODUCTION

Hopsrig Wind Farm Limited (‘the Applicant’) proposes to submit an application for planning permission to construct and operate a wind farm, to be referred to as Hopsrig Wind Farm (‘the proposed development’), on land located approximately 7.5 km north west of Langholm, Dumfries and Galloway. The site location and wider context is shown on Figure 1. The land and the developer are wholly owned by The Buccleuch Estates Limited.

A provisional turbine layout has been prepared for the purposes of scoping, and comprises 18 turbines with a maximum tip height of 135 m. Based on currently available turbines, the typical maximum rated output per turbine is likely to be up to 3.2 MW. The turbine layout design is at an early stage and will be developed to take account of environmental and technical constraints and stakeholder consultation feedback. The provisional turbine layout is shown also on Figure 1 (see Appendix A).

1.1 Consenting Regime

For the purposes of scoping we have assumed that the proposed development would have a maximum generation capacity of > 50 MW. On this basis, an application for consent would be made to the Scottish Ministers under section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989. A deemed planning permission would follow such consent, under section 57 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997.

Should the maximum generating capacity reduce to less than 50 MW through the design evolution process, an application would be made to Dumfries and Galloway Council under the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, as amended. We would expect that the views of consultees expressed in the course of scoping under the Electricity Works (Environmental Impact Assessment) (Scotland) Regulations 2000 would remain relevant should such an application be made under the 1997 Act, and no formal re-scoping exercise would be undertaken should this change occur.

In the event that the capacity of the proposed development falls below 50 MW, but remains in excess of 20 MW, a Proposal of Application Notice will be submitted to Dumfries and Galloway Council.

1.2 Purpose of this Report

This scoping report has been prepared to support a request for a scoping opinion from the Scottish Ministers under regulation 7 of the Electricity Works (Environmental Impact Assessment) (Scotland) Regulations 2000. The specific objectives of this report are to:

seek agreement on the likely significant effects associated with the proposed development, and confirm that all likely significant effects have been correctly included in the proposed scope of the EIA (‘scoped in’);

seek agreement where non-significant effects have been excluded (‘scoped out’); and

invite comment on the proposed approach to baseline data collection, prediction of environmental effects and the assessment of significance.

Unless consultees specifically request otherwise, all responses will be summarised and presented as a Technical Appendix to the Environmental Statement (ES), as a record of the results of the scoping exercise.

1.2.1 Consultees

The scoping report will be provided to the consultees set out in Appendix B.

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm


2

1.3 Structure of this Report

The remainder of this report is structured as follows:

section 2 provides a brief description of the nature and purpose of the proposed development, typical construction activities and decommissioning proposals;

section 3 describes the baseline environment conditions, the likely significant environmental effects identified and proposed method for further data collection and evaluation of effects;

section 4 describes the effects that are considered not to be significant, and proposes that these be excluded from the EIA, providing a rationale in each case; and

section 5 provides information on the process for making representations on the scoping report.

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm


3

2. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

2.1 Site Description and Context

The ‘site’, as defined by the red line boundary on Figure 1, is located west of the B709 road, approximately 7.5 km north west from the town of Langholm. The land is wholly owned by The Buccleuch Estates Limited.

Turbines are proposed for the western part of the site, on Calkin Rig (450 m), Ward Hill (387 m), Enzieholm Height (342 m), Threep Hill (336 m) and The Shin (359 m), around the headwaters of Boyken Burn. The Boyken Burn runs west to east through the centre of the site and joins the River Esk just outside of the site. The western section of the site is predominantly coniferous plantation woodland intersected with tributaries of the Boyken Burn and forest tracks. The eastern section of the site consists mainly of open moorland and semi-improved grassland used for grazing livestock. The site is also used for rearing pheasants and partridges, with high numbers observed on site during previous site visits.

The nearest village is Bentpath, located adjacent to the northern boundary of the site. The Old Hopsrig property is the only residential property located within the red line boundary, at 1.7 km south east of turbine 14.

As illustrated on Figure 1, the recently consented Ewe Hill wind farm is located immediately to the south with turbines very close to the boundary on the east flank of Ewe Hill and just off the summit of Ward Hill. The consented Ewe Hill wind farm comprises 22 turbines with 111.5 m tip height. In addition, the land to the south and east of the site is the subject of a planning application for Loganhead wind farm, comprising 13 turbines with a maximum tip height of 130 m. Land to the west is the subject of an application for Crossdykes wind farm, comprising 15 turbines with a maximum tip height of 130 m.

2.2 Policy Considerations

2.2.1 Project Need and National Planning Policy

A key Scottish Government target, as set out in The Routemap for Renewable Energy in Scotland, 2011 (as amended)1, is that the equivalent of 100% of gross electricity consumption should be generated from renewable sources by 2020. The Scottish Government expects that onshore wind generation would meet a significant component of the electricity generated to meet this target.

Scottish Planning Policy 2014 (SPP)2 introduces a presumption in favour of development that contributes to sustainable development (§§27-28, 32, 33 and 92 in particular).

The National Planning Framework 3 (NPF3)3 sets out the Scottish Government's commitment to establishing Scotland as a leading location for the development of renewable energy technology.

The proposed development is entirely consistent with the Scottish Government’s planning policy as set out in SPP and NPF3, and specifically the policy on the promotion of renewable energy and its target for the equivalent of 100% of Scotland’s electricity demand to be met from renewable sources by 2020.

1 The Scottish Government (2011) 2020 Routemap for Renewable Energy in Scotland, The Scottish Government, Edinburgh: URL: http://www.gov.scot/Publications/2011/08/04110353/ScreenPDF (accessed 11.12.15) 2 Scottish Planning Policy (2014): URL: http://www.gov.scot/Publications/2014/06/5823/0 (accessed 11.12.15) 3 National Planning Framework 3 (2014): URL: http://www.gov.scot/Publications/2014/06/3539/0 (accessed 11.12.15)

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm


4

2.2.2 Local Development Plan

The statutory development plan for the site comprises the Dumfries & Galloway Local Development Plan (the LDP) (adopted 29 September 2014)4 and associated formal statutory supplementary guidance (SG), including Wind Energy Development: Development Management Considerations (the Wind SG) (adopted 6 March 2015). A Planning Statement will be provided with the application to assess compliance with each relevant LDP policy.

At this stage, the key point of note is that the Wind SG (specifically the Wind Farm Landscape Capacity Study) identifies the landscape character type ‘Southern Uplands with Forest’ (19a), within which the site is located, as a preferred area of the development of large turbine typologies.

2.3 The Proposed Hopsrig Wind Farm

The main elements of the proposed development would be as follows:

up to 18 wind turbines, with a blade tip height of a maximum of 135 m;

associated external transformers and underground cabling;

new access tracks and hardstanding areas adjacent to each turbine;

borrow pit(s);

meteorological mast(s); and

an on-site electricity substation and control room.

It is expected that the wind turbines would have a generating capacity of up to 3.2 MW each, with a potential total generating capacity of 57.6 MW.

Access to the site would be taken from the B709 through the upgrade of an existing estate access track.

It is anticipated that the grid connection for the proposed development would be via an overhead line or underground cable, connecting to the Ewe Hill substation 4.4 km to the south. The grid connection would be subject to a separate consenting process led by the transmission license holder and is not included in the scope of the Hopsrig Wind Farm EIA.

2.4 Construction

Typical construction activities and work methods will be set out in the ES. Information will also be provided on proposals for forestry removal, an indicative construction programme, construction traffic generation and construction phasing. The ES will also contain details of appropriate environmental management measures, including pollution prevention measures (in line with Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA)’s Pollution Prevention Guidelines (PPGs)), and waste minimisation and management measures.

2.5 Decommissioning

The proposed development would be operational for 25 years, following which, if there has been no approval to extend the life, the turbines would be dismantled and removed from the site. This operation would be similar to their erection and would be carried out according to relevant decommissioning guidelines prevailing at the time.

4 Dumfries and Galloway Local Development Plan (2014), URL: http://www.dumgal.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=11944

(accessed 11.12.15)

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm


5

3. SCOPE OF THE EIA

The content of ES will be prepared to meet the requirements of the EIA regulations and the Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (IEMA) Quality Mark commitments. The EIA will cover all phases of the proposed development including construction, operation and decommissioning.

3.1 Design and Alternatives

Given the complexity of the cumulative context, and more particularly, the proximity of the Ewe Hill array, the proposed development design process will establish a layout and turbine typology which is sufficiently coherent with neighbouring developments, in accordance with SNH’s current design guidance on Siting and Designing Windfarms in the Landscape5.

Following completion of the main baseline landscape and visual assessment, design objectives will be developed and used to evaluate a series of layout options. These layouts will be examined from key design viewpoints to assess and optimise the number, size and layout of the proposed turbines in relation to the landform of the site and surrounds as well as adjacent wind farm developments. The design iteration process will take account of other environmental and technical factors to establish the final layout for the proposed development.

The design optimisation process will be reported and illustrated in the Environmental Statement and in an accompanying Design and Access Statement.

3.2 Impact Assessments

The ES will report on the likely significant direct effects, along with any indirect, cumulative, short, medium and long-term, permanent and temporary, beneficial and adverse effects.

Impact assessment chapters will be provided under the following topic categories:

landscape and visual amenity;

ecology;

ornithology;

historic environment;

traffic, transport and access; and

noise.

Cumulative effects will be addressed under each topic chapter. Cumulative effects are defined as the potential additional changes caused by a proposed development in conjunction with other similar developments or as the combined effect of a set of developments, taken together. Figure 2 shows the location and status of operational, consented and proposed wind farms (tip height >50 m) which are the subject of a valid application within 35 km from the proposed development. A final list of developments relevant to the assessment of cumulative effects would be agreed when the point of a finalised design is reached (approximately four months from submission).

In addition, factual reports will be prepared to provide sufficient environmental information on:

hydrology and hydrogeology; and

forestry.

5 Scottish Natural Heritage, 2009 version 2 Siting and Designing windfarms in the landscape. [pdf] Scottish Natural Heritage. Available

at: <http://www.snh.gov.uk/docs/A337202.pdf> [Accessed 2 February 2016].

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm


6

The following sub-sections provide a review of proposed technical issues to be considered as part of the ES.

3.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

A Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) will be undertaken to establish potential significant effects of the proposed development on the landscape resource and visual amenity of an area equivalent to a 35 km radius from the outermost turbines of the development. The assessment will also address potential cumulative landscape and visual effects within this area. The assessment will be undertaken in line with European and national legislation, policy and guidance. The relevant legislation, policy and guidance documents are provided in Appendix C: LVIA Supporting Information.

3.3.1 Baseline

Key Landscape and Visual Issues

According to the Dumfries and Galloway Wind Farm Landscape Capacity Study (2011) the proposed development lies within the Southern Uplands with Forest Landscape Character Type which is identified as having low landscape sensitivity and low to medium visual sensitivity to large wind farm typologies, and that it has potential to accommodate ‘multiple large and medium typologies’ with some provisos relating to the avoidance of open topped hills and areas of more complex landform. Figure 3 illustrates the Landscape Character Types within a 35 km study area.

The Capacity Study also states that the “landscape is very sparsely populated and not readily visible from the wider landscape being sited away from settled areas and public roads. Visual sensitivity would be Medium in relation to the large typology and Medium-low in relation to the medium typology. The majority of this landscape is not covered by landscape designations and this, together with an absence of recreational use or other non-designated interests, would result in Low sensitivity in respect of landscape values.”

The key landscape and visual consideration for the proposed development will be its relationship with the established and emergent cumulative context (Figure 2), including Craig Wind Farm, Ewe Hill Wind Farm, Crossdykes Wind Farm, and Loganhead Wind Farm.

Other considerations relate to the predicted visibility and potential prominence of the Hopsrig turbines, particularly from the nearby high sensitivity valley of the River Esk (Narrow Wooded River Valley landscape at the eastern end of the site) (Figure 3) and from the open summits of the North Langholm Southern Uplands (within the Langholm Hills Regional Scenic Area (RSA)) to the north east and east of the site. Consideration will also be given to effects associated with the removal of forestry and a revised forest design plan given the anticipated felling at the site.

Landscape designations and classifications will also be considered as part of the LVIA. As shown on Figure 4, the eastern part of the site lies within the Langholm Hills Regional Scenic Area. However, none of the proposed turbine locations are within the Regional Scenic Area boundary.

Viewpoint Selection

A range of visual receptors within the study area will be identified, which are anticipated to include residents of settlements and scattered dwellings, recreational receptors including hill walkers and cyclists, and road users. Initial Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) analysis has been carried out based on the scoping layout for the proposed development to identify a list of candidate viewpoints representative of the main landscape and visual receptors in the study area, and at varying distances, directions and elevations from the proposed development. In addition, cognisance has

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm


7

been taken of the viewpoint selection in the LVIA of Loganhead and Crossdykes Wind Farms. The proposed viewpoints are listed in Table 1 in Appendix C and illustrated on the ZTV shown on Figure 5. The final selection of viewpoints for assessment will be agreed with Dumfries and Galloway Council and Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) during the consultation process.

3.3.2 Potential Significant Effects

The Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment will consider effects on:

landscape fabric, caused by changes to the physical form of the landscape and its elements; landscape character, caused by changes in the key characteristics and qualities of the landscape as a result of the proposed development, including consideration of effects on designated areas; and visual amenity, caused by changes in the appearance of the landscape as a result of the proposed development, considering receptors in settlements and residential property, motorists and other road users, rail passengers, core paths and other recreational receptors.

The layout will be tested to ensure that it reflects current SNH guidance on Siting & Designing Wind Farms in the Landscape6.

3.3.3 Issues to be Scoped Out

Given the limited geographical extent of the proposed development viewshed (based on the ZTV analysis), the LVIA will not consider effects on the following receptors:

Talla-Hart Fell Wild Land (25 km to the north west of the site);

Torthorwald Ridge RSA (21.6 km to the south west);

Solway Coast RSA (25.3 km to the south);

Hadrian’s Wall Path (25.3 km to the south); and

the Southern Upland Way (appears 12 km to the north west at its closest point within the ZTV).

3.3.4 Effects Evaluation

The aim of the LVIA is to identify, predict and evaluate potential landscape and visual effects arising from the proposed development and associated ancillary elements. Wherever possible, effects will be quantified, but the nature of landscape and visual assessment requires interpretation by professional judgement. In order to provide a level of consistency to the assessment, landscape sensitivity to change, the prediction of magnitude of change/impact and assessment of significance of the residual effects has been based on pre-defined criteria which are based on guidance provided in the GLVIA 37, as refined for the purposes of wind farm assessment and taking account of SNH guidance.

6 Scottish Natural Heritage, 2014. Siting and Designing Wind Farms in the Landscape. Version 2. [pdf] Scottish Natural Heritage. Available at: <http://www.snh.org.uk/pdfs/strategy/renewables/Guidance_Siting_Designing_wind_farms.pdf> [Accessed 1 February 2016]. 7 Landscape Institute and Institute of Environmental Management & Assessment, 2013. Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact

Assessment, 3rd ed. Abingdon: Routledge.

