Environmental Impact Assessment River Grudie Kinlochewe, Wester Ross

Final Report

June 2013

www.erm.com

Delivering sustainable solutions in a more competitive world

RWE Npower Renewables Limited (NRL)

Environmental Impact Assessment Hydroelectric Scheme: River Grudie, Kinlochewe.

June 2013

Reference 0131886

Prepared by: John Flannery

For and on behalf of Environmental Resources Management

Approved by: Bruce Davidson

Signed:

Position: Partner

Date: 07 June 2013

Environmental Resources Management Limited Incorporated in the with registration number 1014622 Registered Office: 2nd Floor, Exchequer Crt, 33 St Mary Axe, London, EC3A 8AA CONTENTS

NON TECHNICAL SUMMARY

1 INTRODUCTION 1-1

1.1 ABOUT THIS DOCUMENT 1-1 1.2 THE RIVER GRUDIE HYDROELECTRIC SCHEME 1-1 1.3 APPROACH TO THE EIA 1-2 1.4 SCHEME DESIGN 1-10 1.5 THE STRUCTURE OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT 1-11

2 PLANNING CONTEXT 2-1

2.1 INTRODUCTION 2-1 2.2 THE PLANNING POLICY CONTEXT 2-1 2.3 MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS 2-5 2.4 SUMMARY 2-6

3 SCHEME DESCRIPTION 3-1

3.1 INTRODUCTION 3-1 3.2 SITE DESCRIPTION 3-1 3.3 KEY COMPONENTS OF THE SCHEME 3-7 3.4 CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES 3-19 3.5 OPERATIONAL ACTIVITIES 3-23 3.6 DECOMMISSIONING 3-28

4 ALTERNATIVES 4-1

4.1 INTRODUCTION 4-1 4.2 ALTERNATIVE RUN-OF-RIVER HYDROELECTRIC PROJECTS 4-1 4.3 ALTERNATIVE LOCATIONS FOR INDIVIDUAL SITE COMPONENTS 4-2

5 HYDROLOGY AND THE AQUATIC ENVIRONMENT 5-1

5.1 INTRODUCTION 5-1 5.2 LEGISLATION AND POLICY CONTEXT 5-1 5.3 ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY AND SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA 5-4 5.4 CONSULTATION 5-6 5.5 BASELINE CONDITIONS 5-7 5.6 POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS 5-21 5.7 MITIGATION 5-31 5.8 ASSESSMENT OF RESIDUAL SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS 5-41 5.9 SUMMARY 5-44

6 TERRESTRIAL ECOLOGY 6-1

6.1 INTRODUCTION 6-1

6.2 POLICY CONTEXT 6-1 6.3 ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY AND SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA 6-4 6.4 BASELINE CONDITIONS 6-9 6.5 POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS 6-42 6.6 MITIGATION MEASURES & BEST PRACTICE 6-47 6.7 ENHANCEMENT MEASURES 6-50 6.8 RESIDUAL SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS 6-50

7 GEOLOGY AND GROUND CONDITIONS 7-1

7.1 INTRODUCTION 7-1 7.2 ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY AND SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA 7-1 7.3 BASELINE CONDITIONS 7-2 7.4 POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS 7-3 7.5 MITIGATION MEASURES 7-5 7.6 RESIDUAL SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS 7-7

8 LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL 8-1

8.1 INTRODUCTION 8-1 8.2 LEGISLATION AND POLICY CONTEXT 8-1 8.3 ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY AND SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA 8-4 8.4 CONSULTATION 8-12 8.5 BASELINE CONDITIONS 8-12 8.6 POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS 8-33 8.7 MITIGATION MEASURES 8-35 8.8 RESIDUAL SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS 8-38 8.9 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS 8-47

