Linfairn Wind Farm Addendum Chapter A6: LVIA

Transcription

1 A6. Landscape and Visual 6.1 Introduction The purpose of this chapter is to review amendments to the Project design and to advise of any consequent alterations to the landscape and visual effects as previously reported in the Environmental Statement (ES) and supporting appendices. In addition, the chapter addresses consultation comments as set out in Table A6-1 and takes cognisance of revised assessment methodology, a revised landscape character assessment and a new landscape capacity study, all of which have been issued since the original assessment was carried out and which are referred to in more detail below. The assessment has been carried out by Chartered Landscape Architects, ASH design+assessment Ltd (ASH). The revised assessment is supported by Appendices A6.1 to A6.6 inclusive, which accompany this ES Addendum. 6.2 Scope of the Assessment Study Area The overall study area for the landscape and visual assessments in this Addendum chapter extends to 35km from the outermost Wind Turbine Generators (WTGs) in line with current best practice 1 with a more detailed study area defined for the landscape character and visual assessments as was undertaken for the ES Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA). The modified layout has resulted in a reduced study area to the northern extent as a result of removing the northern cluster of WTGs (WTGs 1 to 6). An initial search area of 60km from the outermost WTGs has continued to be adopted for the Cumulative Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (CLVIA). All wind energy schemes with a tip height in excess of 50m have been included in the assessment, which includes all Larger WTG typologies identified within the South Ayrshire Capacity Study Consultation Responses The Section 36 application was submitted to the Scottish Government Energy Consents and Deployment Unit (ECDU) on 27 September 2013 with responses received in November / December SNH Visual Representation of Windfarms: Good Practice Guidance, /7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 1 of 41

2 Subsequent consultation responses were received from Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) and South Ayrshire Council (SAC) in April and July 2014 regarding proposed revisions to the Project layout. Set out in Table A6-1 is a summary of relevant consultation responses with details of how these have been taken into consideration within this chapter. Table A6-1: Summary of Consultation Responses Consultee Summary of Response Comment / Action Relevant Chapter Section SNH We advise that the proposal would give rise to significant landscape and visual impacts. These significant impacts could be avoided by removing the northern cluster (turbines 1-6) and reducing the number of turbines in the southern cluster. The reduction of turbines in the southern cluster should, in part, be informed by a revised assessment of the potential impacts on the Merrick Search Area for Wild Land which accords with our guidance of such. Removal of WTGs in the northern cluster (WTGs 1-6). Removal of WTGs 11 and 12 in the southern cluster. Repositioning of remaining WTGs. A revised assessment of potential effects on the Merrick Wild Land Area has been undertaken (Appendix A6.2). Appendix A6.2. SNH The development appears as two separate schemes, resulting in significant adverse landscape and visual impacts. Removal of WTGs in the northern cluster no longer creates the appearance of two separate schemes. N/A SNH The ES assessment (Appendix 6.2) of the potential impacts on the Merrick SAWL does not follow the guidelines as set out in our guidance Assessing the Impacts on Wild Land Interim Guidance Note (SNH, February 2007). There is no determination of the significance of effects for each attribute and no evidence of fieldwork undertaken. We therefore advise that an assessment of the potential impacts on the Merrick SAWL as per our guidelines is carried out. An updated Wild Land Assessment has been carried out in accordance with SNH s guidance on the Merrick Wild Land Area (which now replaces the Merrick SAWL in light of SPP2) (Appendix A6.2). Appendix A6.2 14/7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 2 of 41

3 Consultee Summary of Response Comment / Action Relevant Chapter Section SNH Consideration should be given to the inclusion of key viewpoints with the SAWL in the revised assessment. In addition to the existing Merrick Viewpoint (VP20), additional Viewpoints from Shalloch on Minnoch (VP 21) and Cornish Hill (VP 22) have been included within the revised assessment. Section 6.9. Figures A a & b and A a & b. SAC Additional visualisations from key viewpoints were suggested by SAC in the vicinity of Straiton, including: Minor road within the Girvan Valley to the south of Straiton; B741 on the approach to Straiton from the east; B7045 between Straiton and the entrance to Cloncaird Castle; B7023 on the boundary of Kilkerran east of Ruglen. An additional visualisation was prepared and included within the revised viewpoint assessment from the minor road to the south of Straiton (VP 23). In addition, a visualisation and further assessment was undertaken for the B741 on the approach to Straiton and included within the revised route assessment. Figure A a b. Figure A6.20.1, A6.20.2a A6.20.2b. & & Review of other suggested viewpoints have not been included due to either not falling within the schemes revised Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) or due to screening influences. Save Straiton for Scotland (SSfS) SSfS requested an additional viewpoint at the entrance to the upper Girvan Water Valley looking south towards the Project, Similar to VP 1 of SSfS report; Review of Environmental Statement Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment Appendix B, Fig.2) An additional Viewpoint, VP 24, has been included, showing the view from the Minor road to the south of Straiton, OS Grid Ref: , Figure A a b. & 14/7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 3 of 41

