Forss Wind Farm Extension Environmental Statement Contents

Copyright and Disclaimer Copies of the full ES may be viewed during normal opening hours at the following locations: This document remains the copyright of RES UK and Ireland Ltd (“RES”) and of its agents. No element may be reproduced without the prior permission of RES. Thurso Library Highland Council Service Point Planning & Building Standards Office RES shall not be deemed to make any representation regarding the accuracy, completeness, Davidsons Lane Rotterdam Street Market Square methodology, reliability or current status of any material contained in this document (“Report”), nor shall Thurso Thurso Wick RES assume any liability with respect to any matter or information referred to or contained in the KW14 7AF KW14 8AB KW1 4AB Report, nor shall any person relying on the Report (“Recipient”) or any party to whom the Recipient 01847 893237 01349 886606 (Council Service Centre) 01955 607 751 provides the Report or information have any claim against RES arising out of such Report.

Preface Alternatively, copies of this document are available from RES priced £250 each however a CD version This document forms Volume 2 of the Environmental Statement (ES) containing written text and figures. may be purchased at a cost of £25. Volume 1 is the A4 Non-Technical Summary.

Requests for this document should be made in writing, including payment to RES UK & Ireland Ltd, 3rd This ES has been prepared by RES in consultation with the Highland Council and in collaboration with Floor, STV, Pacific Quay, Glasgow, G51 1PQ, Tel.: 0141 404 5500. the following specialist consultants:

Ornithological Landscape & Visual Hydrological & Avian Vantage Assessment Assessment Hydrogeology Survey Work Assessment Dr. Steve Percival Horner & Mclennan Robert Swann Chris Baker Ecology Consulting No 1 Dochfour North of Scotland Business Centre CB Consulting Swallow Ridge Barn Ornithological Services Dochgarroch Oleander Old Cassop 17 St Vincent Road Inverness IV 3 8GY Cairneyhill Road Durham Tain Bankfoot DH6 4QB IV19 1JR Perth PH1 4AG

Cultural Heritage Avian & Ecology Assessment Survey Work CFA Archaeology Alba Ecology Ltd South Meiklemoss Archibald Hope Collieston House Ellon Eskmills Park Aberdeenshire Musselburgh AB41 8SB EH21 7PQ

Volume 2 Contents Page 1

Forss Wind Farm Extension Environmental Statement Contents

CONTENTS 4.3 Screening and Scoping 2 Chapter Title Page 4.4 Community Consultation 2 No. 4.5 Baseline Assessment 3 4.6 Assessment of Env ironmental Effects and their Significance 3 1 Introduction 4.7 Mitigation 3 1.1 The Application 1 4.8 Non -Technical Summary 4 1.2 The Applicant 1 1.3 The History of Forss Wind Farm Development 2 5 Landscape & Visual Assessment 1.4 The Environmental Statement 2 5.1 Introduction 1 1.5 Rationale for the Project - the Environmental Need for Greenhouse Gas Reduct ion 2 5.2 Definition of Study Area 2 1.6 Greenhouse Gases and Climate Change 3 5.3 Methodology 2 1.7 Greenhouse Gases and Electricity Production 3 5.4 Assessment Criteria and Definitions 3 1.8 Renewable Energy and Greenhouse Gas Reduction 3 5.5 Planning and Legislative Definitions 7 1.9 Energy Payback and Recycling 4 5.6 Landscape Design Considerations 8 1.10 Government Environmental and Energy Policy 4 5.7 The Landscape Resource Baseline Description 9 1.11 The Renewa bles Obligation (Scotland) Order, 2002 7 5.8 Assessment of Impacts on the Landscape Resource 14 1.12 Scotland's Renewable Energy Resource 8 5.9 Visual Amenity Baseline Description 20 1.13 Contribution of the Forss III Wind Farm 8 5.10 Assessment of Impacts on Visual A menity 21 1.14 Non -Technical Summary 8 5.11 Viewpoint Assessment 21 1.15 References 9 5.12 Landscape and Scenic Designations Assessment 36 5.13 Sequential Assessment 37 2 Design Development 5.14 Cumulative Effects 47 2.1 Introduction 1 5.15 Conclusion 64 2.2 Design adopted by RES 1 5.16 Non -Technical Summary 65 2.3 General Chronology of Design Development at Forss Wind Farm Extension 1 5.17 References 66 2.4 Scoping/Screening and Project Definition Layout Stages 2 2.5 Overview of Design Constraints 2 6 Ecology Assessment –Habitats, Flora & Fauna 2.6 Development of Final Turbine Layout 3 6.1 Introduction 1 2.7 Design of On -Site Track Routing 4 6.2 Policy Context 1 2.8 Location of Infrastructure 4 6.3 Baseline Studies 2 2.9 Non -Technical Summary 5 6.4 Assessment of Effects 7 2.10 References 5 6.5 Impact Assessment 11 6.6 Mitigation 13 3 Description of the Project 6.7 Cumulative Impacts 15 3.1 Introduction 1 6.8 Summary of Effects 18 3.2 Physical content 1 6.9 Non -Technical Summary 18 3.3 Overview of Proposed Development 1 6.10 References 19 3.4 Turbine, Electrical and Control Elements 2 3.5 Cons truction Elements 4 7 Ornithology Assessment 3.6 Non -Technical Summary 9 7.1 Introduction 1 7.2 Assessment Methodology 1 4 Environmental Impact Assessment 7.3 Baseline Studies 1 4.1 Introduction 1 7.4 Baseline Description 4 4.2 The EIA Regulations (Scotland) 1999 1 7.5 Assessment of Potential Primary Effects 8