9 ARCHAEOLOGY AND CULTURAL HERITAGE 9-1

9.1 INTRODUCTION 9-1 9.2 LEGISLATION AND POLICY CONTEXT 9-1 9.3 ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY AND SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA 9-3 9.4 CONSULTATION 9-9 9.5 BASELINE CONDITIONS 9-10 9.6 POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS 9-10 9.7 MITIGATION MEASURES 9-11 9.8 RESIDUAL SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS 9-11 9.9 REFERENCES 9-11

10 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT 10-1

10.1 INTRODUCTION 10-1 10.2 ROAD TRAFFIC AND MOBILE PLANT 10-1 10.3 ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS 10-2 10.4 MITIGATION MEASURES 10-4 10.5 RESIDUAL IMPACTS 10-4 10.6 REFERENCES 10-5

11 CARBON ASSESSMENT 11-1

11.1 INTRODUCTION 11-1 11.2 ASSESSMENT APPROACH - FACTORS INFLUENCING SOIL CARBON STOCKS 11-1 11.3 ASSESSMENT METHOD 11-3 11.4 RESULTS 11-5 11.5 PREDICTED IMPACTS 11-7 11.6 REFERENCES 11-8

12 TRAFFIC, TRANSPORT AND SITE ACCESS 12-1

12.1 INTRODUCTION 12-1 12.2 PREDICTED IMPACTS 12-10 12.3 MITIGATION 12-11 12.4 RESIDUAL SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS 12-12

13 LANDUSE, RECREATION AND SOCIO-ECONOMICS 13-1

13.1 INTRODUCTION 13-1 13.2 LEGISLATION AND POLICY CONTEXT 13-1 13.3 ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY AND SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA 13-3 13.4 CONSULTATION 13-5 13.5 BASELINE CONDITIONS 13-7 13.6 POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS 13-10 13.7 MITIGATION MEASURES 13-13 13.8 RESIDUAL SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS 13-13

Annex A Scoping Report and Opinion Annex B Schedule of Mitigation Annex C Summary of Consultation Responses Annex D Geomorphology Information and Aquatic Ecology Annex E Supporting Ecological Information Annex F Landscape and Visual Baseline Data Annex G CAR Screening and Supporting Information Annex H Engineering Drawings

River Grudie Hydroelectric Scheme NON TECHNICAL SUMMARY

1 INTRODUCTION

RWE Npower Renewables Ltd is planning to submit an application to Council, to construct and operate a run-of-river (1) hydroelectric power development on the River Grudie, Kinlochewe, Wester Ross with a maximum output of about 2.0 megawatts (MW).

Under The Planning etc. () Act 2006 (as amended) consent is required from the planning authority, Highland Council, to construct and operate a hydroelectric generating scheme under 50 MW in capacity.

A licence is also required from the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) for authorisation under the Water Environment (Controlled Activities) (Scotland) Regulations 2011 (CAR) for certain activities associated with the proposed scheme. A CAR Licence Application for the scheme has been submitted to SEPA.

The Environmental Statement (ES) has been prepared under The Environmental Impact Assessment (Scotland) Regulations 2011. Under these regulations, an Environmental Statement reporting the findings of an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) must be submitted with the planning application and made available for public review and comment prior to a decision being made by the Council or relevant decision maker.

This document is the Non Technical Summary (NTS) of the assessments conducted and the findings reported in the ES. Its purpose is to provide an overview, in non-technical language, of the following:

• the project, including its design and the way it will be constructed and operated over the long term; and

• its impacts on the environment.

The ES and this NTS have been prepared by Environmental Resources Management (ERM) on behalf of RWE Npower Renewables Ltd. This NTS forms part of the ES and is also available as a separate document. Paper copies of the full ES are available, priced £100 each or £10 on CD (including VAT). Copies of the NTS are available free of charge. The NTS can also be viewed on the RWE Npower Renewables Ltd website at the link identified in the

(1) Using the flow of the river with very little storage

ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT RWE NPOWER RENEWABLES LTD 1 footnote(1). Requests for either document should be made to Environmental Resources Management at the address below:

Environmental Resources Management Norloch House 36 King’s Stables Road Edinburgh EH1 2EU Tel – 0131 478 6000 Fax – 0131 656 5813 E-mail – [email protected]