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm


8

Study Area

The currently proposed extension turbines are 135 m to blade tip height. Consequently, in accordance with SNH’s Visual Representation of Windfarms Good Practice Guidance8, the study area will be 35 km radius from the outer edges of the proposed turbines.

LVIA Visualisations

Appendix C contains details of the supporting visual material for the LVIA ES chapter.

3.3.5 Cumulative effects

SNH Cumulative Guidance9 states that the focus should be on the key cumulative effects which are likely to influence decision making, rather than an assessment of every potential cumulative effect.

Based on the above and on the cumulative data collected to date (based on preliminary assessment of the locations of these developments and their potential interaction with the proposed development), the following cumulative assessment scope for the proposed development LVIA is suggested:

cumulative base plan within 35 km search area;

inclusion of all sites, which are operational, consented, at application stage and any at scoping within 10 km of the proposed development, to the cumulative assessment;

exclusion of <50 m turbines in the assessment;

exclusion of developments in scoping, beyond 10 km from the site;

exclusion of single turbines beyond 15 km from the site; and

due to the distance/location from the proposed development the following wind farms, Dalswinton, Great Orton, Langhope Rig, Birneyknowe, are not expected to interact with the proposed development and therefore would be excluded from the cumulative assessment.

A provisional list of cumulative schemes within 35 km of the proposed development are listed in Table 2 in Appendix C and shown in Figure 2.

3.4 Ecology

The ecology chapter will assess the potential significant effects on non-avian ecology during the construction, operational and decommissioning phases of the proposed development. The ornithology assessment will be presented in a separate chapter.

3.4.1 Baseline

Ecology surveys to date have been conducted between May and October 2015 at the site. Field surveys following current best practice guidance have been undertaken at the site, including:

National Vegetation Classification (NVC) Survey10;

great-crested newt (GCN) Habitat Suitability Index (HSI) Assessment11;

8 Horner + MacLennan and Envision, 2006. Visual Representation of Wind farms: Good Practice Guidance. [pdf] Scottish Natural

Heritage. Available at: <http://www.snh.gov.uk/docs/A305436.pdf> [Accessed 1 February 2016]. 9 Scottish Natural Heritage, 2012. Assessing the Cumulative Impact of Onshore Wind Energy Developments. [pdf] Scottish Natural Heritage. Available at: <http://www.snh.gov.uk/docs/A675503.pdf> [Accessed 1 February 2016]. 10 Rodwell, J.S. ed., 1991-2000. British Plant Communities. (Vols 1-5). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 11 Oldham, R.S., Keeble, J., Swan. M.J.S. and Jeffcote, M., 2000. Evaluating the Suitability of Habitat for the Great Crested Newt

(Triturus cristatus). Herpetological Journal, 10, pp.143-155.

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm


9

otter survey12 13 14;

water vole survey15;

badger survey16 17;

pine marten survey18;

red squirrel survey19;

bat activity surveys (including at height surveys)20 21;

bat roost surveys22 23; and

reptile habitat suitability survey24.

In addition, the results of the NVC survey will be referenced against SEPA guidance (2014a25 and 2014b26) to aid identification of those habitats which may be classified, depending on the hydrological setting, as being potentially groundwater dependent (Groundwater Dependent Terrestrial Ecosystems (GWDTE)).

Badgers Meles meles and common lizard Zootoca vivipara are known to use the site. Evidence of squirrels Sciurus sp. were observed; however it is not possible to determine the species from the field evidence recorded. Surveys also found common amphibians present; however, GCN Trituruscristatus are unlikely to be present. A range of bat species were recorded on site predominantly using the forest edges on the higher elevations on the northern and southern boundaries for foraging and commuting. Common pipistrelle Pipistrellus pipistrellus, soprano pipistrelle Pipistrellus pygmaeus, Myotis species, Nyctalus species and brown long-eared bats Plecotus auritus have all been recorded during the surveys.

12 Bang, P. and Dahlstrøm, P., 2001. Animal Tracks and Signs. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 13 Chanin, P., 2003. Monitoring the Otter (Lutra lutra). Conserving Natura 2000 Rivers Monitoring Series No.10. Peterborough: English

Nature. 14 Sargent, G. and Morris, P., 2003. How to Find and Identify Mammals. London: The Mammal Society. 15 Strachan, R., Moorhouse, T. and Gelling, M., 2011. The Water Vole Conservation Handbook. 3rd ed. Oxford: Wildlife Conservation Research Unit, Department of Zoology, University of Oxford. 16 Neal, E. and Cheeseman, C.L., 1996. Badgers. London: Poyser Natural History. 17 Bang, P. and Dahlstrøm, P., 2001. Animal Tracks and Signs. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 18 O’Mahony D., O’Reilly, C. and Turner, P., 2006. National Pine Marten Survey of Ireland 2005. [pdf] Dublin: Corford. Available at: < http://www.coford.ie/media/coford/content/publications/projectreports/cofordconnects/PineMarten.pdf> [Accessed 7 March 2016]. 19 Gurnell, J., Lurz, P., McDonald, R. and Pepper, H., 2009. Practical Techniques for Surveying and Monitoring Squirrels: Forestry

Commission Practice Note October 2009. [pdf] Edinburgh: Forestry Commission. 20 Hundt, L., 2012. Bat Surveys: Good Practice Guidelines. 2nd ed. London: Bat Conservation Trust. 21 Natural England, 2014. Bats and onshore wind turbines: Interim guidance. 3rd ed. [pdf] Natural England. Available at: <

publications.naturalengland.org.uk/file/6122941666295808> [Accessed 7 March 2016]. 22 Hundt, L., 2012. Bat Surveys: Good Practice Guidelines. 2nd ed. London: Bat Conservation Trust. 23 Natural England, 2014. Bats and onshore wind turbines: Interim guidance. 3rd ed. [pdf] Natural England. Available at: <

publications.naturalengland.org.uk/file/6122941666295808> [Accessed 7 March 2016]. 24 Edgar, P., Foster, J. and Baker, J., 2010. Reptile Habitat Management Handbook. Bournemouth: Amphibian and Reptile

Conservation. 25 SEPA (2014a). Land Use Planning System Guidance Note 4: Planning guidance on on-shore windfarm developments, Version 7. [pdf] SEPA. Available at: < http://www.sepa.org.uk/media/136117/planning-guidance-on-on-shore-windfarms-developments.pdf> [Accessed 1 February 2016]. 26 SEPA (2014b). Land Use Planning System Guidance Note 31: Guidance on Assessing the Impacts of Windfarm Development Proposals

on Groundwater Abstractions and Groundwater Dependent Terrestrial Ecosystems, Version 2. [pdf] SEPA. Available at: < http://www.sepa.org.uk/media/144266/lups-gu31-guidance-on-assessing-the-impacts-of-development-proposals-on-groundwater-abstractions-and-groundwater-dependent-terrestrial-ecosystems.pdf> [Accessed 2 February 2016].

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm


10


Taking account of the findings of the work undertaken to date, whilst still adopting a precautionary approach at this preliminary stage, potential effects associated with the construction and operation of the proposed development include:

direct and indirect habitat loss;

disturbance to / loss of breeding sites, resting places, etc.;

direct / indirect loss of foraging resource;

displacement / disruption to movement of animals within / through the site;

direct effects upon protected fauna, i.e. road traffic accidents, etc.;

environmental effects, i.e. pollution of watercourses, etc.; and

changes to habitat composition through land-use change, increased human presence, etc.

In addition to the above, the habitats that fall under SEPA GWDTE categories will be assessed for their potential groundwater dependency based on the vegetation, topography and hydrological setting. If present, potential impacts to GWDTEs will be assessed and considered within the design, with mitigation measures proposed, where appropriate. A technical appendix to address the hydrogeology effects on GWDTE will be provided as an appendix to the Ecology chapter in line with SEPA LUPS Guidance Notes 4 and 31.


There are no international, national or local designated sites with non-avian ecological qualifying species within 5 km of the site. Effects on designated sites will therefore be scoped out of the assessment. Sites designated by Dumfries and Galloway Council, e.g. Sites of Importance to Nature Conservation (SINC) or similar, within 5 km of the site will be requested as part of the desk study, and assessed accordingly. Figure 6 shows the location of ecological and ornithological designated sites within 20 km of the site.

Sites designated for ornithological interests will be dealt with in the ornithology chapter.

Following the results of the GCN HSI assessment, the ponds on the site are not considered suitable to support GCN. The waterbodies on site are acidic, contain waterfowl and possibly fish; and they lack suitable submerged vegetation and surrounding terrestrial habitat. Full results of the survey will be detailed in the associated technical report; however GCN will be scoped out of the ecology chapter.

In addition, it is proposed that fish and fisheries are scoped out of the EIA. The Boyken Burn flows through the site and into the River Esk approximately 2 km downstream of the site. Although the banks are poached by livestock along some reaches, the majority of the habitat is considered to be suitable for a variety of salmonid and lamprey species. It is acknowledged that there is the potential for accidental events including the discharge of silt contaminated surface water or hydrocarbon/chemical spill from construction areas into the Boyken Burn and River Esk catchment. However the Construction Environmental Management Plan for the proposed Hopsrig wind farm would be designed to incorporate good practice measures to control surface water run-off rate and water quality, and to implement good practice pollution prevention measures. As a result of accepted and robust measures being put in place, there would be no likely significant direct or indirect effects on aquatic species during construction, operation and decommissioning.

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm


11

3.4.4 Additional Baseline Information Collection

The following organisations will be contacted for information and advice to inform the impact assessment: Dumfries and Galloway Council, SNH, Dumfries and Galloway Environmental Resource Centre, Scottish Badgers, Dumfries and Galloway Bat Group and the Dumfries and Galloway Amphibian and Reptile Group.

The desk study will gather ecological information (including relevant designated sites) from a variety of online sources and consultation with conservation organisations. In addition to those organisations listed above, the following will be consulted:

National Biodiversity Network NBN Gateway27 (http://data.nbn.org.uk/);

Scottish Natural Heritage, including Sitelink (http://gateway.snh.gov.uk/sitelink/index.jsp); and

Other available research into applicable habitats and species.

No further ecological surveys are proposed.


The assessment will be undertaken in line with European and national legislation, policy and guidance. The relevant legislation policy and guidance documents are provided in Appendix D: Ecology Supporting Information.

The assessment process involves the following:

identification of the potential effects of the proposed development;

consideration of the likelihood of occurrence of potential effects where appropriate;

defining the Nature Conservation Value of the ecological receptors present;

establishing the receptor’s Conservation Status;

establishing the Magnitude of the likely effect (both spatial and temporal);

based on the above information, a professional judgement as to whether or not the identified effect is significant with respect to the EIA Regulations;

if a potential effect is determined to be significant, measures to mitigate or compensate for the effect will be presented;

opportunities for enhancement may be considered; and

residual effects after mitigation, compensation or enhancement are reported.


Cumulative effects require the assessment of additional effects when the proposed development is considered in combination with other developments. The context in which these effects are considered is heavily dependent on the ecology of the receptor assessed but in all cases will involve consideration of the cumulative effects upon the receptor extents/populations relevant to that receptor. For example, for water voles it may be appropriate to consider effects specific to individual catchments or metapopulations, should the distance between neighbouring catchments be sufficient to assume no movement of animals between them.

27 Please note that taxa/species shown on the NBN Gateway will not be listed due to NBN restrictions imposed relating to the use of

such data. (All material, data and/or information on the NBN website are protected by copyright, database rights and other intellectual property rights). The NBN information has been utilised solely to provide an assessment of the likely presence of such species/taxa on site based on the presence of recent (within 10 years) records within a 5km radius from the site central grid reference.

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm


12

3.5 Ornithology

The ornithology chapter will assess the potential significant effects on ornithology during the construction, operational and decommissioning phases of the proposed development.

3.5.1 Baseline

Ornithology surveys were initiated in May 2015, are ongoing through the 2015/2016 non-breeding season (i.e. September 2015 to mid-March 2016) and will continue through the 2016 breeding season. The survey results to date have revealed that the proposed development site appears to be of low importance for target bird species (target species are those considered to be at risk due to wind farm development).

Bird surveys following current best practice guidance have been undertaken at the site, these comprise:

flight activity (Vantage Point) surveys (from May 2015 and ongoing): One breeding season of survey data has been collected, and non-breeding season data collection is ongoing; within the site and surrounding area. Three vantage points provide coverage of the turbine area;

breeding bird surveys: 2015 breeding season within the site and 500 m buffer (where access permitted), with four survey visits following the Brown & Shepherd (199328) methodology and considering the recommendations set out in Calladine et al. (200929);

breeding raptor and owl surveys: 2015 breeding season within the site and 2 km buffer (where access permitted), following the methods described in Hardey et al. (201330);

black grouse Tetrao tetrix surveys: 2015 breeding season within the site and 1.5 km buffer (where access permitted), following guidance in Gilbert et al. (199831); and

winter walkovers: ongoing during the 2015/2016 non-breeding season within the site and 500 m buffer (where access permitted).

Very little breeding bird activity was recorded during the 2015 breeding season; this may be in part due to the adverse weather conditions during the early part of the breeding season, causing breeding failures. Snow falls and frost conditions occurred irregularly into late April and early May in 2015. Breeding waders were recorded in low numbers, with 1-2 territories each for curlew Numenius arquata, snipe Gallinago gallinago and oystercatcher Haematopus ostralegus. Overall there was a low level of site usage by foraging raptors, mainly by buzzard Buteo buteo and sparrowhawk Accipiter nisus. Buzzard bred close to the site, and sparrowhawk and kestrel Falcotinnunculus are likely to breed nearby. Roosting barn owl Tyto alba were also recorded within, and close to, the site, but there was no evidence of breeding.

Ongoing winter surveys also indicate the site to be of low importance to any migratory or over-wintering species, with only single flights recorded to date for golden plover Pluvialis apricaria and pink-footed geese Anser brachyrhynchus. The most frequently encountered species during the winter, and all year round, is buzzard.

28 Brown, A. F. and Shepherd, K. B. 1993. A method for censusing upland breeding waders. Bird Study, 40(3), pp.189-195. 29 Calladine, J., Garner, G., Wernham, C. and Thiel, A., 2009. The influence of survey frequency on population estimates of moorland

breeding birds. Bird Study, 56(3), pp.381-388. 30 Hardy, J., Crick, H., Wernham, C., Riley, H., Etheridge, B. and Thompson, D., 2013. Raptors: A field guide for surveys and monitoring. 2nd ed. Edinburgh: The Stationery Office. 31 Gilbert, G., Gibbons, D. W. and Evans, J., 1998. Bird Monitoring Methods: A manual of techniques for key UK species. Exeter: Pelagic

Publishing.

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm


13

The following designated sites are located within 20 km32 of the site and are designated for their ornithological interests (relevant features in brackets):

Langholm – Newcastleton Hills Special Protection Area (SPA): (designated for breeding hen harrier Circus cyaneus). Approximately 10 km east;

Langholm – Newcastleton Hills Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI): (designated for breeding hen harrier and breeding bird assemblage). Approximately 10 km east;

Castle Loch, Lochmaben (SPA & Ramsar): (designated for pink-footed goose, non-breeding). Approximately 20 km to the south-west; and

Castle Loch, Lochmaben (SSSI): (designated for pink-footed goose, greylag goose Anser anserand goosander Mergus merganser, all non-breeding). Approximately 20 km to the south-west.