4 6.3 Assessment Methodology Regulatory and Policy Context Since the ES was submitted in September 2013, there have been a number of updates to regulations, policy and guidance which are of relevance to the LVIA methodology and assessment. These are detailed further below: National Policy and Guidance National policy and guidance updates relevant to landscape and renewable energy includes: National Planning Framework for Scotland 3 (NPF3), June Scottish Planning Policy 2 (SPP2), June Scottish Government Renewable Energy Policy Subject Outline Advice for Onshore Wind Farms, last updated July 2013 (replacement to PAN 45). Planning Advice Note 1/2013 Environmental Impact Assessment (replacement to PAN 58), Wild Land SNH has recently completed a desk mapping exercise (the Mapping Scotland s Wildness project) to identify the parts of Scotland where physical and perceptual attributes as described within SNH s Policy Statement No. 02/03 Wildness in Scotland s Countryside (2002) 2, combine to form the most significant areas of wild land. This is a two stage project with two separate outputs: The Map of Relative Wildness 3, attempts to indicate relative wildness throughout Scotland and indicates the degree of wildness considered to be present on a continuum from Low through to High at a 25m resolution. Wild Land Areas (WLAs) represent the areas considered to have the highest degree and extent of wild land and meriting safeguarding in the National interest. WLAs are recognised within the SPP as requiring significant protection from wind farms, and recognition in Local Development Planning. 2 SNH (2002) Policy Statement No.02/03 Wildness in Scotland s Countryside (available at: 3 SNH (2014) Mapping Scotland s Wildness Map 5. Relative Wildness of Scotland 2014 (available at: 14/7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 4 of 41

5 As a result of this exercise, SNH has identified 42 Wild Land Areas (WLAs), which supersedes earlier maps identifying Search Areas of Wild Land (2002) and Core Areas of Wild Land (2013). These are considered to represent the most significant areas of wild land character in Scotland and are therefore considered as being of National importance. These WLAs are recognised within the SPP as requiring significant protection from wind development. Further analysis of wild land and policy objectives and a revised wild land assessment in relation to the revised Project is provided in Appendix A Regional and Local Guidance South Ayrshire Landscape Wind Capacity Study and Appendix (SACWCS) (Carol Anderson Landscape Associates, July 2013) 4 This document sets out South Ayrshire s strategic planning for wind energy development in line with Scottish Planning Policy and provides guidance on the appraisal of wind farm / WTG development in South Ayrshire. The study considers the sensitivity of various landscape character types to a range of WTG development typologies, principally categorised on the basis of WTG height. The assessment considers key sensitivities related to landscape character and visual amenity and makes recommendations and guidance on the capacity of each character type to accommodate WTGs. East Ayrshire Landscape Wind Capacity Study and Appendix (EAWCS) (Carol Anderson Landscape Associates, July 2013) 5 Guidance following the same approach as discussed above for the South Ayrshire Landscape Wind Capacity Study has also been prepared for East Ayrshire Assessment Guidance In the original Linfairn ES, the landscape and visual methodology was based upon the Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (GLVIA), Second Edition, 2002, published by the Landscape Institute and the Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment. This document has since been superseded by the GLVIA Third Edition, 2013 (GLVIA3). 4 Carol Anderson Landscape Associates (2013) South Ayrshire Landscape Wind Capacity Study ayrshire.gov.uk/documents/south%20ayrshire%20landscape%20wind%20capacity%20study%20- %20final%20main%20report%20july%2019% pdf 5 Carol Anderson Landscape Associates (2013) East Ayrshire Landscape Wind Capacity Study 14/7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 5 of 41

6 This revised LVIA has therefore been prepared with reference to the updated GLVIA3. The assessment methodology used for the landscape character and visual amenity is outlined in Sections and The methodology for the CLVIA continues to be based on that described in SNH Guidance: Assessing the Cumulative Impact of On-Shore Wind Energy Developments (2012). However, the Capacity Studies discussed in Section have also been referred to in arriving at the cumulative capacity value. Within ES Chapter 6, the visualisation methodology utilised was the SNH Visual Representation of Windfarms: Good Practice Guidance, Since then, new guidance has been published. 6 With regard to the adoption of this methodology in respect of projects already undergoing assessment, SNH offers the following advice: we recognise that baseline photography is expensive and that it is often captured well in advance of the submission of an Environmental Statement. As a result, we have agreed a grace period of 6 months from the publication of this guidance in which visualisations produced under the old guidance can still be submitted. After January 2015 we expect all visualisations to comply with the new standards. Taking consideration of this advice, the 2006 SNH visualisation methodology continues to be used in this ES Addendum Baseline Data Collection Desk Study Landscape Designations A review of changes to landscape designations within the study area since completion of the ES Chapter 6 (LVIA) has been undertaken. As discussed in Section , Search Areas of Wild land (SAWL) has now been replaced by WLA in light of the updated SPP. As a result, the Merrick SAWL has been replaced by Merrick WLA, which includes a slight expansion to the western boundary, to include Buchan and Benmore hills. There have been no further changes to the landscape designations. Landscape Character The ES LVIA included review of the following SNH Landscape Character Assessment documents, which were relevant to the study area: Ayrshire Landscape Assessment, 1998 (Scottish Natural Heritage Review No 111). 6 Visual Representation of wind farms SNH, July /7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 6 of 41