The planning application may also be inspected during normal working hours at the following address:

Dingwall Service PointRoss House High Street Dingwall IV15 9RY

The application can also be viewed online and comments or representations can be made at: www.highland.gov.uk/yourenvironment/planning/planningapplications/Vi eworcommentonaPlanningApplication.htm

(1) http://www.rwe.com/web/cms/en/1839748/rwe-innogy/sites/hydroelectric-power-station/united-kingdom/sites- in-development/grudie/

ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT RWE NPOWER RENEWABLES LTD 2 9 ARCHAEOLOGY AND CULTURAL HERITAGE

9.1 INTRODUCTION

This chapter considers the probable effects on cultural heritage of the scheme. The assessment has been undertaken by CFA Archaeology Ltd in accordance with the Institute for Archaeologists’ Code of Conduct (2010) and Standard and Guidance for Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment (2008). The principal methods employed in the assessment comprised consultation with national and regional curators, archival and documentary research, and reconnaissance field survey.

9.2 LEGISLATION AND POLICY CONTEXT

9.2.1 Context

Scotland’s historic environment contributes to the Scottish Government’s strategic objectives and to the target of improving the state of Scotland’s historic buildings, monuments and environment, and is identified as a national indicator and target under the National Performance Framework. The Scottish Historic Environment Policy (SHEP) (July 2009) sets out Scottish Minister’s policies for the historic environment, and provides a policy direction for Historic Scotland and a framework that informs the day-to-day work of a range of organisations that have a role and interest in managing Scotland’s historic environment. Through the implementation of the SHEP Scottish Ministers wish to achieve three outcomes for Scotland’s historic environment.

• That the historic environment is cared for, protected and enhanced for the benefit of our own and future generations;

• To secure greater economic benefits from the historic environment; and

• That the people of Scotland and visitors to our country value, understand, and enjoy the historic environment.

Cultural heritage resources include sites with statutory and non-statutory designations, as set out in Scottish Planning Policy (SPP) (2010).

Sites with statutory designations include:

• Scheduled Monuments. • Listed Buildings. • Conservation Areas. • Designated Wrecks.

ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT RWE NPOWER RENEWABLES LTD 9-1 Sites with non-statutory designations include:

• World Heritage Sites. • Gardens and Designed Landscapes. • Historic Battlefields. • Other Historic Environment Interests.

Cultural heritage resources relevant to the scheme and this assessment are undesignated historic environment interests. This is because there are no sites with statutory designations ie Scheduled Monuments, Listed Buildings, Conservation Areas, Designated Wrecks, World Heritage Sites, Garden or Designed Landscapes or Historic Battlefields in the near vicinity of the proposed development area that could either be directly affected or that could have their settings affected.

9.2.2 Sites with Non-Statutory Designations

Other Historic Environment Interests

There is a range of other non-designated archaeological sites, monuments and areas of historic interest, including battlefields, historic landscapes, other gardens and designed landscapes (non-Inventory), woodlands and routes such as drove roads that do not have statutory protection. Scottish Planning Policy (SPP) and Planning Advice Note (PAN) 2 provide national planning policy guidance and advice on the treatment of such resources. PAN 2/2011 advises that, in determining planning applications, planning authorities should take into account the relative importance of archaeological sites (para 5). It also notes that in determining planning applications that may impact on archaeological features or their setting, planning authorities may on occasion have to balance the benefits of development against the importance of archaeological features (para 6). The desirability of preserving a monument (whether scheduled or not) is a material consideration and the objective should be to assure the protection and enhancement of monuments by preservation in situ, in an appropriate setting. When preservation in situ is not possible, recording and/or excavation followed by analysis and publication of the results may be an acceptable alternative (para 14).

9.2.3 Regional and Local Planning Policy Guidance

Highland Wide Local Development Plan (April 2012)

This newly adopted plan replaces the Highland Structure Plan 2001 and most local plan policies. The Highland Council’s built and cultural heritage policies are set out in policy 57.