Taking account of the findings of the work undertaken to date in the local area, whilst still adopting a precautionary approach at this preliminary stage, potential effects on birds associated with the construction and operation of the proposed development include:

a short-term reduction in breeding or wintering bird populations due to construction disturbance (affecting breeding or foraging behaviour and causing reductions in productivity or survival);

a long-term reduction in breeding or wintering bird populations due to the loss of habitat critical for nesting or foraging. This may arise as a consequence of direct loss of habitat under infrastructure or disturbance/displacement as a result of operational activities;

a long-term reduction in breeding or wintering bird populations due to collision mortality. If collision risk is identified as a concern, predicted collision rates will be calculated through theoretical collision risk modelling; and

cumulative effects with other projects or activities that are constructed during the same period, and / or with projects or activities which pose either a potential collision risk or loss of habitat by displacement.

Given the low levels of activity recorded to date, it is considered unlikely that significant effects will occur on ornithological receptors at the site, although this issue will be considered in detail as part of the EIA.


As bird surveys and data collection are ongoing, and despite the site appearing to be of low ornithological interest, it is not possible to scope out specific potential effects on any target species, or target species within the wider countryside, at this stage.

Effects on the Langholm – Newcastleton Hills SSSI and SPA, designated for breeding Hen Harrier, are scoped out. No hen harrier were recorded during any surveys during the breeding season, the habitats are unsuitable for nesting hen harrier, and as the majority of the site is mature commercial conifer plantation it is of limited foraging value. Furthermore, it is considered that there is unlikely to be any connectivity between the proposed development and the SSSI/SPA as these designated sites are approximately 10 km from the site. During the breeding season hen harriers have a core foraging range of 2 km (SNH, 201333). Breeding females hunt mostly within 1

32 Distances provided here are approximate until the final turbine layout is confirmed. 33 Scottish Natural Heritage, 2013. Assessing Connectivity with Special Protection Areas (SPAs). [pdf] Scottish Natural Heritage. Available at: <http://www.snh.gov.uk/docs/A994842.pdf> [Accessed 2 February 2016].

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm


14

km of the nest site with males foraging generally within 2 km, average home ranges during the breeding season are of the order of 8 km2 for males and 4.5 km2 for females, often with overlap in foraging areas of different pairs (Arroyo et al. 201434). Any assessment of potential effects on hen harrier will be considered in the context of the wider countryside population, unrelated to the SPA and SSSI.

All effects on the Castle Loch, Lochmaben SSSI, SPA and Ramsar are scoped out given their ornithological qualifying species as listed above (many of which have not been recorded during surveys, and with only a single flight of pink-footed geese to date), and the distance of these designated sites from the proposed development (approximately 20 km). The proposed development is also on the edge of, or outwith, the core foraging ranges for the species for which these sites have been designated (SNH, 201333). Further information provided in Mitchell (201235)indicates that Castle Loch, Lochmaben SPA no longer holds internationally important numbers of geese. Additionally, the sensitivity maps within Mitchell (201235) show that the distribution of geese at this SPA and their feeding locations are clustered immediately north of Castle Loch or to the south along the coast of the Solway Firth, no data indicates that any geese from Castle Loch move east towards the site area. Consequently it is considered that there is no connectivity between the site and Castle Loch, Lochmaben SSSI, SPA and Ramsar designations.


The following organisations will be contacted for information and advice to inform the impact assessment: Dumfries and Galloway Council, Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB), SNH, Dumfries and Galloway Environmental Resource Centre, the Scottish Wildlife Trust and the Dumfries and Galloway Raptor Study Group. To gather further ornithological information, including designated sites, online sources will be consulted, including National Biodiversity Network NBN Gateway27 (http://data.nbn.org.uk/) and SNH, including Sitelink (http://gateway.snh.gov.uk/sitelink/index.jsp).

In addition, ornithological information available in the public domain relating to relevant applications of local wind farm projects in proximity of the site will be referred to (e.g. Loganhead Wind Farm, Crossdykes Wind Farm and Ewe Hill Wind Farm). This information includes scoping reports, environmental statements and consultation responses from relevant stakeholders.

Following completion of the 2015/2016 non-breeding season surveys, a further breeding season of surveys will be carried out over spring and summer 2016. These surveys will consist of the following:

flight activity (Vantage Point) surveys from three vantage points, 36 hours of data to be collected from each Vantage Point;

breeding bird surveys: within the site and 500 m buffer (where access permitted);

breeding raptor and owl surveys: within the site and 2 km buffer (where access permitted); and

black grouse surveys: within the site and 1.5 km buffer (where access permitted).

34 Arroyo, B.E., Leckie, F., Amar, A., McCluskie, A. and Redpath, S., 2014. Ranging behaviour of Hen Harriers breeding in SpecialProtection Areas in Scotland. Bird Study 1(8), pp.48-55. 35 Mitchell, C., 2012. Mapping the distribution of feeding Pink-footed and Iceland Greylag Geese in Scotland. [pdf] Slimbridge: Wildfowl

& Wetlands Trust / Scottish Natural Heritage. Available at: <http://monitoring.wwt.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/FeedingDistribution_PGGJScot_2012.pdf> [Accessed 2 February 2016].

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm


15

It is considered that 18 months of survey effort (i.e. two breeding seasons and one non-breeding season) is sufficient to allow a robust characterisation of the baseline ornithological assemblage and usage of the proposed development site and surrounding area. Data collection for a second non-breeding season is not considered necessary given the low importance of the site for any migratory or over-wintering target species, the low levels of bird activity recorded, the low value habitats present for such species, and the absence of any connectivity with relevant designated sites (as detailed above). The data collected so far for the proposed development is also consistent with the findings presented as part of the Environmental Statements for the neighbouring Loganhead and Crossdykes Wind Farms (Muirhall Energy), which indicate low levels of bird activity for target species. The SNH response to the pre-scoping briefing note advises that the scope of surveys appears appropriate and the methods employed are consistent with SNH guidance.


Effects on target species will be assessed in relation to the species’ reference population, range and distribution. The assessment of potential effects will follow guidelines published by the Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (IEEM, 200636) and SNH (200637). The assessment will be undertaken in line with European and national legislation, policy and guidance. The relevant legislation policy and guidance documents are provided in Appendix E: Ornithology Supporting Information.

The evaluation for wider-countryside interests (interests unrelated to SPAs, but including SSSIs) involves the following process:

identification of the potential effects of the proposed development;

consideration of the likelihood of occurrence of potential effects where appropriate;

defining the Nature Conservation Value of the bird populations present;

establishing the population’s Conservation Status;

establishing the Magnitude of the Likely Effect (both spatial and temporal);

based on the above information, a judgement is made as to whether or not the identified effect is significant with respect to the EIA Regulations;

if a potential effect is determined to be significant, measures to mitigate or compensate the effect are suggested where required;

opportunities for enhancement are considered where appropriate; and

residual effects after mitigation, compensation or enhancement are reported.

Nature Conservation Value is defined on the basis of the geographic scale, and it is necessary to consider each receptor’s conservation status, its distribution and its population trend based on available historical records.

The significance of potential effects is determined by integrating the assessments of Nature Conservation Value and Magnitude in a reasoned way.

36 Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management, 2006. Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the United Kingdom. [pdf] Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management. Available at: <http://www.cieem.net/data/files/Resource_Library/Technical_Guidance_Series/EcIA_Guidelines/TGSEcIA-EcIA_Guidelines-Terestrial_Freshwater_Coastal.pdf> [Accessed 2 February 2016]. 37 Scottish Natural Heritage, 2006. Assessing significance of impacts from onshore windfarms on birds outwith designated areas. [pdf]

Scottish Natural Heritage. Available at: <http://www.snh.org.uk/pdfs/strategy/renewable/Significance%20of%20bird%20impacts%20July%2006.pdf> [Accessed 2 February 2016].

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm


16

A set of pre-defined significance criteria will be used in assessing the effects of the proposed development. It is necessary to establish whether there will be any effects which will be sufficient to adversely affect the receptor to the extent that its conservation status deteriorates above and beyond that which would be expected should baseline conditions remain (i.e. the ‘do nothing’ scenario). Furthermore, these predictions will be given with a level of confidence relative to the effect being assessed where required (in line with IEEM, 2006).


An assessment of cumulative effects will be undertaken following published guidance (SNH 201238). Cumulative effects on each receptor relevant to this proposed development will be assessed in relation to other projects and activities subject to the EIA process within a relevant search area, and their effects on a relevant reference population (for example at a Natural Heritage Zone level).

3.6 Historic Environment

3.6.1 Baseline

All heritage assets within a distance of up to 1 km from the site and all designated assets within 5 km of the site have been identified from available online records and historic Ordnance Survey mapping. All heritage assets noted within this report and shown on Figure 7 and Figure 8 are detailed in the Site Gazetteer39. There are 44 known heritage assets located within the site (Figure 7). The west, forested part, of the site has relatively few recorded heritage assets; a building associated with enclosures and lazy beds at Eild Beck (Site 2) and buildings at Boykenhopehead (Site 197). The remaining six assets within the west of the site are sheepfolds (Sites 3, 198, 203 and 210) and sheep shelters (Site 211 and 212) identified from historic mapping. In contrast, the east of the site is richer in archaeological and architectural remains and contains 36 heritage assets representative of Iron Age to post-medieval settlement. The identified assets include six Scheduled Ancient Monuments; Site 40, Boyken Burn, township 695 m W of Westerhall; Site 28, Old Hopsrigg, farmstead 700 m SW of; Site 34, Calkin, settlements and cultivation terraces 300 m N of; Site 37, Calkin, settlement 300 m E of; Site 24, Calkin, settlement, farmstead and linear earthworks 500 m SSE of, and Site 22, Calkin, farmstead 500 m WSW of). These monuments are part of the Boyken Burn Archaeologically Sensitive Area (ASA) (Figure 7) described as an exceptional cluster of multi-period remains and protected under Policy HE4: Archaeologically Sensitive Areas of the Dumfries and Galloway Local Development Plan4041.Additionally there are three Listed Buildings (Sites 55, 63 and 105) located on the eastern boundary of the site.

In addition to the Scheduled Monuments within the site there are 63 Scheduled Ancient Monuments located within the 5 km study area (Figure 8) and a further 49 Scheduled Monuments located between 5 km and 10 km of the site. The Conservation Area of Langholm, which contains 41 Listed Buildings is located 7.5 km southeast of the site, while an 89 additional Listed Buildings

38 Scottish Natural Heritage, 2012. Assessing the cumulative effects of onshore wind energy developments. [pdf] Scottish Natural

Heritage. Available at: <http://www.snh.gov.uk/docs/A675503.pdf> [Accessed 2 February 2016]. 39 Site Gazetteer will be sent to Historic Environment Scotland and Dumfries and Galloway Council. Available on request for otherconsultees. 40 Dumfries and Galloway Council, 2014a. Dumfries and Galloway Council Local Development Plan. [pdf] Dumfries and Galloway Council. Available at: <http://www.dumgal.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=11287> [Accessed 2 February 2016]. 41 Dumfries and Galloway Council, 2014b. Dumfries and Galloway Council Local Development Plan Technical Paper: Archaeologically

Sensitive Areas (ASAs). [pdf] Dumfries and Galloway Council. Available at: http://www.dumgal.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=11778&p=0 [Accessed 2 February 2016].

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm


17

(or elements of Listed Buildings) are located within 5 km. Of these, five are Category A Listed. There is a non-inventory locally designated designed landscape at Westerhall near Bentpath east of the site. The Tanlawhill ASA is located north-west of the site and within the 5 km study area. A further two ASA’s, Raeburnfoot and Dryfe Water, are located within 10 km of the site.


Construction of the proposed development has the potential to disturb, damage or destroy hitherto unknown features or buried remains of cultural heritage interest. Other construction activities, such as vehicle movements, soil and overburden storage and landscaping also have the potential to cause direct permanent and irreversible effects on cultural heritage assets. It is probable that modern forestry operations will have, to some degree, damaged archaeological remains within the west of the site. However, the east of the site has remained undisturbed in recent years and is rich in archaeological remains as recognised by its local designation as an ASA.

As Scheduled Monuments, Sites 22, 24, 28, 34, 37 and 40 as identified above are afforded statutory protection under the provisions of the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 197942 modified by the Historic Environment (Amendment) (Scotland) Act 201143. The boundary of each Scheduled Monument is shown on Figure 8. Any works within the boundary of these Scheduled Monuments would require Scheduled Monument Consent (SMC) from Historic Environment Scotland (HES). The works which require SMC are comprehensively defined in the 1979 Act and summarised as any works that result in demolition, destruction or damage, removal, repair, alteration or addition, flooding or tipping. It is assumed that proposed development works will avoid the Scheduled Monuments and as such impacts on the Scheduled Monuments will be limited to indirect effects on their settings.

Indirect effects include impacts upon the setting of designated assets such as Listed Buildings, Scheduled Monuments, Conservation Areas and Inventory Gardens and Designed Landscapes as well as non-designated assets identified as being of potentially nationally important in the Dumfries and Galloway Historic Environment Record (HER). Depending upon the final turbine layout and configuration there is the potential that a number of the assets in the vicinity of the site could be subject to impacts upon their settings. Such assets include the six aforementioned Scheduled Monuments within the site itself as well as those within the study area including the hill forts at Little Hill (Site 71) Camp Hill (Site 171) Newland Hill (Site 175) and Craighousesteads (Site 177) and the cluster of Monuments within the Tanlawhill ASA north of the site. The level and significance of settings effects will be determined following full analysis of the ZTV and site visits to identify the setting of each asset. Where appropriate, analysis of visualisations will also inform the assessment of indirect effects.


The proposed development will seek to avoid direct impacts upon any known heritage assets during construction though careful siting of infrastructure and, where appropriate, fencing off of known heritage assets. Direct effects on known heritage assets will therefore be scoped out of the assessment.

There are no World Heritage Sites, Inventory Gardens and Designed Landscapes or Inventory Battlefields located within the 10 km study area. Potential effects on designated assets within these categories will therefore be scoped out of the assessment. The Conservation Area of

42 The Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979. (c.46). London: HMSO. 43 Historic Environment (Amendment) (Scotland) Act 2011. London: HMSO).

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm


18

Langholm and the 91 Listed Buildings (or elements thereof) contained within and immediately around the settlement are located outwith the provisional ZTV (see Figure 8). Settings effects on these 91 assets will therefore be scoped out of the assessment, provided they remain outwith the final ZTV. There are no other Conservation Areas within 10 km of the site.


Further desk-based assessment will be undertaken to collate known archaeological information on the site and identify any previously unknown archaeological features through inspection of aerial photographic records and cartographic records. The results of the desk-based assessment, along with the walkover survey (see below) will be used to identify areas where the proposed development may impact on the assets identified or elements of the historic environment and will be used to inform the iterative design process and, if necessary, to facilitate consultation with HES and Dumfries and Galloway Archaeology Service.