7 Dumfries and Galloway Landscape Assessment, 1998 (Scottish Natural Heritage Review No 94). Subsequent to the preparation of the ES Chapter 6 (LVIA), SAC, East Ayrshire Council (EAC) and Dumfries and Galloway Council (DGC) have each undertaken a review of landscape types using the SNH Assessments as a foundation, but with specific consideration to wind development in their Council boundaries (South Ayrshire Landscape Wind Farm Capacity Study (SALWFC); East Ayrshire Landscape Wind Farm Capacity Study (EALWFC); and Dumfries and Galloway Wind Farm Landscape Capacity Study (DGWFLC)). These documents identify some variation to the Landscape Character Types (LCTs) defined in the SNH Landscape Character Assessment documents. Due to the nature of the Project, this revised Addendum assessment has opted to consider the revised areas within the Capacity Study documents in preference to those within the SNH Landscape Assessment, these being the most up to date landscape character assessments available at the time of writing; specifically addressing the changes in the landscape character baseline brought about by WTG development. The SNH Ayrshire Landscape Assessment divides the Ayrshire landscape into 22 LCTs where it is considered the landscape components combine to form a distinct unity of character and were included in the original Landscape Character Assessment (see ES Chapter 6). The SALWFC in turn divides South Ayrshire landscape into 20 LCTs, EALWFC divides East Ayrshire into 12 LCTs and DGWFLC divides Dumfries and Galloway into 21 LCTs. The Capacity Studies have reviewed the SNH LCTs in the field and some minor changes have been made to the boundaries and new LCTs have been classified. Whilst the landscape assessments cover the distinct regional areas, there is some cross-border consistency of LCT in name and physical character. Where this occurs, these areas have been considered as parts of the same LCT. Cumulative Baseline Scenario A review of the cumulative baseline scenario within the 60km search area highlighted a change to the number of wind farms / WTGs projects, which are either operational, consented or within the planning system. In the original ES, 140 other wind farms / WTG projects (within 60km) were identified (cut-off date 23 August 2013). A review of the cumulative situation up to 31 July 2014 showed that the number of other wind farm / WTGs project within the study area had changed to 138 (see Appendix A6.3) with new projects entering the planning system, several being consented and others being refused or withdrawn. The updated CLVIA has been completed using the updated cumulative baseline situation. 14/7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 7 of 41

8 Consultation A meeting was held in January 2014 between the Developer, the ECDU, SAC and SNH. Further subsequent consultations have also taken place to discuss the Project and proposed changes to the design in light of the concerns raised. The Developer has sought to address the concerns by altering the Project proposals. This has included removing the northern cluster of WTGs (1 to 6), along with a further two WTGs in the southern cluster from the layout and repositioning the remaining WTGs to improve the overall Project aesthetics. In addition to the changes made to the WTGs to reduce effects, access track routes were rationalised and reduced following WTG deletion and realignment. The WTG dimensions have also slightly adjusted and now consist of a maximum hub height of 76m (previously 80m), a maximum rotor diameter of 101m (previously 93m) and maintaining a maximum blade tip height of 126.5m. During this consultation process, SNH suggested the inclusion of additional key viewpoints from within the Merrick Search Area of Wild Land in the revised assessment, noting that this has been replaced by WLA in light of the updated SPP. Suggested additional viewpoints subsequently adopted were: Shalloch on Minnoch. Cornish Hill. SAC also requested additional visualisations be included within the revised assessment. As a result, two additional visualisations have been prepared; one from the minor road to the south of Straiton within the Upper Girvan Valley (included in the viewpoint assessment) and the other from the B741 road on the approach to Straiton (included in the route assessment). Further analysis of other suggested viewpoints demonstrated that they either did not fall within the ZTV and would therefore would not obtain a view of the proposed WTGs, or views would be screened by intervening forestry. Public exhibitions were held in July 2014 at which time it was agreed with a representative of the community group Save Straiton for Scotland that an additional viewpoint would be included along the minor road to the south of Straiton Field Study Photography As a result of the inclusion of four additional viewpoints in the revised assessment, additional photography was taken in late July / early August 2014 and photomontages have been included within the revised visualisations (Figures A a A b). 14/7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 8 of 41