Policy 57 Natural, Built and Cultural Heritage

ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT RWE NPOWER RENEWABLES LTD 9-2 All development proposals will be assessed taking into account the level of importance and type of heritage features, the form and scale of the development, and any impact on the feature and its setting, in the context of the policy framework detailed in Appendix 2. The following criteria will also apply:

1. For features of local/regional importance we will allow developments if it can be satisfactorily demonstrated that they will not have an unacceptable impact on the natural environment, amenity and heritage resource.

2. For features of national importance we will allow developments that can be shown not to compromise the natural environment, amenity and heritage resource. Where there may be any significant adverse effects, these must be clearly outweighed by social or economic benefits of national importance. It must also be shown that the development will support communities in fragile areas who are having difficulties in keeping their population and services.

3. For features of international importance developments likely to have a significant effect on a site, either alone or in combination with other plans or projects, and which are not directly connected with or necessary to the management of the site for nature conservation will be subject to an appropriate assessment. Where we are unable to ascertain that a proposal will not adversely affect the integrity of a site, we will only allow development if there is no alternative solution and there are imperative reasons of overriding public interest, including those of a social or economic nature. Where a priority habitat or species (as defined in Annex 1 of the Habitats Directive) would be affected, development in such circumstances will only be allowed if the reasons for overriding public interest relate to human health, public safety, beneficial consequences of primary importance for the environment, or other reasons subject to the opinion of the European Commission (via Scottish Ministers). Where we are unable to ascertain that a proposal will not adversely affect the integrity of a site, the proposal will not be in accordance with the development plan within the meaning of Section 25(1) of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997.

Highland Historic Environment Strategy (January 2013)

In addition to policy 57 in the Highland Wide Local Development Plan, supplementary guidance on cultural heritage is provided by the Highland council in the Highland Historic Environment Strategy. This document puts forward the strategic aims of the council in regards to protection and enhancement of the historic environment. It contains 34 strategies to be taken into account when submitting a planning application.

9.3 ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY AND SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA

9.3.1 Spatial Scope of Assessment

The assessment aimed to identify the cultural heritage baseline within the proposed development area (around the intake and headpond; along a

ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT RWE NPOWER RENEWABLES LTD 9-3 corridor c.200 m wide centred on the pipeline route and access track; and at the powerhouse location). A walk-over field survey confirmed and augmented the results of the desk-based survey and covered the same c.200 m corridor and a 1 km radius study area centred on the powerhouse for the identification of sites that may have their settings affected.

9.3.2 Assessment Methodology

Aims and Objectives

The specific aims and objectives of the cultural heritage study were to:

• identify the cultural heritage baseline within the proposed development area (around the intakes and headpond; along a corridor c.200 m wide centred on the pipeline route and access track; and at the powerhouse location);

• consider the potential impacts of construction and operation of the proposed development on the cultural heritage resource of the area; and

• propose mitigation measures to reduce or offset and predicted adverse impacts where appropriate.

The collation of baseline information was carried out in accordance with the Institute for Archaeologists’ Code of Conduct (2010), Standard and Guidance for Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment (2008) and Standards for Archaeological Work (March 2012) . The principal methods comprised archival and documentary research, consultation with interested parties, and walkover reconnaissance field survey undertaken on the 11th and 12th of August 2011.

Figure 9.1 shows the proposed development at the River Grudie, along with a 200 m wide study corridor centred upon the proposed route of the pipe and access track (for the identification of sites and features that may be directly affected by the construction of the scheme).

ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT RWE NPOWER RENEWABLES LTD 9-4 KEY: Intake Powerhouse area Indicative Pipeline Indicative Access Track Tailrace 100m Buffer

0 200

Metres

TITLE: Figure 9.1 Cultural Heritage Study Area

CLIENT: SIZE: RWE Npower Renewables Ltd A3

Date: 06/02/2012 CHECKED: DL PROJECT: 0131886

DRAWN: WB APPROVED: SCALE: 1:10,000

DRAWING: REV: 9_1_CulturalHeritageStudyArea.mxd 0

ERM Norloch House 36 King's Stables Road Edinburgh, EH1 2EU Tel: 0131 478 6000 Fax: 0131 656 5813

SOURCE: Reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data. © Crown copyright, All rights reserved. 2011 License number 0100031673. PROJECTION: British National Grid File: 0131886_RiverGrudie_PM_DL\MAPS\9_1_CulturalHeritageStudyArea.mxd © ERM This print is confidential and is supplied on the understanding that it will be used only as a record to identify or inspect parts, concepts or designs and that it is not disclosed to other persons or to be used for construction purposes without permission. Desk-based Assessment

Up-to-date information was obtained from appropriate sources on the locations and extents of sites with statutory and non-statutory designations and undesignated archaeological or historic environment sites along the route of the proposed pipeline and access track, and in the vicinity of the proposed weir intake, headpond and powerhouse locations.

Information was sought from Historic Scotland GIS spatial data warehouse (1) for details of Scheduled Monuments, Listed Buildings, and Historic Gardens and Designed Landscapes within the study areas.

Detailed information on previously recorded archaeological sites and monuments within the study area was sought from the National Monuments Record of Scotland (NMRS) and from the Highland Council Historic Environment Record (HER).

Ordnance Survey maps and other early maps held by the Map Library of the National Library of Scotland were examined to provide information on sites of potential archaeological significance and to assess land-use history within and around the study areas. Aerial photographic records were also consulted.

The Scottish Palaeoenvironmental Database (SPAD) (2) , which records the distribution of known sites across Scotland, was consulted for information on sites with the potential to provide palaeoenvironmental data within or adjacent to the proposed development area.

A list of all sources consulted during the assessment is provided in Section 9.9.

Field Survey

The results of the desk-based were confirmed and augmented by a walk-over field survey undertaken on the 11th and 12th of August 2011. The survey aimed to:

• assess any information previously obtained through the desk-based assessment;

• identify the extent and condition of any visible archaeological sites and features;

• identify any area with palaeoenvironmental potential; and

• assess the topography and geomorphology of the proposed development areas with a view to informing an assessment of the archaeological potential of the proposed development areas.

(1) (http://hsewsf.sedsh.gov.uk) (2) (http://xweb.geos.ed.ac.uk/~ajn/spad),

ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT RWE NPOWER RENEWABLES LTD 9-6 Sites were plotted accurately using GPS. Written descriptions, sketch plans and digital photographic records were made of all sites located within the study areas.

Assessment of Impacts

The types of effects of the proposed development on cultural heritage interests were assessed in the following categories:

• Direct effects, where there may be a physical effect on a site caused by the development. Direct effects tend to have permanent and irreversible adverse effects upon cultural heritage remains.

• Effects upon setting, where the setting of a site may be affected. Impacts on the settings of cultural heritage sites were restricted to those with statutory protection that are within 1km of proposed powerhouse locations.

• Uncertain effects, where there is a risk that the works may impinge on a site, for example where it is not clear where the location or boundaries of a site lie, or where the precise nature of development works is not known.

Effects were assessed in terms of their magnitude and nature (adverse/ neutral/beneficial).

The assessment of significance of the predicted effects of the proposed development on individual cultural heritage receptors was undertaken using two key criteria: the sensitivity of the receptor, and the magnitude of the effect.

In assessing the sensitivity of the receptor, the importance of cultural heritage resources was assessed principally according to the criteria published in SPP. The main thresholds of archaeological importance proposed in SPP are sites of national importance, and sites of regional and local importance. The relative sensitivities of archaeological and historic environment features were assessed according to the criteria outlined in Table 9.1.