Subject to the ZTV and consultation with Historic Environment Scotland and the Dumfries and Galloway Archaeology Service, assets located between 5 km and 10 km of the proposed development which have the potential to be significantly affected by the proposed development will be identified and assessed in full within the ES.

Sources to be consulted for the collation of data will include:

Dumfries and Galloway Historic Environment Record (HER);

The National Monuments Record of Scotland (HES);

Ordnance Survey maps (principally First and Second Edition), and other published historic maps held in the Map Library of the National Library of Scotland;

Unpublished historic maps and documents held by the National Archives of Scotland;

Vertical and oblique aerial photographs held by HES;

Published bibliographic sources, including historical descriptions of the area (Statistical Accounts, Parish Records);

The Scottish Palaeoecological Database; and

The Historic Land-use Assessment Data (HLAMap) for Scotland (HES).

The collation of baseline information will be conducted in accordance with the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists’ ‘Code of Conduct’44 and ‘Standard and Guidance for Historic Environment Based Desk-Based Assessment’45.

An archaeological walkover survey of the site will be undertaken with the aim of identifying any previously unknown remains. The site will be surveyed, where breaks in the forestry allow, along transects. All accessible known heritage assets will be assessed in the field to establish their survival, extent, significance and relationship to other assets. Weather and any other conditions affecting visibility during the survey will also be recorded. All heritage assets encountered will be recorded and photographed. Hand-held Global Positioning System (GPS) will be used to note and confirm the position of each asset. All assets will be marked on plans, at a relevant scale keyed by means of Grid References to the Ordnance Survey mapping.

44 Chartered Institute for Archaeologists, 2014b. Code of conduct. [pdf] Chartered Institute for Archaeologists. Available from: <http://www.archaeologists.net/sites/default/files/CodesofConduct.pdf> [Accessed 2 February 2016]. 45 Chartered Institute for Archaeologists, 2014a. Standards and Guidance for historic environment desk-based assessment. [pdf]

Chartered Institute for Archaeologists. Available from: <http://www.archaeologists.net/sites/default/files/CIfAS&GDBA_2.pdf>[Accessed 2 February 2016].

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm


19


Having established the heritage baseline, an assessment of the potential direct and indirect effects of the proposed development on the historic environment will be undertaken.

The assessment will be undertaken in line with relevant policy and guidance. The relevant legislation, policy and guidance documents are provided in Appendix F: Cultural Heritage Supporting Information. The approach to the assessment will involve establishing the value and importance of the heritage receptor and then assessing the sensitivity of the asset to change. A judgement regarding the impact magnitude that may be experienced will be made. Further information on the detailed significance criteria proposed for use in the assessment are provided in Appendix F: Cultural Heritage Supporting Information.

The proposed development has the potential to affect the setting of cultural heritage assets within the study area. An asset’s sensitivity to impacts upon its setting refers to its capacity to retain its cultural value in the face of changes to that setting. Assets with high sensitivity will be vulnerable to changes which affect their settings and even slight changes may reduce their value or the ability of their settings to contribute to the understanding, appreciation and experience of that asset. Less sensitive assets will be able to accommodate greater changes to their settings without significant reduction in their cultural value and in spite of such changes the relationship between the asset and its setting will still be legible. Where there is the potential for the proposed development to impact upon the setting of an asset, the asset’s setting will be defined as will the sensitivity of that setting to changes. Assessment of individual assets will be informed by knowledge of the asset itself; of the asset type, if applicable, and by site visits to establish the current setting of the assets. This will allow for the use of professional judgement and each asset will be assessed on an individual basis. The criteria proposed for assessing the significance of setting effects is detailed in Appendix F: Cultural Heritage Supporting Information.


Cumulative effects on cultural heritage assets will be assessed, taking into consideration the additional effects of the proposed development on the settings of both designated and non-designated assets within 10 km of the site in combination with the likely effects of other operational, consented and proposed wind farm developments (at the application stage). Those heritage assets which have been included in the detailed setting assessment, under operational effects for the proposed development, will be considered when assessing the potential for cumulative effects. However, only those assets which were judged to have the potential to be subject to significant cumulative effects will be included in the detailed cumulative assessment.

The assessment will take into account the relative scales (i.e. size and number of turbines) of the other developments, their distances from the affected assets and the potential degree of visibility to the various developments. While all turbines >50 m to tip within 15 km will be considered, only those which contribute to, or have the possibility to contribute to, cumulative effects on specific heritage assets will be discussed in detail in the text.

3.7 Hydrology, Hydrogeology and Geology,

3.7.1 Baseline

Hydrology

As identified during the desk-based survey, and during the initial site visit, the site is drained by a number of small burns, including Trough Burn, Eild Beck, Clackanna Sike and Auchenbeg Sike;

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm


20

these mainly form tributaries to the Boyken Burn. The Boyken Burn flows into to the River Esk, located adjacent to the east of the site. A small reservoir is also located within the site adjacent to the existing track, which is supplied by Wet Sike and Yadlairs Sike. The existing track traverses across an earth dam structure. Hydrological constraints are mapped on Figure 9.

According to the SEPA’s River Basin management Plan (RBMO) Interactive Map46, the River Esk was classified as having Good overall status with High confidence in 2008 with overall ecological status of Good and overall chemical status of Pass.

A review of the SEPA Indicative River & Coastal Flood Map47 shows that areas at risk of flooding within the site and its vicinity are confined to the areas alongside the Boyken Burn.

There is one private water supply (PWS) located on the eastern site boundary, Carlesgill PWS, (NGR NY 32700 87600) which serves Burn Cottage (NGR NY 33263 87956). There are no PWS abstractions located within 2 km of the proposed turbines (the nearest turbine, turbine 14, is located 2.1 km from North Lodge PWS (NGR NY 31500 90600)).

Hydrogeology

The site is located over two major aquifers according to the 1:625,000 UK Digital Hydrogeological Data; Hawick group and Riccarton Group. Both of these are low productivity aquifers in which flow is virtually all through fractures and other discontinuities.

Geology

According to the Geology of Britain viewer (online)48 small areas of peat are located within, adjacent and in close proximity to the site, with larger areas of Diamicton (Langholm Till Formation) located within and near the site.

A peat probing survey comprising 351 peat probe locations was completed for the site targeting provisional turbine locations and areas of peat identified on the BGS 1:50000 scale superficial deposits map. A small area of deeper peat was recorded on the western boundary of the site, with a maximum depth recorded of 3.8 m, however no turbines are to be located in this area. Generally, peat was found to be shallow across the remainder of the site and modified within the plantation forestry areas, consistent with the BGS 1:50000 scale mapping. Peat deposits are known to be in the range 1.6 m to 2.9 m on Calkin Rig49. The peat probe locations and results are illustrated by Figure 10.

3.7.2 Potential Significant Effects / Issues to be Scoped Out

It is acknowledged that there is the potential for an increase in the rate of runoff associated with the proposed development, and /or accidental events including the discharge of silt contaminated surface water or hydrocarbon/chemical spill from construction areas into the River Esk catchment. However the proposed Hopsrig wind farm would be designed to incorporate good practice measures to control surface water run-off rate and water quality, and to implement good practice pollution prevention and environmental management measures. As a result, there would be no likely significant direct or indirect effects. As such, we would seek to scope out a detailed impact assessment chapter for Hydrology and Hydrogeology from the Environmental Statement (ES). We

46 SEPA, 2011. RBMP Interactive Map. [online] Available at: <http://gis.sepa.org.uk/rbmp/> [Accessed 2 February 2016]. 47 SEPA, 2015. Flood Maps. [online] Available at: <http://map.sepa.org.uk/floodmap/map.htm> [Accessed 2 February 2016]. 48 British Geological Survey, n.d. [online] Available at <http://mapapps.bgs.ac.uk/geologyofbritain/home.html> [Accessed 2 February 2016]. 49 Muirhall Energy Ltd (2015) Loganhead Wind Farm Environmental Statement, Figure 8.3: Peat Depth.

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm


21

would however propose to provide information on hydrology and hydrogeology to the extent necessary to satisfy SEPA’s requirements for information on:

pollution prevention and environmental management – we will include outline details of a proposed Construction Environmental Management Plan within the description of the proposed development;

engineering in the water environment - we will provide a water crossing schedule and information on flood risk as an appendix to the project description;

information on peat characteristics, extent, proposed excavation, surplus and re-use options would be provided in a stage 1 peat management plan in line with SEPA guidance50 as an appendix to the Proposed Development Chapter; and

Ground Water Dependent Terrestrial Ecosystems (GWDTE) - we will provide a technical appendix to address the hydrogeology effects on GWDTE as an appendix to the Ecology chapter in line with SEPA LUPS guidance 4 and 31.

Given that there are no PWSs within 250 m of proposed tracks or turbines there will be no requirement for detailed risk assessment for PWS abstractions (in line with SEPA LUPS guidance 4 and 31).

Only areas alongside the Boyken Burn are mapped as being at risk from flooding within the site on the SEPA Flood Map. Therefore, a Drainage Impact Assessment and Flood Risk Assessment are not considered necessary.

3.8 Traffic, Transport and Access

The traffic, transport and access assessment will consider the likely significant effects of the proposed development on the transport network as a result of an intensification in traffic levels as a consequence of construction traffic.

The assessment will be carried out in accordance with the relevant policy and guidance documents including the Guidelines for Traffic Impact Assessment51, IEMA Guidelines for the Environmental Assessment of Road Traffic52 (“the IEMA Guidelines”), Transport Assessment Guidance53; and the Design Manual for Roads & Bridges (DMRB)54.

A review of published transport plans and planning policies for the area will be undertaken.

Other more specific records will also be sourced, such as data on traffic levels, accident records and details of any vehicle route weight restrictions.

A site visit will also be used to inform the traffic, transport and access assessment.

50 Developments on Peatland: Guidance on the Assessment of Peat Volumes, Reuse of Excavated Peat and Minimisation of Waste, Version 1 (2012) Scottish Renewables & SEPA 51 The Institution of Highways and Transportation, 1994. Guidelines for Traffic Impact Assessment. London: The Institution. 52 Institute of Environmental Assessment, 1993. Guidelines for the Environmental Assessment of Road Traffic, Guidance Note 1.Institute of Environmental Assessment. 53 Transport Scotland, 2012. Transport Assessment Guidance. [pdf] Glasgow: Transport Scotland. Available from: <http://www.transport.gov.scot/sites/default/files/private/documents/tsc-basic-pages/Planning_Reform_-_DPMTAG_-_Development_Management__DPMTAG_Ref__17__-_Transport_Assessment_Guidance_FINAL_-_June_2012.pdf> [Accessed 2 February 2013]. 54 Highways Agency, 2008. Design Manual for Roads Bridges. [pdf] Highways Agency. Available at:

<http://www.standardsforhighways.co.uk/dmrb/> [Accessed 2 February 2016].

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm


22

3.8.1 Baseline

The traffic, transport and access study area will be defined by the preferred abnormal and general construction traffic routes to the proposed development site.

Direct access to the site would be taken from the B709. This access point would cater for abnormal loads and general construction traffic.

At this time the preferred access route from the trunk road network (T) to the site for abnormal loads has yet to be confirmed, however abnormal vehicles would likely access the site from one of two options as shown on Figure 11. Both options use the A74 motorway (T) and B723 to Boreland. At Boreland, one option continues north east on the B723 to Eskdalemuir and then continues south east to Bentpath on the B709. The second option continues south east at Boreland on an unnamed minor road beyond Corrie Common before heading north east to meet the B709 west of Bentpath. The delivery port for turbine components is not yet known. Port options include: Ayr, King George IV Docks, Immingham or Newcastle. A detailed assessment of route options will be undertaken including swept path analysis.

General construction traffic routes to the site would be dependent on the location of suppliers. However, it is anticipated that general construction traffic would route to the site from larger urban areas via the A7 (T) and then the B709, accessing the site from the southeast.

The main sensitive receptor to increased traffic levels and any significant environmental effects as a result of the proposed development is likely to be the population of Langholm to the southeast, and residents at Bentpath to the north. There are also isolated properties adjacent to the B709 that could be classed as sensitive receptors which will also be considered.

Following the identification of the preferred abnormal and construction traffic routes, a desk top review, swept path analysis and a site visit will be used to confirm the traffic, transport and access study area and sensitive receptors.


It is considered potential significant effects could arise in the construction phase of the development. The main potential effects considered are:

Traffic congestion due to an increase in Heavy Goods Vehicle (HGV) traffic related to material and component delivery;

Traffic congestion due to an increase in non-HGV traffic; and

Abnormal road wear and tear.


Operation

Once the proposed development is operational, there will be little traffic associated with the proposed development apart from occasional maintenance vehicles which will have negligible effect. It is therefore proposed not to undertake any detailed assessment of the operational phase of the proposed development in respect of traffic, transport and access.

Decommissioning

Development consent is sought for a 25 year period, after which time the proposed development is expected to be decommissioned. Traffic associated with decommissioning would include HGVs, Light Goods Vehicles (LGVs), abnormal loads and private cars. The number of vehicle trips associated with decommissioning would be significantly less than those associated with

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm


23

construction. At this stage it is not possible to quantify decommissioning traffic volumes as the precedent for decommissioning has not yet been established. It is also not possible to quantify the effect of decommissioning traffic as the baseline conditions will change over the planning permission period.

Traffic, transport and access impacts and effects associated with decommissioning will therefore not be addressed in the ES.


It is likely that there will be a requirement to commission traffic surveys at two locations along the B709. These traffic surveys would take the form of Automatic Traffic Counts and would cover a one week period. The traffic surveys would be undertaken outwith school holidays.

Baseline traffic flow data will be obtained for routes within the study area from relevant sources including Transport Scotland, Department for Transport (DfT) and Dumfries & Galloway Council (where available) for the A/M74 (T), A7 (T), B709 and any other routes included in the study area. Should existing information not be available for the B709, two-way traffic counts will be commissioned on the local road network (B709) at two locations – one to the north (Bentpath) of the site access and one to the south (Langholm).


The collated traffic flow data is expected to confirm existing traffic levels including LGVs and HGVs within the study area. These figures will be combined with the forecast levels of proposed development traffic in order to identify the likely significant effects within the study area taking cognisance of IEMA Guidelines. In accordance with the IEMA Guidelines, the method used for assessing environmental effects of increased traffic will be based on a comparison between predicted traffic flows on potentially affected roads with and without proposed development traffic, in percentage terms. In addition to this, the overall carrying capacity of the road in question will be considered in undertaking the assessment.

The traffic, transport and access assessment will seek to provide a robust (worst case) assessment of impacts and effects associated with the proposed development.

The main transport constraints relating to the proposed development relate to the transportation of abnormal loads and the impact of general construction traffic on the settlement of Langholm. An assessment of abnormal loads will be undertaken to identify the preferred route to site, from the nearest suitable port and to assess what mitigating measures may be required on the public road network.

The assessment will identify the potential traffic and associated environmental effects on sensitive receptors and mitigation will be proposed where necessary. Mitigation would likely take the form of a Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP) inclusive of a Green Travel Plan for construction staff.


The anticipated cumulative effects of the potential for overlapping construction programmes for the proposed development in addition to other proposed developments will be considered. The mechanism to mitigate any cumulative effects is the implementation of a CTMP.