9 SNH suggested that all visuals within 17km should include baseline photography. Based on professional opinion, a decision was made that the remaining viewpoints that were without baseline photography (VP8: Little Eriff / Loch Doon (12.5km); VP12: Benquhat Hill (13km); or VP13: B741 near Clawfin (14km)), were unlikely to receive significant effects as a result of the Project primarily due to distance and that wirelines alone were sufficient to illustrate this. Visual Amenity As a result of the revised layout design and revision to the study area, a revised assessment of all potential visual receptors within 5km of the Project was undertaken in early July In addition, an assessment of the new viewpoints was also undertaken whilst taking the photography for the visualisations. 6.4 Landscape Assessment Landscape Assessment Methodology As discussed in Section , the updated assessment has been prepared with reference to the Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Assessment (Third Edition), 2013 (GLVIA3). The methodology is described further below Professional Judgement GLVIA3 places a strong emphasis on the importance of professional judgement in identifying and defining the significance of landscape effects. As part of this assessment, professional judgement has been used in combination with structured methods and criteria to evaluate landscape value, sensitivity, magnitude and significance of effect Key Stages of Assessment The GLVIA3 methodology is based on an appreciation of the existing landscape and the susceptibility of its key components to accept the change proposed an understanding of the potential effects which could occur and how these could affect the key landscape components and the potential to mitigate adverse effects. There are five key stages to the assessment: Establishment of the baseline. Appreciation of the development proposed. Identification of key landscape receptors. Identification of potential effects. Assessment of effect significance. 14/7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 9 of 41

10 Establishment of the Baseline Establishment of the baseline conditions has been undertaken through combination of desk study and site appraisal. The following specific tasks have been undertaken: Review of the consultation responses from SNH and SAC. Review of the relevant development plans and planning policy. Review of national and regional/local landscape designations and other landscape planning constraints. Review of the Ayrshire 7 and Dumfries and Galloway 8 Landscape Assessments from the SNH national programme of landscape character assessment. Review of the South Ayrshire, East Ayrshire and Dumfries and Galloway 9 Wind Farm Landscape Capacity Study s and appendices. Site appraisal of Landscape Character Types (LCTs) defined in the above plans and description of key landscape components Relative Landscape Value The relative value of the landscape is an important consideration in informing later judgement of the significance of effects. Value concerns the perceived importance of the landscape, when considered as a whole and within the context of the study area. Landscape value is established through consideration of the following factors: Presence of landscape designations, other inventory or registered landscapes / landscape features or identified planning constraints. The scenic quality of the landscape. Perceptual aspects, such as wildness or tranquillity. Conservation interests such as cultural heritage features or associations, or if the landscape supports notable habitats or species. Recreational value. Rarity either in the national or local context or if it is considered to be a particularly important example of a specific landscape type. 7 Land Use Consultants (1998) Ayrshire Landscape Assessment. Scottish Natural Heritage Review No Land Use Consultants (1998) Dumfries and Galloway Landscape Assessment. Scottish Natural Heritage Review No Carol Anderson Landscape Associates (2011) Dumfries and Galloway Wind Farm Landscape Capacity Study 14/7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 10 of 41

11 It should be noted that absence of a designation does not necessarily mean that that a landscape or component is not highly valued as factors such as accessibility and local scarcity can render areas of nationally unremarkable quality, highly valuable as a local resource. Criteria for the allocation of perceived landscape value are outlined in Table A6-2 below: Table A6-2: Landscape Value Criteria Value High Criteria (one or more of the following) The landscape is closely associated with features of international or national importance which are rare within the wider context. The landscape is of high scenic quality and forms a key part of an important designated landscape or planning constraint. The landscape is an example of a scarce resource within the local context and is of considerable local importance for its scenic quality, recreational opportunities or cultural heritage associations. Medium The landscape is associated with features of national or regional importance which are relatively common within the wider context. The landscape forms part of a designated landscape or is associated with other features of importance but is not rare or distinctive within the local context. The landscape is one of a number within the local context appreciated for its scenic quality, recreational opportunities or cultural heritage associations. Low The landscape characteristics are common within the local and regional context and the landscape is not associated with any particular features or attributes considered to be important; The landscape is of poor scenic quality and is not appreciated for any recreational or cultural associations Appreciation of the Proposed Development Appreciation of the proposed development involves the accumulation of a thorough knowledge of the proposal, its nature, scale and location within the baseline landscape, and any peripheral or ancillary features proposed. Analysis of the proposed activities and changes which would take place leads to an understanding of the potential effects that may occur on the landscape resource. As part of this process, ZTV diagrams produced to aid the visual assessment have been consulted to also inform the potential range of landscape effects. 14/7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 11 of 41

12 Identification of Key Landscape Receptors The identification of landscape receptors is the first step in the analysis of the potential for significant landscape effects to take place. Landscape receptors comprise key characteristics or individual features which contribute to the value of the landscape and have the potential to be affected by the proposed development. Landscape receptors are identified through analysis of baseline characteristics when considered in relation to the impacts which might result from a development of the type proposed Landscape Sensitivity Landscape sensitivity considers the nature of the landscape and its ability to accommodate development of the type proposed without compromising its key characteristics and components. The appraisal of landscape sensitivity involves consideration of the sensitivity of individual landscape receptors. There are two aspects which are considered when establishing the landscape sensitivity: Value: The baseline value of the landscape and the contributory value of individual landscape receptors to the landscape as a whole. Susceptibility to change: The ability of landscape receptors to accommodate development of the type proposed without changing the intrinsic qualities of the landscape as a whole. Landscape sensitivity has been evaluated with reference to the subject areas above and using a three-point scale as follows: Table A6-3: Sensitivity Criteria Sensitivity High Medium Low Criteria A highly valued landscape of particularly distinctive character susceptible to relatively small changes of the type proposed. A reasonably valued landscape with a composition and characteristics tolerant of some degree of change of the type proposed. A relatively unimportant landscape which is potentially tolerant of a large degree of change of the type proposed. 14/7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 12 of 41