Table 9.1 Definitions of importance of cultural heritage resources

Sensitivity Definition / criteria High Sites of national or international importance, including: World Heritage Sites Scheduled Monuments, and sites proposed for scheduling Undesignated archaeological sites and areas of likely national importance identified in HERs/SMRs Category A Listed Buildings Gardens and Designed Landscapes (Inventory sites) Outstanding Conservation Areas Designated Wreck Sites

ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT RWE NPOWER RENEWABLES LTD 9-7 Sensitivity Definition / criteria Medium Sites of regional importance, including: Archaeological sites and areas of distinctive regional importance Archaeologically Sensitive Areas Category B listed buildings Conservation Areas

Low Sites of Local Importance, including: Archaeological sites of local importance Category C(S) listed buildings Unlisted historic buildings and townscapes with local (vernacular) characteristics

Negligible Sites of little or no importance, including: Sites of former archaeological features Unlisted buildings of minor historic or architectural interest Poorly preserved examples of particular types of feature

Magnitudes of impact were assessed in terms of the categories imperceptible, low, medium or high, as described in Table 9.2.

Table 9.2 Definitions of magnitude of impact

Level of magnitude Definition High Major impact fundamentally changing the baseline condition of the receptor, leading to total or major alteration of character or setting.

Medium Moderate impact changing the baseline condition of the receptor materially but not fundamentally, leading to partial alteration of character or setting.

Low Minor detectable impact which does not alter the baseline condition of the receptor materially.

Imperceptible A very slight and barely distinguishable change from baseline conditions.

None No discernible change to the baseline condition of the character or setting of the receptor.

Table 9.3 combines these criteria to provide an assessment of whether or not an impact is considered to be significant as required by Environmental Impact Assessment (Scotland) Regulations 1999.

Table 9.3 Matrix for assessing significance of impact

Magnitude Sensitivity High Minor Moderate Major Major Medium Negligible Minor Moderate Major Low Negligible Negligible Minor Minor Imperceptible Negligible Negligible Negligible Minor None None None None None Lesser Local Regional National / International Sensitivity

ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT RWE NPOWER RENEWABLES LTD 9-8 Major and moderate effects are considered to be significant.

Responses to the Scoping Report

Table 9.4 lists the points raised by consultees in response to the Scoping Report and explains how they have been dealt with in the assessment.

Table 9.4 Responses to the Scoping Report

Consultee Summary of issue Summary of response Historic Scotland Historic Scotland considered Methodology limits that there would not be any consideration of setting to a significant impacts upon radius of 1km from the Category A Listed buildings or powerhouse. scheduled monuments.

Historic Scotland Historic Scotland noted the Methodology limits presence of a scheduled consideration of setting to a monument in close proximity radius of 1km from the to the proposed development powerhouse. (within Loch Maree), Eilean Ghruididh, castle, (index no. 6182) but feel that the proposed development is unlikely to result in significant impacts on either the site (through changes in water level) or the setting of the monument.

Highland Council Historic Highland Council Historic Highland Council Historic Environment Team Environment Team provided a Environment Team generic approach to requirements taken into assessment which included: account in the methodology. the requirement for a non- invasive field reconnaissance Further consultation with survey of the site area. HCAU to clarify specific The requirement to assess both assessment requirements the direct impact of all raised in their response. elements of the proposed development upon cultural heritage assets, but also the consideration of their indirect impact upon the wider landscape setting of these assets both individually and cumulatively.

9.4 CONSULTATION

Further consultation (07 June 2011) was carried out with Highland Council Historic Environment Team for clarification on their Scoping Report response. Highland Council Historic Environment Team accepted the methodology proposed by CFA, and offered no further comments. Further consultation with Historic Scotland (07 June 2011) confirmed that they did not consider that

ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT RWE NPOWER RENEWABLES LTD 9-9 there would be any significant impacts upon sites within their remit and re- emphasised that they considered that the proposed development would not have any significant impact upon the scheduled monument of Eilean Ghruididh castle (Index no. 6182) which is located within Loch Maree. Historic Scotland also accepted the methodology proposed by CFA.