It is important to note that a cumulative assessment in respect of traffic, transport and access effects is dependent on the likelihood of more than one wind farm being under construction at the

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm


24

same time as the proposed development. This is especially pertinent to the peak construction periods associated with the importation of stone which would be dependent on the outputs of local quarries.

3.9 Noise

3.9.1 Baseline

There are a number of noise sensitive properties (dwellings) situated around the site. The local area is rural in nature and existing background noise levels are expected to be fairly low. Background noise monitoring has previously been undertaken for existing wind farm developments in the area and it may be possible to re-use some of this data to assess the proposed development.


Based on initial modelling results, there is the potential for significant effects from construction noise however such effects would be temporary and short term and would probably be limited to a small number of properties (if any). Noise emitted during the operational phase of the development is not expected to be significant as achievement of the relevant noise limits will form a key part of the site design. The significance of the effects will be assessed and presented as part of the ES.


Properties where noise from the proposed development is more than 10 dB below existing wind turbine noise levels will be scoped out of the assessment as noise from the proposed development will be having a negligible impact at the properties.


Prior to the noise monitoring survey, a desk based survey will be undertaken with the most up to date layout to determine which noise sensitive receptors will be included within the noise monitoring exercise. Consultation will be undertaken with the Dumfries and Galloway Council’s Environmental Health Department to agree the number and position of the proposed monitoring locations.


Operational Noise

ETSU-R-97 ‘The Assessment of Rating of Noise from Windfarms' details a methodology for establishing noise limits for proposed wind farm developments and these limits should not be exceeded. ETSU-R-97 states that noise limits should be set relative to existing background noise levels at the nearest receptors and that these limits should reflect the variation in background noise with wind speed. Separate noise limits apply for quiet daytime and for night-time periods. Quiet daytime limits are chosen to protect a property’s external amenity, and night time limits are chosen to prevent sleep disturbance indoors, with windows open.

A background noise survey is not required for situations where predicted wind turbine noise levels at the nearest noise sensitive properties is limited to an LA90,10min of 35 dB(A) up to wind speeds of 10 m/s at 10 m, as the protection of the amenity of those properties can be controlled through a simplified noise condition as detailed in ETSU-R-97. ETSU-R-97 states that:

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm


25

‘For single turbines or wind farms with very large separation distances between the turbines and the nearest properties, a simplified noise condition may be suitable. If the noise is limited to an LA90,10min of 35 dB(A) up to wind speeds of 10 m/s at 10 m height, then this condition alone would offer sufficient protection of amenity, and background noise surveys would be unnecessary.’

An assessment undertaken in accordance with ETSU-R-97 and current good practice will be included within the ES, predicted wind turbine noise will be compared to the limits established in accordance with ETSU-R-97. Achievement of the noise limits will be a key design criteria during the site design process. In order to assess operational noise impacts in accordance with ETSU-R-97, the following steps are required:

specify the location of the wind turbines;

identify the locations of the nearest, or most noise sensitive neighbours;

measure the background noise levels as a function of on site wind speed at the nearest neighbours, or a representative sample of the nearest neighbours;

determine the quiet daytime and night-time noise limits from the measured background noise levels at the nearest neighbours;

specify the noise emission characteristics of three candidate wind turbines suitable for the proposed development;

calculate the noise emission levels due to the operation of the wind turbines as a function of on site wind speed at the nearest neighbours; and

compare the calculated wind turbine noise emission levels with the derived noise limits and assess compliance with ETSU-R-97.

Construction Noise

Noise emitted during the construction phase will be temporary and short term in nature and can be minimised through careful construction practices. The effective control of these impacts can be achieved by way of a suitable planning condition. Construction noise can be controlled post planning consent (should consent be granted) through the use of two legislative instruments which address the effects of environmental noise with regard to construction noise, vibration, and nuisance:

The Environmental Protection Act 1990 (EPA); and

The Control of Pollution Act 1974 (CoPA).

The CoPA provides two means of controlling construction noise and vibration. Section 60 provides the Local Authority with the power to impose at any time operating conditions on the site. Section 61 allows the Applicant to negotiate a set of operating procedures with the Local Authority prior to commencement of site works.

A construction noise assessment will be undertaken to determine the potential noise impacts during the construction phase of the proposed development. The construction noise assessment will be undertaken in accordance with the methodology outlined in British Standard (BS) 5228: Part 1: 2009 and ISO9613:1996 (‘Acoustics - Attenuation of sound during propagation outdoors -Part 2: General method of calculation’). Impacts will be assessed using criteria contained within BS5228-1: 2009 and, where appropriate, mitigation measures will be proposed.

An assessment of the potential noise emissions during the decommissioning phases of the development will also be undertaken as part of the construction noise assessment. The impacts of the decommissioning phase will be assessed and, where appropriate, mitigation measures will be proposed.

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm


26


A cumulative noise assessment is required where there is potential for an increase in noise effects from the operation of two or more wind farms at any property/properties surrounding a development. In this regard, the following turbine developments have been identified as potentially relevant when considering potential cumulative effects:

Ewe Hill Wind Farm (Consented);

Craig Wind Farm (4 Turbines Operational, 1 consented, and 1 proposed);

Crossdykes Wind Farm (Application); and

Loganhead Wind Farm (Application).

The assessment will be undertaken in accordance with current best practise and the schemes above will be reviewed and accounted for as part of the ES.

3.10 Forestry

The changes to the commercial forestry on site will be considered as part of the project description, rather than as a receptor which requires a separate technical EIA assessment. A separate factual Technical Appendix will be provided on forestry, whereas the indirect effects of forestry removal on landscape, visual, ecology and ornithology will be considered in the respective technical chapters.

The forestry baseline will be established in order to describe the crops existing at time of preparation of the ES. This will include species composition; age class; yield class (if available); other relevant crop information; and baseline felling and restocking plans (if available).

The output would be the production of finalised baseline data including species, planting year, yield class (where available), felling and restocking proposals (where available). The baseline data, in particular the restocking plan, would be used for comparison with the wind farm forestry proposals.

The development of a “Wind Farm Forest Design Plan” to replace the existing plan and to incorporate the wind farm infrastructure would be a key component of the design process. This would be an iterative process as the wind farm layout is refined and will be finalised once the wind farm layout has been fixed.

The revised Wind Farm Forest Design Plan will show which woodlands are to be felled and when they are to be felled during the life of the proposed development. It would take into account existing crops; silvicultural constraints; site conditions; the baseline Forest Design Plans; landowner objectives; wind farm requirements; and other constraints identified during the EIA process.

The felling proposals would consider the full range of options available including conventional felling and restocking; felling with no replanting; keyholing; early staged felling; restructuring felling; delayed felling; compensatory planting, long term retentions and natural reserves.

The Wind Farm Forest Design plan will provide proposals for restocking, including which species are to be planted and where during the life of the proposed development. Restocking options would include delayed restocking; revised species; and/or stocking densities.

The plan would identify the proposed method of crop clearance, subsequent replanting and aftercare requirements. It would identify changes to the pattern of timber harvesting and the effects on timber production. The plan would also provide information on the use of forestry

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm


27

wastes that are to be retained and reused at the site. The proposed reuse of forestry wastes would be quantified and justified.

The proposals will take into account The Scottish Government’s Control of Woodland Removal Policy55, the UK Forestry Standard56 and other legislation, policy and guidance as relevant. The proposals will also identify the extent of any net loss of woodland.

55 Forestry Commission Scotland, 2009. The Scottish Government’s Policy on Control of Woodland Removal. [pdf] Forestry Commission Scotland. Available at: <http://www.forestry.gov.uk/pdf/fcfc125.pdf/$FILE/fcfc125.pdf> [Accessed 2 February 2016]. 56 Forestry Commission, 2011. The UK Forestry Standard: The governments’ approach to sustainable forest management, 3rd ed. [pdf]

Edinburgh: Forestry Commission. Available at: <http://www.forestry.gov.uk/pdf/FCFC001.pdf/$FILE/FCFC001.pdf> [Accessed 2 February 2016].

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm


28

4. ISSUES SCOPED OUT OF THE EIA

The following issues are proposed to be scoped out of the EIA.

4.1 Aviation and Defence

The Applicant commissioned a NATS technical and operational assessment for the proposed development. The En-route radar technical assessment indicates that the proposed development would be likely to cause false primary plots, and a reduction in the radar’s probability of detection for real aircraft. The operational impact on Prestwick Centre ATC, without further mitigation, has been deemed unacceptable. Where there is an identified need, the Applicant would enter into a radar mitigation contract to provide a technical solution to potential interference with radar. On the basis that a technical mitigation solution is implemented, there would be no significant effects on aviation. No further assessment is required as part of the EIA process and a summary of consultation will be presented in the ES rather than a detailed technical assessment.

The site is also located inside the Ministry of Defence (MOD) Low Flying Area 16 and Tactical Training Area 20 (T) – a high priority area for military tactical training. The Applicant will consult with the Defence Infrastructure Organisation (DIO)) on behalf of the MOD to determine the need for any specific mitigation e.g. a scheme of non-visible (infrared) aviation lighting.

The site is located 15.3 km from the centre of the Eskdalemuir seismic monitoring station at its closest point (see Figure 12). As the site is located over 15 km from the centre of the Eskdalemuir seismic monitoring station, the proposed development would not compromise the operations at the station.

4.2 Socioeconomics

The proposed development would bring the potential for significant beneficial economic effects at a local level in relation to the temporary and long term increase in employment opportunities during construction and less so through operation.

The potential effects on visual amenity for tourism and recreational locations will be fully assessed in ES as part of the landscape and visual assessment. However, it should be noted that there is no evidence to support the suggestion that the presence of a wind farm would result in a significant adverse effect on tourism or recreation resources57. The proposed development is located in a preferred area for large typology wind turbines according to Dumfries and Galloway landscape capacity study.

The construction of the proposed development would not entail significant road works, closures or diversions which would have potential to adversely affect access to tourism assets and no potential for significant effects is identified.

The economic effects are not considered to give rise to significant effects on a regional or national level, and as such will not be considered in an impact assessment chapter of the ES. However, a separate factual statement on the socio-economic benefits will be provided as part of the ES, and the community benefit potential of the proposed development will be set out.

4.3 Air Quality

The proposed development is not considered likely to give rise to significant impacts on air quality. The main activities would be limited to construction works (dust from soil stripping and

57 Renewables UK, 2010. Wind Farms and Tourism Fact Sheet 03. [pdf] Renewables UK. Available at:

<http://www.helensburghrenewables.co.uk/wp-uploads/2013/02/ReUK-Tourism.pdf>.

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm


29

earthworks, from excavation, potentially including occasional blasting, and from vehicles running over unsurfaced ground) and exhaust emissions from fixed and mobile construction plant and construction vehicles. Construction works would be localised, short term, intermittent and controllable through the application of good construction practice. Fixed and mobile plant would be limited in size and number, and operate for short periods.

The contributions of exhaust emissions (NO2 and PM10) from construction vehicles are likely to be low, and orders of magnitude below current Air Quality Objectives. Therefore, it is proposed that the EIA will not address air quality impacts.

4.4 Shadow Flicker

Scottish Government web-based advice on onshore wind turbines (previously known as PAN45) states that ‘where separation is provided between wind turbines and nearby dwellings (as a general rule 10 rotor diameters), “shadow flicker” should not be a problem.’ Local policy58 also looks for a 10 rotor diameter separation to the nearest dwellings. The potential for shadow flicker effects will be addressed through the proposed development design process (and reported in the design/alternatives section of the ES), either by specifying a software based turbine mitigation during critical time periods to prevent shadow flicker, or through the proposed turbine layout to provide a 10 rotor diameter separation from residential properties. On this basis, no shadow flicker assessment will be provided.

4.5 Ice Throw

The maximum potential distance of ice falling from turbines can be approximated using the formula 1.5 x (blade diameter + hub height)59. For the proposed development, the maximum distance from a turbine where ice could be expected to fall is therefore in the region of 270 m. As such, the risk to public safety is considered to be very low because the distance from the turbines to the nearest public road, residential property or core path would be greater than 270 m.

In line with current guidance60, however, a permanent warning sign at the site entrance is proposed to alert the public to this issue. No detailed assessment is proposed as part of the ES.

58 Dumfries and Galloway Council, 2015. Local Development Plan, Supplementary Guidance, Part 1 Wind Energy Development:

Development Management Considerations. [pdf] Dumfries and Galloway Council. Available at: <http://www.dumgal.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=11890&p=0> [Accessed 01/02/2016]. 59 Seifert, H., Westerhellwg, A. and Kroning, J., 2003. Risk Analysis of Ice Throw from Wind Turbines. [pdf] Available at: <http://www.windaction.org/posts/13298-risk-analysis-of-ice-throw-from-wind-turbines#.VrDHV01yaUl> [Accessed 2 February 2016]. 60 Scottish Renewables, Scottish Natural Heritage, SEPA and Forestry Commission Scotland, 2010. Good Practice During Wind Farm

Construction. [pdf] Available at: <http://www.snh.org.uk/pdfs/strategy/renewables/Good%20practice%20during%20windfarm%20construction.pdf> [Accessed 2 February 2016].

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm


30

5. NEXT STEPS

In forming its opinion, the Scottish Ministers will seek the views of various organisations with an interest in the proposed development, inviting comments on the proposed scope of and approach to the EIA proposed herein.

In submitting your comments on this report, we would be grateful if you could send a copy of your response to the address below.

Peter Bruce

Ramboll Environ

5th Floor

7 Castle Street

Edinburgh

EH2 3AH

Email: [email protected]

Telephone: 0131 297 2650

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm

APPENDIX A FIGURES

G F

G F

G F

G F

G FG F

G F

G F

G FG F

G F

G FG F

G F

G FG F

G F

G F

G FG F

G F

G F

G F

G F

G F

G F

G F

G F

G F

G F

G F

G F

G F

G F

G F

G FG F

G F

G F

G FG F

G F

G F

G F

G F

G F

G F

G F

G F

G F

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

T9

T8

T7

T6T5

T4

T3

T2

T1

T16

T15

T14

T13

T12

T11

T10

T18

T17

CT9

CT8

CT7

CT6

CT5

CT4

CT3

CT2

CT1

CT1

5

CT1

4

CT1

3 CT1

2

CT1

1

CT1

0

LH9

LH8

LH7

LH6

LH5

LH4 LH

3

LH2

LH1

LH13

LH12

LH11

LH10

EW9

EW8

EW7

EW6

EW5

EW4

EW3

EW2

EW39

EW38

EW37

EW36

EW35

EW32

EW25

EW24

EW17

EW16

EW14

EW13

EW11

EW10

Issu

eD

raw

n by

Sca

le

Dat

e

Site

Proj

ect

No.