13 Identification of Potential Effects The second step in the assessment process involves the identification of potential effects which may occur as a result of the interaction of the impacts of the proposed development with the identified landscape receptors. The assessment takes into account direct effects upon existing landscape elements, features and key characteristics and also indirect effects which may occur secondary to changes affecting another landscape component or LCT. The ZTV is used as a tool to gauge the extent of potential indirect change, supported by targeted field surveys Magnitude of Change Magnitude of change concerns the degree to which the proposed wind farm would alter the existing characteristics of the landscape. The appraisal of magnitude involves consideration of the nature and scale of the change which would occur in relation to each identified potential effect and also the duration and potential reversibility of the effect. These changes are then combined to evaluation a magnitude rating for the LCT as a whole. Magnitude is categorised on a four point scale as follows: Table A6-4: Magnitude of Change Criteria Magnitude of Change High Medium Low Negligible Criteria Notable change in landscape characteristics over an extensive area ranging to a very intensive change over a more limited area. Perceptible change in landscape characteristics over an extensive area ranging to notable change in a localised area. Virtually imperceptible change in landscape characteristics over an extensive area or perceptible change in a localised area. No discernible change in any landscape characteristics or components. Consideration is given to the potential for effects to vary over time, through the inclusion of effects during both the construction and operational phases Assessment of Effect Significance Evaluation of the predicted significance of effect has been carried out through analysis of the anticipated magnitude of change in relation to the identified landscape sensitivity and using a degree of professional judgement. The assessment takes into account identified effects upon existing landscape receptors and assesses the extent to which these would be lost or modified, in the context of their importance in determining the existing baseline character. 14/7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 13 of 41

14 The prominence of WTGs in the landscape will vary according to the prevailing weather conditions. The assessment has been carried out, as is best practice, by assuming the 'worst case' scenario i.e. on a clear, bright day in winter, when neither foreground deciduous foliage nor haze can interfere with the clarity of the view obtained. Effect significance has been evaluated using a four point scale and using the following criteria: Table A6-5: Effect Significance Criteria Effect Significance Substantial Moderate Slight Neutral Criteria The proposals are at considerable variance with the landform, scale and pattern of the landscape and would be a dominant feature, resulting in considerable reduction in scenic quality and large scale change to the intrinsic landscape character of the area. The proposals are out of scale with the landscape, or inconsistent with the local pattern and landform and may be locally dominant and/or result in a noticeable reduction in scenic quality and a degree of change to the intrinsic landscape character of the area. The proposals do not quite fit with the scale, landform or local pattern of the landscape and may be locally intrusive but would result in an inappreciable reduction in scenic quality or change to the intrinsic landscape character of the area. The proposals sit well within the scale, landform and pattern of the landscape and would not result in any discernible reduction in scenic quality or change to the intrinsic landscape character of the area. For the purposes of the assessment effects with a rating of Moderate or above are considered to be significant in terms of the EIA Regulations. 6.5 Baseline Conditions Landscape Designations Landscape designations / planning constraints within the overall 35km overall study area are shown on Figure A6.4 and Figure A6.5a A6.5d, and comprise the following: National Level Designation Wild Land The Project would be located approximately 5.5km to the north-west of the Merrick WLA at its nearest point. 14/7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 14 of 41

15 The ZTV indicates that there would be intervisibility of the revised Project with some parts of the Merrick WLA. A new Wild Land Assessment has been undertaken and is included within Appendix A6.2 in order to understand whether or not the revised Project would have any significant effects upon the wild land qualities of the WLA. Gardens and Designed Landscapes (GDL) Within the 35km study area, previously there were 13 GDLs, however within the revised study area, there are 11 GDLs with Caprington Castle GDL and Loudoun Castle GDL now falling outwith the 35km study area. The ZTV has been used to predict the likelihood of these 11 sites being affected by the revised Project and to refine the scope of assessment as detailed in Table A6-6: Table A6-6: Gardens and Designed Landscapes within the Study Area Name Potential for Landscape Effect Action Bargany ZTV indicates no intervisibility Scope out Kilkerran ZTV indicates no intervisibility Scope out Blairquhan ZTV indicates intervisibility Included Craigengillan ZTV indicates intervisibility Included Skeldon House ZTV indicates no intervisibility Scope out Culzean Castle ZTV indicates no intervisibility Scope out Rozelle (La Rochelle) ZTV indicates intervisibility Included Auchincruivie ZTV indicates intervisibility Included Dumfries House ZTV indicates no intervisibility Scope out Carnell GDL ZTV indicates no intervisibility Scope out Glenapp ZTV indicates no intervisibility Scope out Regional / Local Level Designation The revised Project continues to fall entirely within the South Ayrshire Scenic Area (SA) and Ayrshire Sensitive Landscape Character Area (SLCA) and as such, both were included in the revised assessment. In addition, the Galloway Hills Regional Scenic Area (RSA) is located approximately 6km to the south and east of the proposed Project. The ZTV suggests intervisibility would be limited to the northern extent of the designation and therefore it continues to be included in the assessment. 14/7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 15 of 41