9.5 BASELINE CONDITIONS

9.5.1 Overview

There are no previously recorded cultural heritage sites or features along the proposed run-of-river development route and the Ordnance Survey 1st Edition map indicates that the area was largely unoccupied. No sites were recorded by field survey.

9.5.2 Archaeological Potential

The proposed scheme runs from an altitude of approximately 120 m above Ordnance Datum (AOD), at the weir intake, through a boulder field and down a north east facing hill slope to the Bridge of Grudie which lies just to the south of the shore of Loch Maree, at approximately 30 m AOD.

No cultural heritage features have been previously recorded within the development study areas and no further sites were identified during the field survey. Few sites are recorded in the wider area, most relating to post- medieval farmstead settlements. It is considered unlikely that any previously unrecorded archaeological remains will be encountered during construction of the hydro-electric scheme. The archaeological potential of the area of the scheme is considered to be negligible.

9.6 POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS

9.6.1 Construction Impacts

Construction works at the weir and powerhouse locations and along the access track and penstock routes would have direct impacts on any cultural heritage sites or features that may be present. There are, however, no recorded cultural heritage sites of features in these areas.

9.6.2 Operational Impacts

Indirect effects on the settings of important cultural heritage sites are most likely to affect sites in close proximity to the powerhouse location. As there are no sites with statutory designations within 1 km of the powerhouse location there are no anticipated impacts on the settings of such sites. No impacts are predicted in relation to the operation of the proposed hydroelectric scheme.

ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT RWE NPOWER RENEWABLES LTD 9-10 9.7 MITIGATION MEASURES

General

It is considered that no further work is merited in advance of development.

Should unexpected archaeological relics be encountered during construction, any archaeological mitigation work that was considered appropriate would be presented in a Written Scheme of Investigation (WSIfs), drawn up in consultation with the Highland Council Historic Environment Team and presented for approval by the planning authority. The mitigation works would be carried out at an appropriate stage in the construction programme, as agreed with the Highland Council Historic Environment Team.

Operational Phase

No mitigation measures are required in relation to the operation of the hydroelectric generation scheme.

Decommissioning Phase

No mitigation measures are anticipated in relation to the decommissioning of the hydroelectric generation scheme.

9.8 RESIDUAL SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS

Provided any unexpected discoveries are properly dealt with and recorded, there would be no significant residual direct impacts on cultural heritage interests within the development area.

No significant residual effects are anticipated in relation to cultural heritage interests and the development proposals are considered to conform with the aims of national, regional and local planning policy with regard to cultural heritage.

9.9 REFERENCES

Bartholomew, J. G. 1912. Survey Atlas of Scotland.

Blaeu, J. 1654, Atlas of Scotland.

Institute for Archaeologists, 2008, Standard and Guidance for Archaeological Desk- based Assessment.

Institute for Archaeologists 2009 Code of Conduct.

Moll, H. 1745. Maps of Scotland – The Shires of Ross and Cromartie.

ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT RWE NPOWER RENEWABLES LTD 9-11 Ordnance Survey, 1875, First Edition, Ross-shire. LVIII 6 inches to one mile.

Ordnance Survey, 1881, First Edition, Ross-shire LXX 6 inches to one mile.

Ordnance Survey, 1905, Second Edition, . LXX 6 inches to one mile.

Ordnance Survey 1967. Ross and Cromarty, OS NG 96 NE, 6 inches to one mile.

Pont, T. 1580s-1590s Pont’s Maps of Scotland.

Roy, W. 1747-55 Military Survey of Scotland.

Thomson, J. 1832. Atlas of Scotland.

Table 9.5 Aerial Photographs (Vertical)

Sortie Date Frames Scale 90 27/08/47 3340-3344, 4340 – 4344 1:10,000

85 27/08/47 3291-3295, 4291, 4295 1:9960

541_A_0541 06/06/50 4421-4423, 4428-4430, 4305-4307 1:9960

CPE_UK_0190 10/10/46 5001-5005, 5038-5040, 160-170, 130-135 1:10,000

ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT RWE NPOWER RENEWABLES LTD 9-12