Title

Clie

nt

1RM

Mar

ch 2

016

Figu

re 1

: Site

Layo

ut

Scop

ing

Rep

ort

UK12

-224

27 @A

31:

30,0

00

Key

Site

Bou

ndar

y

!(Tu

rbin

e Lo

catio

n -

Hop

srig

G FTu

rbin

e Lo

catio

n -

Cro

ssdy

kes

G FTu

rbin

e Lo

catio

n -

Ewe

Hill

G FTu

rbin

e Lo

catio

n -

Loga

nhea

d

Rep

rod

uce

d f

rom

Ord

nan

ce S

urv

ey

Ma

p D

ata

wit

h t

he

per

mis

sio

n o

f th

e C

ontr

oll

er o

f H

MS

O,

Cro

wn

Co

pyr

igh

t R

eser

ved

Lic

ence

No

. E

S 1

00

02

24

32

Path: P:\CONTRACT\UK224xx\UK12-22427 Hopsrig Wind Farm Ltd (Buccleuch Estates)_ Hopsrig EIA\GIS\MapFiles\Figures\ScopReport\UK1222427_Fig1_SiteLoc_E.mxd

01,

000

m

N

Hop

srig

Win

d Fa

rm L

td

Hop

srig

Win

d Fa

rmLa

ngho

lm

020

km

Har

esta

nes

Ewe

Hill

Hig

hlee

Hill

Cly

de W

ind

Farm

(Ext

ensi

on)

Cly

de (N

orth

, Cen

tral

and

Sou

th)

Auc

henc

airn

Har

esta

nes

Exte

nsio

n

Whi

tela

w B

rae

Min

sca

Birn

eykn

owe

Win

dy E

dge

Solw

ayba

nk

Min

nyga

p

Cro

ssdy

kes

Cly

de (N

orth

, Cen

tral

and

Sou

th)

Dal

swin

ton

Loga

nhea

d

Bla

ckw

ood

Lang

hope

Rig

Hal

lbur

n

Dun

cow

Com

mon

Wes

t Sca

les

Cra

ig

Issu

eD

raw

n by

Sca

le

Dat

e

Site

Proj

ect

No.

Title

Clie

nt

1D

D

Mar

ch 2

016

Figu

re 2

: Cum

ulat

ive

Situ

atio

n

Scop

ing

Rep

ort

UK12

-224

27 @A

31:

275,

000

Key

Site

Bou

ndar

y

Stud

y Are

a -

10km

Stud

y Are

a -

20km

Stud

y Are

a -

30km

Stud

y Are

a -

35km

Win

dfa

rm -

Sta

tus

Inst

alle

d

Appr

oved

Appl

icat

ion

Appe

al

Scop

ing

Re

prod

uce

d f

rom

Ord

nan

ce S

urv

ey

Ma

p D

ata

wit

h t

he

per

mis

sio

n o

f th

e C

ontr

oll

er o

f H

MS

O,

Cro

wn

Co

pyr

igh

t R

ese

rve

d

Lice

nce

No

. E

S 1

00

02

243

2

Path: P:\CONTRACT\UK224xx\UK12-22427 Hopsrig Wind Farm Ltd (Buccleuch Estates)_ Hopsrig EIA\GIS\MapFiles\Figures\ScopReport\UK1222427_Fig2_Cumulatives_B.mxd

010

km

N

Hop

srig

Win

d Fa

rm L

td

Hop

srig

Win

d Fa

rmLa

ngho

lm

STC

15ST

C13

BD

R6

BD

R28

BD

R22

STC

21

BD

R29

BD

R4

BD

R25

BD

R22

BD

R29

BD

R4

STC

12

LOC

HLO

CH

DG

W22

LOC

H

BD

R10

LOC

H

DG

W11

LOC

HLO

CH

BD

R10

DG

W10

BD

R28

DG

W21

BD

R8

BD

R8

LOC

H

STC

14

BD

R7

BD

R28

BD

R11

DG

W22

LOC

H

BD

R26

LOC

H

BD

R5

BD

R11

BD

R29

STC

18

STC

18

LOC

H

DG

W11

LOC

H

DG

W8

DG

W5

LOC

H

DG

W21

BD

R10

BD

R10

LOC

HLO

CH

DG

W11

DG

W22

DG

W11

DG

W20

DG

W20

DG

W11

DG

W20

DG

W17

DG

W17

DG

W11

DG

W22

DG

W22

BD

R22

BD

R26

LOC

HLO

CH

LOC

H

LOC

HLO

CH

BD

R28

BD

R11

LOC

H

DG

W20 D

GW

20

DG

W22

DG

W11

BD

R22

DG

W21

LOC

H

DG

W20

DG

W6

DG

W17

DG

W17

LOC

H

DG

W17 D

GW

17

DG

W6

DG

W21

DG

W7

LOC

H

BD

R5

DG

W22

LOC

H

BD

R4

DG

W22

DG

W22

DG

W23

UR

BA

N

UR

BA

ND

GW

5D

GW

8

DG

W14

LOC

H

DG

W7

LOC

HLO

CH

LOC

HLO

CH

DG

W17

DG

W7

DG

W3

DG

W7

DG

W3

LOC

H

DG

W15

DG

W24

DG

W15

LOC

HLO

CH

LOC

H

DG

W6

DG

W20

DG

W8

LOC

H

DG

W2

LOC

H

DG

W1

LOC

H

LOC

H

LOC

H

ISLD

DG

W24

DG

W14

DG

W5

LOC

H

DG

W5

DG

W16

DG

W17

DG

W8

LOC

H_I

SLD

DG

W24

DG

W24

DG

W24

LOC

H

Issu

eD

raw

n by

Sca

le

Dat

e

Site

Proj

ect

No.

Title

Clie

nt

1D

D

Mar

ch 2

016

Figu

re 3

: La

ndsc

ape

Cha

ract

er T

ypes

Scop

ing

Rep

ort

UK12

-224

27 @A

31:

275,

000

Key

Site

Bou

ndar

y

Stu

dy A

rea

- 10k

m

Stu

dy A

rea

- 20k

m

Stu

dy A

rea

- 30k

m

Stu

dy A

rea

- 35k

m

Re

prod

uce

d f

rom

Ord

nan

ce S

urv

ey

Ma

p D

ata

wit

h t

he

per

mis

sio

n o

f th

e C

ontr

oll

er o

f H

MS

O,

Cro

wn

Co

pyr

igh

t R

ese

rve

d

Lice

nce

No

. E

S 1

00

02

243

2

Path: P:\CONTRACT\UK224xx\UK12-22427 Hopsrig Wind Farm Ltd (Buccleuch Estates)_ Hopsrig EIA\GIS\MapFiles\Figures\ScopReport\UK1222427_Fig3_LandscCharTypes_B.mxd

010

km

N

Hop

srig

Win

d Fa

rm L

td

Hop

srig

Win

d Fa

rmLa

ngho

lm

Lan

dsc

ape

Ch

ara

cter

Typ

es

BDR10

- G

rass

land

with

Roc

k O

utcr

ops

BDR11

- G

rass

land

with

Hill

sBD

R22

- U

plan

d Va

lley

with

Past

oral

Flo

orBD

R25

- U

plan

d Va

lley

with

Woo

dlan

dBD

R26

- P

asto

ral U

plan

d Fr

inge

Val

ley

BDR28

- W

oode

d U

plan

d Fr

inge

Val

ley

BDR29

- L

owla

nd V

alle

y w

ith

Farm

land

BDR4

- Sou

ther

n U

plan

ds w

ith S

catt

ered

For

est

BDR5

- Sou

ther

n U

plan

ds F

ores

t Cov

ered

BDR6

- Che

viot

Upl

ands

BDR7

- Che

viot

Foo

thill

sBD

R8

- Ro

lling

Far

mla

ndD

GW

1 -

Peni

nsul

aD

GW

10 -

Upp

er D

ale

(Val

ley)

DG

W11

- U

plan

d G

lens

DG

W14

- D

rum

lin P

astu

res

DG

W15

- C

oast

al P

late

auD

GW

16 -

Flo

w P

late

auD

GW

17 -

Upl

and

Frin

geD

GW

2 -

Peni

nsul

a w

ith G

orse

y Kno

lls

DG

W20

- F

ooth

ills

DG

W21

- F

ooth

ills

With

For

est

DG

W22

- S

outh

ern

Upl

ands

DG

W23

- S

outh

ern

Upl

ands

with

For

est

DG

W24

- C

oast

al G

rani

te U

plan

dsD

GW

3 -

Coa

stal

Fla

tsD

GW

5 -

Nar

row

Woo

ded

Riv

er V

alle

ysD

GW

6 -

Intim

ate

Past

oral

Val

leys

DG

W7

- Lo

wer

Dal

e (V

alle

y)D

GW

8 -

Mid

dle

Dal

e (V

alle

y)IS

LD -

Coa

stal

Isl

and

LOCH

- I

nlan

d Lo

chLO

CH

_ISL

D -

Loc

h Is

land

STC12

- U

plan

d Riv

er V

alle

ysST

C13

- B

road

Val

ley

Upl

and

STC14

- U

plan

d G

len

STC15

- F

ooth

ills

STC18

- P

late

au M

oorl

ands

STC21

- S

outh

ern

Upl

ands

URBAN

- U

rban

Solway Coast

Solw

ay

Coas

t

Nor

thP

enni

nes

02. T

alla

-H

art f

ell

Nith

Estu

ary

East

Stew

artr

yC

oast

SCO

T'S

MIN

ING

CO

MPA

NY

HO

USE

MO

NTE

VIO

T

DR

UM

LAN

RIG

CA

STLE

RA

EHIL

LS

MA

XWEL

TON

(GLE

NC

AIR

NC

AST

LE)

DA

LSW

INTO

N

CO

WH

ILL

TOW

ER

BR

OO

KLA

ND

S

KIN

MO

UN

T

AR

BIG

LAN

D

BA

RN

HO

UR

IEM

ILL

Tort

horw

ald

Rid

ge

Thor

nhill

Upl

ands

Mof

fat

Hill

s

Lang

holm

Hill

s

Terr

egle

sR

idge

Solw

ayC

oast

Solw

ayC

oast

Solw

ayC

oast

Issu

eD

raw

n by

Sca

le

Dat

e

Site

Proj

ect

No.

Title

Clie

nt

1D

D

Mar

ch 2

016

Figu

re 4

: La

ndsc

ape

Des

igna

tions

and

Cla

ssifi

catio

nsSc

opin

g Rep

ort

UK12

-224

27 @A

31:

275,

000

Key

Site

Bou

ndar

y

Stud

y Are

a -

10km

Stud

y Are

a -

20km

Stud

y Are

a -

30km

Stud

y Are

a -

35km

Nat

iona

l Sce

nic

Area

s

Wild

Lan

d Ar

eas

2014

Gar

dens

and

Des

igne

dLa

ndsc

apes

Spec

ial L

ands

cape

Area

s -

Sco

ttis

hBo

rder

s

Regi

onal

Sce

nic

Are

a-

Dum

frie

s an

dG

allo

way

Area

of

Out

stan

ding

Nat

ural

Bea

uty

Wor

ld H

erita

ge S

ite -

Had

rian

s W

all

Re

prod

uce

d f

rom

Ord

nan

ce S

urv

ey

Ma

p D

ata

wit

h t

he

per

mis

sio

n o

f th

e C

ontr

oll

er o

f H

MS

O,

Cro

wn

Co

pyr

igh

t R

ese

rve

d

Lice

nce

No

. E

S 1

00

02

243

2

Path: P:\CONTRACT\UK224xx\UK12-22427 Hopsrig Wind Farm Ltd (Buccleuch Estates)_ Hopsrig EIA\GIS\MapFiles\Figures\ScopReport\UK1222427_Fig4_LandscDesignations_B.mxd

010

km

N

Hop

srig

Win

d Fa

rm L

td

Hop

srig

Win

d Fa

rmLa

ngho

lm

!(

!( !(

!(!(!(

!(!( !( !(

!(!(!(

!( !(!(

!(!(

_ _

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

1 2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1011

12

13

14

15

Issu

eD

raw

n by

Sca

le

Dat

e

Site

Proj

ect

No.

Title

Clie

nt

1D

D

Mar

ch 2

016

Figu

re 5

: ZTV

and

View

poin

t Lo

catio

ns

Scop

ing

Rep

ort

UK12

-224

27 @A

31:

275,

000

Key

Site

Bou

ndar

y

!(Tu

rbin

e Lo

catio

n

Rad

ii Fr

om O

uter

Turb

ine

at 1

0km

Inte

rval

s

Stu

dy A

rea

- 35k

m

1_Vi

ewpo

int L

ocat

ion

Re

prod

uce

d f

rom

Ord

nan

ce S

urv

ey

Ma

p D

ata

wit

h t

he

per

mis

sio

n o

f th

e C

ontr

oll

er o

f H

MS

O,

Cro

wn

Co

pyr

igh

t R

ese

rve

d

Lice

nce

No

. E

S 1

00

02

243

2

Path: P:\CONTRACT\UK224xx\UK12-22427 Hopsrig Wind Farm Ltd (Buccleuch Estates)_ Hopsrig EIA\GIS\MapFiles\Figures\ScopReport\UK1222427_Fig5_ZTVandViewpoints_E.mxd

010

km

N

Hop

srig

Win

d Fa

rm L

td

Hop

srig

Win

d Fa

rmLa

ngho

lm

Num

ber o

f Tur

bine

sVi

sibl

e at

Bla

de T

ipLe

vel (

135m

)

1 - 3

4 - 6

7 - 9

10 -

12

13 -

16

17 -

18

1.

The

ZTV

an

alys

is

does

no

tta

ke i

nto

acco

unt

the

scre

enin

gef

fect

of

vege

tati

on,

build

ings

an

dot

her

surf

ace

feat

ures

2. P

redi

cted

vis

ibili

ty b

ased

on

avi

ewer

ey

e he

ight

2m

ab

ove

grou

nd3.

V

isib

ility

ca

lcul

ated

us

ing

Ord

nanc

e S

urve

y Te

rrai

n 5

DTM

on

a 5m

Gri

d4.

Eff

ect

of e

arth

cur

vatu

re a

ndlig

ht r

efra

ctio

n is

incl

uded

1

Issu

eD

raw

n by

Sca

le

Dat

e

Site

Proj

ect

No.

Title

Clie

nt

1D

D

Mar

ch 2

016

Figu

re 6

: Ec

olog

ical

and

O

rnitho

logi

cal

Des

igna

tions

Scop

ing

Rep

ort

UK12

-224

27 @A

31:

160,

000

Key

Site

Bou

ndar

y

20km

Stu

dy A

rea

Spe

cial

Are

a of

Con

serv

atio

n

Spe

cial

Pro

tect

ion

Are

a

RA

MS

AR

Site

of S

peci

al S

cien

tific

Inte

rest

Nat

iona

l Nat

ure

Res

erve

Anc

ient

Woo

dlan

dIn

vent

ory

Loca

l Nat

ure

Res

erve

Impo

rtant

Bird

Are

a

Rep

rod

uce

d f

rom

Ord

nan

ce S

urv

ey M

ap D

ata

wit

h t

he p

erm

issi

on o

f th

e C

ontr

olle

r of

HM

SO

, Cro

wn

Co

pyri

gh

t R

eser

ved

Lic

en

ce N

o. E

S 1

00

02

24

32

Path: P:\CONTRACT\UK224xx\UK12-22427 Hopsrig Wind Farm Ltd (Buccleuch Estates)_ Hopsrig EIA\GIS\MapFiles\Figures\ScopReport\UK1222427_Fig6_EcolAndOrnithDesignations_B.mxd

05

km

N

Hop

srig

Win

d Fa

rm L

td

Hop

srig

Win

d Fa

rmLa

ngho

lm

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

T17

T18

T1

T2

T3

T4T5

T6

T7

T8

T9

T10

T11

T12

T13

T14

T15

T16

2

3

2223

24

252627

28

29

30

31

3334

35

3637

38

39

40

46

474849

5455

6364

197

198

199

200

201

202

203

204

205

206

207

208

209

210

211

212

Issu

eD

raw

n by

Sca

le

Dat

e

Site

Proj

ect

No.