16 The following seven designated landscapes protected by the planning system have therefore been included in the assessment: Blairquhan GDL. Craigengillan GDL. Rozelle (La Rochelle) GDL. Auchincruive GDL. South Ayrshire SA. Sensitive Landscape Character Area (Ayrshire). Galloway Hills RSA. A detailed baseline analysis of these landscape areas is included within Appendix A Landscape Character As discussed above, the revised assessment has taken into account the LCTs outlined in the SALWFC, EALWFC and DGWFLC Studies rather than the SNH Landscape Assessments as was undertaken in the ES LVIA. Table A6-8 lists the LCTs found within the detailed (15km) study area and these are illustrated in Figure A6.6. The reference numbers on the table cross-refer to those in Figure A6.6. The ZTV and site appraisal has been used to predict the likelihood of each LCT being affected by the revised Project and to refine the scope of the assessment. Table A6-8: LCTs within the Detailed Study Area Name Potential for Landscape Effect Action South Ayrshire Landscape Wind Farm Capacity Study 4b - Brown Carrick Hills ZTV indicates some intervisibility Include 5 - Coastal Valley with Policies ZTV indicates very limited visibility. Significant landscape effect considered unlikely. Scope out 11 - Lower Dale ZTV indicates no intervisibility Scope out 12 - Middle Dale ZTV indicates some intervisibility Include 13 - Intimate Pastoral Valley 17c - Foothills with Forest & Wind Farm ZTV indicates some intervisibility ZTV indicates some intervisibility Include Include 17d - Maybole Foothills ZTV indicates some intervisibility Include 17e - Coastal Foothills ZTV indicates no intervisibility Scope out 14/7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 16 of 41

17 Name Potential for Landscape Effect Action 18c - South Ayrshire Plateau Moorlands & Forestry & Wind Farm ZTV indicates very limited visibility. Significant landscape effect considered unlikely. Scope out East Ayrshire Landscape Wind Farm Capacity Study 7c East Ayrshire Lowlands ZTV indicates some intervisibility Include 10 Upland River Valley ZTV indicates some intervisibility Include 17a Foothills with Forest & Opencast Mining 20c Southern Uplands & Forestry ZTV indicates some intervisibility ZTV indicates some intervisibility Include Include Both Assessments 9 - Lowland River Valley ZTV indicates some intervisibility Include 17b - Foothills with Forest west of Doon Valley 21 - Rugged Uplands, Lochs & Forest ZTV indicates some intervisibility ZTV indicates some intervisibility Include Include Dumfries and Galloway Wind Farm Landscape Capacity Study 26 Upper Dale ZTV indicates some intervisibility Include 31a Plateau Moorland ZTV indicates no intervisibility Scope out 33a Southern Uplands with Forest 35 Rugged Granite Uplands 35a Rugged Granite Uplands with Forest ZTV indicates some intervisibility ZTV indicates some intervisibility ZTV indicates some intervisibility Include Include Include In the original ES Chapter 6, it was stated that the proposed WTGs fell entirely within the Foothills with Forest LCT. However, the SALWFC states that due to difference in character and context within the Foothills and Foothills with Forest LCTs described in the SNH Ayrshire Landscape Assessment (1998), these landscapes have been divided into new sub-categories. Therefore, all the proposed WTGs and most of the access tracks now fall within sub-category LCT 17C: Foothills with Forest & Wind Farm. The remainder of the access track continues to go through LCT 13: Intimate Pastoral Valley and into LCT 12: Middle Dale. 14/7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 17 of 41

18 A detailed description of all the 16 LCTs identified for inclusion within the detailed study is included within Appendix A6.1 including identification of key components and characteristics and analysis of landscape value. 6.6 Assessment of Landscape Effects The following section summarises the assessment of likely landscape effects that the revised Project would have on the LCTs and designated sites identified for inclusion through baseline studies and changes from the ES Landscape Assessment Landscape Designations A detailed assessment of all designated landscapes within the assessment is included in Appendix A6.1 and the designation locations are illustrated on Figure A6-4 and Figure A6-5a A6.5d. As described in Section 6.5.1, seven designated landscapes were considered to have the potential to experience landscape effects as a result of the revised Project and were therefore included in the revised assessment. The assessment has concluded that there would continue to be locally significant direct and indirect effects to the South Ayrshire SA and Ayrshire SLCA due to the presence of the Project within these designations. However, the wider indirect impact of the Project on these areas is likely to be limited and not significant. The revised Project would continue to not significantly affect all other landscape designations included in the assessment Landscape Character Types A detailed assessment of all landscapes character types within the assessment is included in Appendix A6.1 and the landscape character types are illustrated on Figure A6-6 and Figure A6-7a A6.7d. Of the 16 LCTs identified as potentially experiencing intervisibility with the Project, three are predicted to receive locally Moderate or Substantial and therefore significant effects (during operation and construction) and one LCT is predicted to receive Moderate to Substantial (and therefore significant effects), as a result of either direct or indirect effects of the revised Project, generally within 5km. 14/7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 18 of 41