Title

Clie

nt

1D

D

Mar

ch 2

016

Figu

re 7

: Cul

tura

lH

eritag

e Ass

ets

with

inth

e Site

Scop

ing

Rep

ort

UK12

-224

27 @A

31:

17,5

00

Key

Site

Bou

ndar

y

!(Tu

rbin

e Lo

catio

n

Sch

edul

ed M

onum

ents

List

ed B

uild

ings

Boy

ken

Bur

n A

SA

!(H

erita

ge C

onst

rain

ts

Re

prod

uce

d f

rom

Ord

nan

ce S

urv

ey

Ma

p D

ata

wit

h t

he

per

mis

sio

n o

f th

e C

ontr

oll

er o

f H

MS

O,

Cro

wn

Co

pyr

igh

t R

ese

rve

d

Lice

nce

No

. E

S 1

00

02

243

2

Path: P:\CONTRACT\UK224xx\UK12-22427 Hopsrig Wind Farm Ltd (Buccleuch Estates)_ Hopsrig EIA\GIS\MapFiles\Figures\ScopReport\UK1222427_Fig7_CultHerSitesWithinSite_C.mxd

01,

000

m

N

Hop

srig

Win

d Fa

rm L

td

Hop

srig

Win

d Fa

rmLa

ngho

lm

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

T17

T18

T1

T2

T3

T4T5

T6

T7

T8T9

T10

T11

T12 T1

3 T14

T15

T16

1

111213

1415

16

24

26

27

28

43

44

45

46

49

58

59

62

63

64

65

6774

78

80

81

82

83

85

9193

95

98

99

100

101

102

103

105

106

107

108

109

110

111

112

113

116

118 11

9

120

121

122

123

124

125

126

127

128

129

130

2

3

2223

24

2526

2728

293031

33 3435

3637

38

3940

4647

4849

5455

63 6419

7

198

199

200

201

202

203

204

205

206

207

208

209

210

211

212

Issu

eD

raw

n by

Sca

le

Dat

e

Site

Proj

ect

No.

Title

Clie

nt

1D

D

Mar

ch 2

016

Figu

re 8

: Cul

tura

lH

eritag

e Ass

ets

with

in5k

m S

tudy

Are

aSc

opin

g Rep

ort

UK12

-224

27 @A

31:

50,0

00

Key

Site

Bou

ndar

y

5km

Stu

dy A

rea

!(Tu

rbin

e Lo

catio

n

!(H

erita

ge A

sset

s

Sch

edul

ed M

onum

ents

List

ed B

uild

ings

Boy

ken

Bur

n

Con

serv

atio

n A

reas

Num

ber o

f Tur

bine

sVi

sibl

e at

Bla

de T

ipLe

vel (

135m

)

1 - 3

4 - 6

7 - 9

10 -

12

13 -

16

17 -

19

Re

prod

uce

d f

rom

Ord

nan

ce S

urv

ey

Ma

p D

ata

wit

h t

he

per

mis

sio

n o

f th

e C

ontr

oll

er o

f H

MS

O,

Cro

wn

Co

pyr

igh

t R

ese

rve

d

Lice

nce

No

. E

S 1

00

02

243

2

Path: P:\CONTRACT\UK224xx\UK12-22427 Hopsrig Wind Farm Ltd (Buccleuch Estates)_ Hopsrig EIA\GIS\MapFiles\Figures\ScopReport\UK1222427_Fig8_CultHerSitesWithin5km_C.mxd

03

km

N

Hop

srig

Win

d Fa

rm L

td

Hop

srig

Win

d Fa

rmLa

ngho

lm

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! (! (

! (

! (

! (! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! (! (

T9T8

T7

T6T5

T4

T3

T2

T1T1

6T1

5

T14

T13

T12

T11

T10

T18

T17

Issu

eD

raw

n by

Sca

le

Dat

e

Site

Proj

ect

No.

Title

Clie

nt

1D

D

Mar

ch 2

016

Hop

srig

Win

d Fa

rm L

td

Hop

srig

Win

d Fa

rmLa

ngho

lm

Figu

re 9

: H

ydro

logi

cal

Con

stra

ints

Scop

ing

Rep

ort

UK12

-224

27 @A

31:

30,0

00

Key

Site

Bou

ndar

y

! (Tu

rbin

e Lo

catio

n

Stud

y Are

a -

2km

Wat

erbo

dy

Wat

erbo

dy -

50m

Buff

er

!(Pr

ivat

e W

ater

Sup

ply

Priv

ate

Wat

er S

uppl

y-

250m

Buf

fer

Re

prod

uce

d f

rom

Ord

nan

ce S

urv

ey

Ma

p D

ata

wit

h t

he

per

mis

sio

n o

f th

e C

ontr

oll

er o

f H

MS

O,

Cro

wn

Co

pyr

igh

t R

ese

rve

d

Lice

nce

No

. E

S 1

00

02

243

2

Path: P:\CONTRACT\UK224xx\UK12-22427 Hopsrig Wind Farm Ltd (Buccleuch Estates)_ Hopsrig EIA\GIS\MapFiles\Figures\ScopReport\UK1222427_Fig9_HydrCons_C.mxd

01,

000

m

N

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

E

EE

E

E

E EEE

E

E

E

EE

E

E E

EE

EE

EE

E

E

E

E E

E

EE

E

E

EE

E

E

E

EE

EE

E

EE

EE E

E

E

E

E

EE

E

E

EE

EE E

E

E

EE

E

E

E

E

E

E

EE

E

EE

E

E

EE

EE

E EE

EE

E

EE

E

E EE

EEEE

E

E

E

EE

E

EEE

EE

E

EE

E

E

EE

E E

EE

EE

EE

EE

E E

E

EEE

E

EE

E

E

E

E

E

EE

EE

EEE

E

E

EE

EE

E

E

E

EE

E

EE

EE

EE

E

E

E

E

E

E

EE

E

E

E

EE

E

E

E

E

E

E

E

E

E

E

E

EE

EE

E

E

E

EE

E

E

E

EE

E

E E

E

E

EE

EE E E

EE

EEE

EEE

E

EE

E

EEE

EEE

E

E

E

EE

EE

E

E

EE

E

E

EE

E

EE

E

E

EE

EE

E

EE

EE

E

EE

E

E

E

E

EE

E

E

EE

E

EE

E

EE

E

E

E

E

E

E

E

E

E

EE

EE

E E E

E

EE

E

E

E

E

EE

E

EE

E

EE

EE

E

E

E

E

E

E

E

EE E

EE

E

E

EE

E

E

E

EE

E

E

E

E

EE

EE

E

EE

EE

EE

E

E

T9

T8

T7

T6T5

T4

T3

T2

T1

T16

T15

T14

T13

T12

T11

T10

T18

T17

Issu

eD

raw

n by

Sca

le

Dat

e

Site

Proj

ect

No.

Title

Clie

nt

1RM

Mar

ch 2

016

Figu

re 1

0: P

eat

Prob

eLo

cation

s an

d Re

cord

edPe

at D

epth

Scop

ing

Rep

ort

UK12

-224

27 @A

31:

20,0

00

Key

Site

Bou

ndar

y

!(Tu

rbin

e Lo

catio

n -

Hop

srig

EP

eat S

urve

y P

robe

Loca

tions

Peat

dep

th (m

)

0 - 0

.5

0.5

- 1

1.0

- 1.5

1.5

- 2.0

2.0

- 2.5

2.5

- 3.0

3.0

- 3.5

3.5

- 4.0

Pea

t (B

GS

50k

Sup

erfic

ial)

Re

prod

uce

d f

rom

Ord

nan

ce S

urv

ey

Ma

p D

ata

wit

h t

he

per

mis

sio

n o

f th

e C

ontr

oll

er o

f H

MS

O,

Cro

wn

Co

pyr

igh

t R

ese

rve

d

Lice

nce

No

. E

S 1

00

02

243

2

Path: P:\CONTRACT\UK224xx\UK12-22427 Hopsrig Wind Farm Ltd (Buccleuch Estates)_ Hopsrig EIA\GIS\MapFiles\Figures\ScopReport\UK1222427_Fig10_Peat_A.mxd

01,

000

m

N

Hop

srig

Win

d Fa

rm L

td

Hop

srig

Win

d Fa

rmLa

ngho

lm

Issu

eD

raw

n by

Sca

le

Dat

e

Site

Proj

ect

No.

Title

Clie

nt

1RM

Mar

ch 2

016

Figu

re 1

: Abn

orm

alLo

ad R

oute

Opt

ions

Scop

ing

Rep

ort

UK12

-224

27 @A

31:

90,0

00

Key

Site

Bou

ndar

y

Abn

orm

al L

oad

Rou

te 3

Abn

orm

al L

oad

Rou

te 6

Re

prod

uce

d f

rom

Ord

nan

ce S

urv

ey

Ma

p D

ata

wit

h t

he

per

mis

sio

n o

f th

e C

ontr

oll

er o

f H

MS

O,

Cro

wn

Co

pyr

igh

t R

ese

rve

d

Lice

nce

No

. E

S 1

00

02

243

2

Path: P:\CONTRACT\UK224xx\UK12-22427 Hopsrig Wind Farm Ltd (Buccleuch Estates)_ Hopsrig EIA\GIS\MapFiles\Figures\ScopReport\UK1222427_Fig12_AbnormalAccess_A.mxd

05

km

N

Hop

srig

Win

d Fa

rm L

td

Hop

srig

Win

d Fa

rmLa

ngho

lm

_̂

Issu

eD

raw

n by

Sca

le

Dat

e

Site

Proj

ect

No.

Title

Clie

nt

1D

D

Mar

ch 2

016

Figu

re 1

: Site

Lay

out

with

15

km

Esk

dale

mui

r Se

ism

ic

Mon

itoring

Sta

tion

Buffer

Scop

ing

Rep

ort

UK12

-224

27 @A

31:

125,

000

Key

Site

Bou

ndar

y

_̂E

skda

lem

uir S

eism

icM

onito

ring

Sta

tion

Esk

dale

mui

r - 1

5km

Buf

fer

Re

prod

uce

d f

rom

Ord

nan

ce S

urv

ey

Ma

p D

ata

wit

h t

he

per

mis

sio

n o

f th

e C

ontr

oll

er o

f H

MS

O,

Cro

wn

Co

pyr

igh

t R

ese

rve

d

Lice

nce

No

. E

S 1

00

02

243

2

Path: P:\CONTRACT\UK224xx\UK12-22427 Hopsrig Wind Farm Ltd (Buccleuch Estates)_ Hopsrig EIA\GIS\MapFiles\Figures\ScopReport\UK1222427_Fig11_Eskdalemuir_B.mxd

03

km

N

Hop

srig

Win

d Fa

rm L

td

Hop

srig

Win

d Fa

rmLa

ngho

lm

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm

APPENDIX B CONSULTEE LIST

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm

Consultee List

Scottish Ministers (care of Energy Consents and Deployment Unit, Scottish Government) - Competent Authority

Dumfries and Galloway Council - Local Planning Authority

Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA)

Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH)

Historic Environment Scotland

Forestry Commission Scotland

Marine Scotland (freshwater fisheries)

Transport Scotland

Scottish Water

Langholm, Ewes, and Westerkirk Community Council

Eskdalemuir Community Council

Middlebie and Waterbeck Community Council

Association of Salmon Fishery Boards

Galloway Fisheries Trust

Civil Aviation Authority - Airspace

Defence Infrastructure Organisation

NATS Safeguarding

RSPB Scotland

Mountaineering Council of Scotland

Scottish Wildlife Trust

Glasgow Prestwick Airport

Scottish Rights of Way and Access Society (ScotWays)

Garden History Society in Scotland

Turbine Coordinates by email only

OFCOM

Atkins

BT

Joint Radio Company

Argiva

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm

APPENDIX C LVIA SUPPORTING INFORMATION

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm

Relevant LVIA Legislation Policy and Guidance

The LVIA will be prepared in accordance with the Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (GLVIA 3) Landscape Institute and the Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (2013). It will also take account of the following:

Scottish Natural Heritage, (December 2014), Visual Representation of Wind Farms Version 2.1;

Scottish Natural Heritage (June 2014), Map of Wild Land Areas;

Scottish Natural Heritage (May 2014), Siting and Designing Windfarms in the Landscape, Version 2;

Scottish Natural Heritage (March 2012), Assessing the Cumulative Impact of Onshore Wind Energy Developments;

Landscape Institute (March 2011), Photography and photomontage in landscape and visual impact assessment, Advice Note 01/11, edited by the Landscape Institute;

Scottish Natural Heritage (February 2007), Assessing the Impact on Wild Land; Interim Guidance Note;

Scottish Natural Heritage (2002), Policy Statement No.02/03: Wildness in Scotland's Countryside;

Scottish Natural Heritage and the Countryside Agency, (2002) Topic Paper 6: Techniques and Criteria for Judging Capacity and Sensitivity;

Department of Landscape University of Sheffield and Land Use Consultants (2002), Landscape Character Assessment Guidance for England and Scotland, The Countryside Agency and Scottish Natural Heritage;

Dumfries and Galloway Council (September 2014), Dumfries and Galloway Local Development Plan;

Dumfries and Galloway Council (September 2014), Dumfries and Galloway Local Development Plan Supplementary Guidance: Part 1 Wind Energy Development: Development Management Considerations;

Dumfries and Galloway Proposed Local Development Plan: Technical Paper ‘Regional Scenic Areas (January 2013);

Dumfries and Galloway Council (Carol Anderson and Alison Grant, for D&GC) (2011), Windfarm Landscape Capacity Study;

Land Use Consultants, (1998), Dumfries and Galloway Landscape Assessment, Scottish Natural Heritage Review No. 94;

Ash Consultants, (1998), Scottish Borders Landscape Assessment, Scottish Natural Heritage Review No. 112; and

Cumbria County Council, (1995), Cumbria Landscape Classification.

The assessment will also take cognisance of relevant national and local landscape planning policy.

Viewpoint Selection

The candidate viewpoints identified following an initial ZTV analysis based on the scoping layout for Hopsrig Wind Farm are listed in the table below and illustrated on the ZTV shown on Figure 5. The final selection of viewpoints for assessment will be agreed with Dumfries and Galloway Council and SNH during the consultation process.