19 The revised Project is anticipated to result in a localised Substantial (significant) landscape effect to the Foothills with Forest & Wind Farm LCT, largely due to the direct effects of the WTGs upon the landscape in the immediate environs of the Project. Consultations with SAC and SNH however have both emphasised the importance of the two neighbouring landmark hills which border the site, both of which fall within this LCT. It should be noted that local adverse landscape effects upon these two Landmark Hills have been reduced by the revised layout. This is because Glenalla Fell is no longer sandwiched between the southern WTG group and the (now omitted) northern WTG group and the removal of the two closest WTGs to Genoch Inner Hill, has had the effect of reducing the proximity of this hill to the remaining WTG group. The adjacent landscapes to the Project; namely, Intimate Pastoral Valley LCT (the upper Girvan Water Valley to the south of Straiton) and Rugged Uplands, Lochs & Forest LCT (the higher land to the south of the Project), are also anticipated to receive localised Substantial (significant) landscape effects due to the indirect effects of the WTGs. However, the presence of screening effects from intervening forestry plantations and topography is considered likely to reduce the landscape effects to non-significant levels beyond this localised area. The Foothills with Forest west of Doon Valley LCT(the higher land on the opposite side of the upper Girvan Water valley), is anticipated to receive a Moderate to Substantial (and therefore significant) effect as a result of the revised Project; however, again, forestry land cover would reduce intervisibility to some extent. In the ES LVIA, due to the close proximity of the northern cluster of WTGs, the Middle Dale LCT was previously assessed as receiving Locally Substantial and Moderate and therefore significant effects. However, due to the removal of the northern cluster of WTGs, the assessed effect on this LCT has been reduced to Slight to Moderate and therefore not significant effects. The revised Project would continue to not significantly affect the remainder of the LCTs within the revised assessment Landscape Mitigation Measures Landscape mitigation for the Project has involved the amending of the layout, including a reduction in WTG numbers and adjustments to some WTG locations, with the joint aim of achieving a more aesthetically pleasing composition when seen from key viewpoints and reducing adverse landscape effects upon important local landscape receptors such as Genoch Inner Hill (see above). 6.7 Cumulative Landscape Impacts The methodology for the cumulative landscape assessment and the assessment criteria used, continue to be based on SNH Guidance: Assessing Cumulative Impact on On- Shore Wind Energy Developments (2012), all as described in the ES. 14/7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 19 of 41

20 As discussed in Section , a review of data identified 138 wind farms / WTGs within the 60km search area as illustrated on Figure A6.14 and listed in Appendix A6.3. An initial appraisal of these sites in relation to the Project suggested that the potential for significant cumulative effects resulting from the introduction of the revised Project into the baseline situation would be likely to be limited to a cluster of sites within approximately 35km of the Project, as these are the sites the Project is most likely to combine with to produce cumulative effects. Therefore, 22 wind farm / WTGs have been included in the cumulative baseline scenario of this revised assessment Scoping Stage Sites As noted in the original ES, the addition of Scoping sites into the baseline scenario as specifically requested by SAC, introduces into the assessment potential development which may never transpire and which is, as yet, underdetermined in exact size and form. This introduces an intangible series of elements into the assessment process which in this case has the effect of considerably elevating the degree of potential local cumulative impacts. The revised assessment has therefore been careful to identify any cumulative visual effects arising specifically from the addition of Scoping sites Cumulative ZTV A cumulative ZTV showing the visual envelope of the Project and that of the cumulative baseline scenario has been produced in order to identify areas of combined and sequential visibility. This is shown on Figures A6.15 to A6.17d inclusive Cumulative Landscape Assessment of Potential Effects The detailed assessment of cumulative effects on landscape designations and landscape character types is included in Appendix A6.4: Cumulative Landscape Assessment Tables. The following paragraphs provide a summary of the results highlighted by the revised assessment. Only those designated areas and LCTs identified as having a Slight to Moderate landscape effect or greater in the main landscape character assessment have been included in the revised cumulative landscape assessment. As discussed above, at the request of SAC, the potential cumulative effects of the Scoping sites located in close proximity to the Project has been considered separately to the cumulative assessment of operational, consented and application sites Designated Landscapes Two designations were identified for inclusion in the revised assessment; South Ayrshire SA and Ayrshire SLCA within which the revised Project is entirely located. 14/7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 20 of 41