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm

Table 1: Proposed candidate viewpoints

No Viewpoint Name

Landscape Receptors

Visual receptors

Distance from the nearest turbine

Direction Elevation (m AOD)

1 Kirk Cleuch Hill

Southern Uplands

Hill walkers 8.3 km North 313 m

2 River Esk Valley

Narrow Wooded River Valleys

Walkers/ road users

1.9 km North 125 m

3* Bentpath A709

Narrow Wooded River Valleys/ Langholm Hills RSA

Settlement 1.6 km North east 113 m

4 Meljon Muit Southern Uplands/ Langholm Hills RSA

Hill walkers 5.1 km North east 441 m

5** Arkleton Hill Southern Uplands/ Langholm Hills RSA

Hill walkers 10.6 km North east 433 m

6* Langholm Monument

Southern Uplands/ Langholm Hills RSA

Walkers of Whita Hill Walk

9.2 km South east 350 m

7* B7068 Foothills Road users 7.0 km South east 163 m

8** Bowness on Solway

Coastal Margins/Cumbria AONB/ WHS

walkers 25.5 km South 0 m

9* Kirtleton Foothills settlement 8.3 km South 144 m

10** Bankshill Upland Fringe settlement 9.4 km South west

11** A709 Torthorwald Ridge

Lower Dale/ Torthorwald Ridge RSA

road users 22.2 km South west 84 m

12** Corrie Common

Foothills settlement 6.5 km South west 242 m

13** Castle O’erForest Hill Fort

Foothills with Forest

walkers 4.5 km North west 261 m

14** Ettrick Pen Southern Uplands with Forest

Hill walkers 19.4 km North west 689 m

15 A709, south of Davington

Narrow Wooded River Valleys

Settlement/ road users

13.2 km North west 206 m

* Loganhead Wind Farm ES (LVIA) viewpoint;

**Both Loganhead and Crossdykes Wind Farms ES (LVIA) viewpoint

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm

Consultees are invited to comment on the above list and provide additional receptors related to this assessment, where these are considered relevant.

Cumulative Context

A provisional list of cumulative schemes within 35 km of the proposed development are listed in Table 2 below and shown in Figure 3.5.

Table 2: Cumulative Scope

Wind Farm

Details Approximatedistance from

Hopsrig

Directionfrom

Hopsrig

ProposedCumulative

ScopeNo of

turbines Tip

Height (m)

Hubheight

(m)

Existing / Operational / Under Construction / Consented

Craig 4 100 60 346 m South east

included

Ewe Hill 22 112.5 71 Abut* South included

Minsca 17 120 80 6.4 km South west

included

Solwaybank 15 126.5 80 5.8 km South included

Hallburn 6 126.5 80 22.8 km South east

included

Harestanes 68 115-125 70-80 23.2 km North west

included

Minnygap 10 125 80 23.9 km North west

included

Clyde Wind Farm (North, Central and South)

152 125 80 34.8 km North west

excluded

Dalswinton 16 125 80 30.7 km West excluded

Langhope Rig 10 121.2 80 30.7 km North east

excluded

Planning Applications

Loganhead 17 130 79.5 Abut* East included

Crossdykes 16 130 80 Abut* West included

Auchencairn 16 121 80 32 km West excluded

Harestanes Extension

7 126.5 80 26.6 km North west

excluded

Birneyknowe 15 132 80 29.8 km North east

excluded

Blackwood 5 120-140 80-100 33.7 km West excluded

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm

Table 2: Cumulative Scope

Whitelaw Brae 14 126.5 80 34.6 km North west

excluded

Scoping

Duncow Common 6 125 80 28.4 km South west

excluded

Highlee Hill 13 176 117 32.4 km North east

excluded

West Scales 5 131 80 19.7 km South excluded

Appeal (considered to represent planning application stage development)

Windy Edge 17 121.5 80 17.9 km North east

included

* we will include distances in due course

LVIA Visualisations

The written assessment will be accompanied by a number of plans including maps plotting blade tip and hub height ZTVs and cumulative ZTVs will be produced and as figures in the ES. Other information is likely to include graphical information on landscape character, designations and the location of visual receptors and recreational and transportation routes.

The SNH Guidance recommends that a ZTV should be presented on a single piece of A1 paper folded within the ES, using OS 1:50,000 as the base map. The Guidance does not specify the ratio of scale. For example the ZTV map on A1, in order to capture a 35 km study area, can only fit on a scale of 1:130,000. A map on this scale is not legible and therefore would not appear to be an effective tool for assessment. We have found that on the 1:50, 000 OS base the legible scale is 1:95,000, which fits on A0 showing a 35 km study area.

Based on an initial examination of cumulative data, it is assumed that there will be 10 paired CZTVs, which would result in an excessive production of Figures on A0. Therefore we propose producing the whole set of CZTVs @ 1: 280,000 on A3 showing a 35 km study area and only providing the CZTVs in scale @ 1:95,000 A0 with the existing Craig and consented Ewe Hill Wind Farm.

In order to avoid excessive figure production and to meet with SNH Guidance we propose the following ZTVs figure production:

Hopsrig Blade Tip/Hub height/comparative ZTVs @ 1:95,000 A0 showing 35 km study;

Hopsrig Blade Tip/Hub height/comparative ZTVs @ 1: 280,000 A3 showing 35 km study area;

Hopsrig cumulative ZTVs @ 1: 280,000 A3 showing 35 km study area. Taking account of the current cumulative situation we would propose producing the whole set of CZTVs @ 1: 280,000 on A3 showing 35 km study area; and

CZTV in bigger scale @ 1:95,000 A0 showing 35 km study area, with the existing/consented Craig/Ewe Hill Wind Farms.

The requirements for wireline presentation:

The proposed turbines will be shown in blue, the existing and consented turbines in black and application turbines in green;

Different schemes will be annotated on the wirelines;

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm

Fainter colour will be used for schemes at scoping than the colour which will be used for existing, consented or application stage schemes; and

The proposed turbines will be numbered on wirelines.

Based on the above outlined scope two cumulative scenarios will be presented (each viewpoint will be illustrated by two cumulative wirelines) and assessed in relation to the proposed development:

Cumulative Baseline: Hopsrig Wind Farm with operational and consented wind farms; and

Future Cumulative Baseline: Hopsrig Wind Farm with operational, consented and application stage wind farms.

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm

APPENDIX D ECOLOGY SUPPORTING INFORMATION

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm

Relevant Ecological Legislation Policy and Guidance

The assessment will be undertaken in line with the following European legislation:

Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a framework for the Community action in the field of water policy (“Water Framework Directive”);

Directive 92/43/EEC on Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora (as amended) (Habitats Directive); and

The Environmental Impact Assessment Directive 85/337/EEC (as amended).

In addition, the following national legislation and policy will be considered as part of the assessment:

Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (Scotland) Regulations (2011);

The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended);

Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2004 (as amended );

The Wildlife and Natural Environment (Scotland) Act 2011;

The Protection of Badgers Act 1992;

UK Post-2010 Biodiversity Framework / UK Biodiversity Action Plan (UKBAP);

Scottish Biodiversity List; and

Dumfries and Galloway Local Biodiversity Action Plan.

The following guidance will be considered as part of the assessment:

Croose, E., Birks, J.D.S. & Schofield, H.W. (2013) Expansion zone survey of pine marten (Martes martes) distribution in Scotland. Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 520;

Gent, T. and Gibson, S. (2003) Herpetofauna Workers’ Manual. JNCC;

Gurnell, J., Lurz, P. McDonald, R. & Pepper, H. (2009) Practical Techniques for Surveying and Monitoring Squirrels. Forestry Commission Practice Note, October 2009;

Hundt, L. (2012) Bat Surveys – Good Practice Guidelines 2nd Edition: Surveying for Onshore Windfarms. Bat Conservation Trust;

Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (IEEM) Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the United Kingdom (2006);

JNCC (2013) Guidelines for the Selection of Biological Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs);

Joint Nature Conservation Committee (2010) Handbook for Phase 1 Habitat Survey – a technique for environmental audit. JNCC;

Natural England (2014a) Natural England Technical Information Note TIN 051. Bats and Onshore Wind turbines – Interim Guidance – Third Edition;

Natural England (2014b) EPS Mitigation Licensing: Latest Developments. Natural England EPS Newsletter, April 2014;

Natural England (2015) Great crested newts: surveys and mitigation for development projects. Species standing advice note. Available via: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/great-crested-newts-surveys-and-mitigation-for-development-projects

Planning Circular 3 2011: The Town & Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (Scotland) Regulations 2011;

Policy Advice Note PAN 1/2013 - Environmental Impact Assessment (Scottish Executive 2013);

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm

Reynolds, P. and Harris, M. (2005) Inverness Badger Survey 2003. Scottish Natural Heritage, Commissioned Report No. 096 (ROAME No. F02LE01);

Rose, F. (2006) A Wild Flower Key, for the British Isles and North West Europe. Warne, London;

Sargent, G. and Morris, P. (2003) How to Find and Identify Mammals. The Mammal Society, London;

Scottish Government (2001) European Protected Species, Development Sites and the Planning System: Interim guidance for local authorities on licensing arrangements;

Scottish Natural Heritage (March 2012) Assessing the cumulative impact of onshore wind energy developments;

Scottish Natural Heritage (2013) Planning for Development: What to consider and include in Habitat Management Plans;

Scottish Renewables, SNH, SEPA, FCS, Historic Scotland (Scotland) (2015, Version 3) Good Practice During Windfarm Construction;

SEPA Land Use Planning System Guidance Note 31: Guidance on Assessing the Impacts of Windfarm Development Proposals on Groundwater Abstractions and Groundwater Dependent Terrestrial Ecosystems, Version 2, October 2014, LUPS-GU31;

SEPA Land Use Planning System Guidance Note 4: Planning guidance on on-shore windfarm developments, Version 7, May 2014, LUPS-GU4;

Stace, C. (2010) New Flora of the British Isles (3rd Edition), Cambridge University Press; and

Strachan, R., Moorhouse, T. and Gelling, M. (2011) The Water Vole Conservation Handbook. Third Edition, Wildlife Conservation Research Unit, Department of Zoology, University of Oxford.

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm

APPENDIX E ORNITHOLOGY SUPPORTING INFORMATION

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm

Relevant Ornithological Legislation Policy and Guidance

The assessment will be undertaken in line with the following European legislation and guidance:

Directive 2009/147/EC on the Conservation of Wild Birds (Birds Directive);

Directive 92/43/EEC on Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora (as amended) (Habitats Directive);

The Environmental Impact Assessment Directive 85/337/EEC (as amended); and

Wind energy developments and Natura 2000 (EC 2011).

In addition the following national legislation, policy and guidance will be considered as part of the assessment:

The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended);

The Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2004 (as amended);

The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (Scotland) Regulations 2011;

The Conservation (Natural Habitats &c.) Regulations 1994 (as amended) (The Habitats Regulations);

SERAD (Scottish Executive Rural Affairs Department) (2000). Habitats and Birds Directives, Nature Conservation; Implementation in Scotland of EC Directives on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Flora and Fauna and the Conservation of Wild Birds (‘the Habitats and Birds Directives’). Revised Guidance Updating Scottish Office Circular No 6/1995;

UK Post-2010 Biodiversity Framework / UK Biodiversity Action Plan (UKBAP);

Dumfries and Galloway Local Biodiversity Action Plan;

Birds of Conservation Concern (BoCC) 4 ‘Red List’ (Eaton et al. 2015);

Scottish Natural Heritage (2000) Windfarms and birds: calculating a theoretical collision risk assuming no avoidance action. SNH Guidance Note. SNH;

Scottish Natural Heritage (2006) Assessing significance of impacts from onshore windfarms on birds outwith designated areas;

Scottish Natural Heritage (2009) Environmental Statements and Annexes of Environmentally Sensitive Bird Information; Guidance for Developers, Consultants and Consultees;

Scottish Natural Heritage (2012) Cumulative effects of windfarms;

Scottish Natural Heritage (2013, revised 2014) Recommended bird survey methods to inform impact assessment of onshore wind farms; and

Scottish Natural Heritage (2013) Assessing connectivity with Special Protection Areas.

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm

APPENDIX F CULTURAL HERITAGE SUPPORTING INFORMATION

Scoping Report

Hopsrig Wind Farm

Relevant Cultural Heritage Legislation, Policy and Guidance

Legislation concerning the protection and conservation of the historic environment includes:

Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act61; as modified by the Historic Environment (Amendment) (Scotland) Act62

Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) (Scotland) Act63; and

Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act64, as amended in the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) (Scotland) Act65 and as modified by the Historic Environment (Amendment) (Scotland) Act66.

Relevant planning policy and guidance concerning the historic environment includes:

The National Planning Framework for Scotland (NPF3)67;

Scottish Planning Policy (SPP)68;

Scottish Historic Environment Policy (SHEP)69;

Planning Advice Note 2/2011 (PAN 2)70;

Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA) Standard and Guidance for Historic Environment Based Desk-Based Assessment71;

The Dumfries and Galloway Local Development Plan72; and

Managing Change in the Historic Environment: Setting73.

Cultural Heritage Gazetteer - available upon request.

The full gazetteer will be provided to Dumfries and Galloway Council (archaeology) and Historic Environment Scotland.

61 The Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979. (c.46). London: HMSO. 62 Historic Environment (Amendment) (Scotland) Act 2011. London: HMSO. 63 Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) (Scotland) Act 1997. (c.9). London: HSMO. 64 Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997. (c.9). London: HSMO. 65 Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) (Scotland) Act 1997. (c.9). London: HSMO. 66 Historic Environment (Amendment) (Scotland) Act 2011. London: HMSO 67 The Scottish Government, 2014. Scotland’s Third National Planning Framework. [pdf] The Scottish Government. Available at: <http://www.gov.scot/Resource/0045/00453683.pdf> [Accessed 2 February 2016]. 68 The Scottish Government, 2014. Scottish Planning Policy. [pdf] The Scottish Government. Available at: <http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0045/00453827.pdf> [Accessed 2 February 2016]. 69 Historic Scotland, 2011. Scottish Historic Environment Policy. [pdf] Historic Scotland. Available at: http://www.historic-

scotland.gov.uk/shep-dec2011.pdf [Accessed 2 February 2016]. 70 The Scottish Government, 2011. PAN2/2011 Planning and Archaeology. [pdf] The Scottish Government. Available at: http://www.gov.scot/Resource/Doc/355385/0120020.pdf [Accessed 2 February 2016]. 71 Chartered Institute for Archaeologists, 2014. Standards and Guidance for historic environment desk-based assessment. [pdf]

Chartered Institute for Archaeologists. Available from: <http://www.archaeologists.net/sites/default/files/CIfAS&GDBA_2.pdf>[Accessed 2 February 2016]. 72 Dumfries and Galloway Council, 2014a. Dumfries and Galloway Council Local Development Plan. [pdf] Dumfries and Galloway

Council. Available at: <http://www.dumgal.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=11287> [Accessed 2 February 2016 73 Historic Scotland, 2010. Managing Change in the Historic Environment: Setting. [pdf] Historic Scotland. Available at: <http://www.historic-scotland.gov.uk/setting-2.pdf> [Accessed 2 February 2016].

HOPSRIG WIND FARM SCOPING REPORT - buccleuch.com · Scoping Report Hopsrig Wind Farm...

Documents

Transcript of HOPSRIG WIND FARM SCOPING REPORT - buccleuch.com · Scoping Report Hopsrig Wind Farm...