21 These two designations are predicted to continue to receive the same cumulative landscape effects as described in the ES assessment; Slight and not significant as a result of the introduction of the Project into the cumulative operational/consented baseline scenario; which would increase to Moderate (and significant) if all the application sites were added to the cumulative baseline scenario. Additionally, if the two scoping sites (at Dalmorton and Hadyard Hill Extension) were added, it is predicted that a Locally Substantial (and significant) effect would be experienced, and this area of the designations would appear as a landscape heavily influenced by WTGs Landscape Character Types Seven LCTs were identified as potentially receiving cumulative landscape effects, as follows: Middle Dale. Intimate Pastoral Valley. Foothills with Forest & Wind Farm. Maybole Foothills. Upland River Valley. Foothills with Forest west of Doon valley. Rugged Uplands, Lochs & Forest. As noted previously, within the study area, the SNH Ayrshire Landscape Assessment LCT s (included in the ES), have since been updated and modified by the relevant wind farm landscape capacity studies. The modified LCTs have been included within this revised landscape cumulative assessment, which in some in cases combines two or more SNH LCTs. It is predicted that the cumulative effect on the Intimate Pastoral Valley LCT would be Slight and not significant as a result of the introduction of the Project to the operational baseline. Assuming all of the consented and application sites were also constructed, this would increase to Moderate and significant. The addition of the two scoping sites into the cumulative baseline in conjunction with the Project would result in a Locally Substantial and significant impact upon the upper Girvan Water Valley component of the LCT. In respect of Foothills with Forest and Wind Farm LCT ( the LCT within which the Project is situated), the cumulative effect is considered to be Slight and not significant as a result of the introduction of the Project to the operational, consented and application baseline. The addition of the two nearby scoping sites (Dalmorton, and Hadyard Hill Extension) in conjunction with the Project would result in a Locally Substantial impact upon the LCT. 14/7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 21 of 41

22 In the Foothills with Forest west of Doon Valley LCT, the cumulative effect is Slight to Moderate and not significant as a result of the introduction of the Project to the operational/ consented baseline. This would increase to locally Moderate and significant if all of the application sites were added to the cumulative baseline scenario. The addition of the two scoping sites in conjunction with the Project would result in a locally Moderate to Substantial and significant cumulative effect upon the LCT. However, in areas screened by forestry, cumulative effects would be Low and not significant. In respect of Rugged Uplands, Lochs & Forest LCT, the cumulative effect would be Slight and not significant as a result of the introduction of the Project to the operational/consented baseline. This would increase to Slight-Moderate and not significant if all of the application sites were added to the cumulative baseline scenario. However, the addition of the two local scoping sites in conjunction with the Project would result in a Locally Moderate-Substantial and significant impact upon the LCT. Elsewhere in the LCT, cumulative effects resulting from the addition of Linfairn Wind Farm to the baseline would range from Slight-Moderate to Neutral depending on the degree of intervisibility (not significant).the original ES assessment predicted that the Middle Dale LCT would receive Moderate (and significant) effects as a result of the introduction of the Project to the operational/consented/application baseline scenario and Locally Substantial (and significant) effects with the addition of the Scoping sites. However, the revised assessment predicts this would be reduced to Slight (and not significant) due to limited combined intervisibility in this area. This is due to the removal of the northern cluster of WTGs and hence the greater separation from this LCT, thereby lowering the predicted effects. The Upland River Valley LCT has been predicted to continue to receive a Slight (not significant) effect as a result of the revised Project and the remaining LCT; Maybole Foothills is predicted to receive a Neutral (not significant) effect in the existing operational, consented and application baseline scenario, which would increase to Slight (still not significant) if Scoping sites were added to this. 6.8 Visual Assessment Visual Assessment Methodology This Section reports the findings of the revised detailed visual impact assessment. It describes and evaluates the potential change in existing views obtained from residential properties, places of work, routes, popular destinations and strategic viewpoints during the construction and operational phases of the Project, and the extent to which these affect residents, visitors and users of the landscape. 14/7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 22 of 41

23 6.8.2 Assessment Guidance As noted in Section , the revised visual assessment has been prepared with reference to GLVIA3. The visual assessment methodology therefore differs to that undertaken for the ES LVIA and is therefore described below Professional Judgement GLVIA3 places a strong emphasis on the importance of professional judgement in identifying and defining the significance of visual effects. As part of this assessment therefore, professional judgement has been used in combination with structured methods and criteria to evaluate sensitivity, magnitude and significance of effect Key Stages of Assessment GLVIA3 suggests that visual effects are assessed from a clear understanding of the development proposed and any mitigation measures which are being adopted. Familiarity with the site and the extent, nature and expectation of existing views is also a key factor in establishing the visual sensitivity in terms of the development proposed. The guidelines require evaluation of magnitude of change to views experienced by sensitive receptors comprising individuals living, working, travelling and carrying out other activities within the landscape, and subsequent evaluation of effect significance. There are four key stages to the assessment: Establishment of the baseline. Appreciation of the development proposed. Analysis of visual receptors and potential effects. Assessment of effect significance Establishment of the Baseline Establishment of the baseline conditions has been undertaken through a combination of desk study and site appraisal. The following specific tasks have been undertaken: Review of consultation responses from ECDU, SAC and SNH. A review of the relevant development plans and planning policy guidance. Generation and review of ZTV diagrams. Identification of sensitive visual receptors and key viewpoints, in consultation with SNH and SAC. Field survey to establish the nature and context of individual visual receptors / viewpoints and the key elements and qualities of the existing view. 14/7048/001/GLA/O/R/001 Revision B1 Page 23 of 41