Volume 2 Contents Page 2

Forss Wind Farm Extension Environmental Statement Contents

7.6 Requirements of Mitigation 11 10.16 Vibration 18 7.7 Summary of Effects 11 10.17 Aerodynamic M odulation 19 7.8 Proposed Monitoring 12 10.18 Construction Noise 19 7.9 Conclusion: Statement of Significance 12 10.19 Conclusions 20 7.10 Non -Technical Summary 13 10.20 Non -Technical Summary 20 7.11 References 13 10.21 References 21

8 Cultural Heritage Assessment 11 Electromagnetic Interference and Aviation 8.1 Introduction 1 11.1 Introduction 1 8.2 Planning and Legislative Background 1 11.2 Television Reception 1 8.3 Methodology 3 11.3 Radio Reception 2 8.4 Baseline Studies 3 11.4 Microwave Communications 2 8.5 Impacts and Mitigation 5 11.5 Aviation Safeguarding 2 8.6 Assessment of Construction Effects 8 11.6 Mitigation Measures 3 8.7 Assessment of Operational Effects 9 11.7 Non -Technical Summary 3 8.8 Non -Technical Summary 14 11.8 References 3 8.9 References 14 12 Access, Transport & Traffic 9 Hydrology and Hydrogeology Assessment 12.1 Introduction 1 9.1 Introduction 1 12.2 Guidance on Methodology 1 9.2 Methodology 1 12.3 Nature and Volume of Traffic a nd Tools Used for Assessing Routing Feasibility 2 9.3 Baseline Studi es 3 12.4 Public Highway Route 5 9.4 Baseline Description 5 12.5 Assessment of Impacts of Traffic Levels 5 9.5 Assessment of Effects 10 12.6 Mitigation Measures 7 9.6 Summary of Effects 21 12.7 Non -Technical Summary 10 9.7 Statement of Significance 22 12.8 References 10 9.8 Non -Technical Summary 22 13 Socio Economics 10 Acoustic Assessment 13.1 Introduction & Scope 1 10.1 Introduction 1 13.2 Legislation & Policy Context 1 10.2 General Overview of Wind Turbine Noise 1 13.3 Assessment Methodology 1 10.3 Leg islative Framework and Guidance 2 13.4 Economic Assessment 2 10.4 Methodology 2 13.5 Recreation Assessment 6 10.5 Noise Emission Characteristics of the Wind Turbine 2 13.6 Amenity of Local Residents 8 10.6 Location of Wind turbines 5 13.7 Education 8 10.7 Location of Nearest Neighbours 5 13.8 Non -Technical Summary 8 10.8 Calculation of Noise Levels at Receivers 5 13.9 References 9 10.9 Simplified Noi se Assessment Procedure 7 10.10 Indicative Background Noise 8 14 Health and Safety 10.11 Acoustic Acceptance Criteria 9 14.1 Introduction 1 10.12 Acoustic Assessment 10 14.2 Ensuring Safe Construction - General Approach 1 10.13 Other Aspects of Noise 18 14.3 General Turbine Safety - Design 1 10.14 Low Frequency Noise 18 14.4 Ensuring Safe Operation 1 10.15 Infrasound 18 14.5 Ensuring Safety During Lightning Conditions and Icing Conditions 2

Volume 2 Contents Page 3

Forss Wind Farm Extension Environmental Statement Contents

14.6 Ensuring Public Safety 2 5.17 Viewpoint 3 - Existing view and wireline 14.7 Shad ow Casting and Reflected Light 2 5.18 Viewpoint 3 - Photomontage 5.19 Viewpoint 4 - Location Pla n 14.8 Non -Technical Summary 4 5.20 Viewpoint 4 - Existing view and wireline 14.9 References 5 5.21 Viewpoint 4 - Photomontage 5.22 Viewpoint 5 - Location Plan Appendices 5.23 Viewpoint 5 - Existing view and wireline 5.24 Viewpoint 5 - Photomontage Appendix A Calculation of Environmental B enefits 5.25 Viewpoint 6 - Location Plan Appendix B Typical Wind Turbine Specification 5.26 Viewpoint 6 - Existing view and wireline Appendix C List of Consultees /Scoping Response 5.27 Viewpoint 6 - Photomontage 5.28 Viewpoint 7 - Location Plan Appendix D Public Exhibition Newsletter 5.29 Viewpoint 7 - Existing view and wireline

Appendix E I Bats & Habitats Surveys 5.30 Viewpoint 7 - Photomontage Appendix Eii Mammals Survey 5.31 Viewpoint 8 - Location Plan 5.32 Viewpoint 8 - Existing view and wireline Appendix F Acoustic Detail 5.33 Viewpoint 8 - Photomontage Appendix G Collision Risk Data - Ornithology 5.34 Viewpoint 9 - Location plan Appendix H Cultural Heritage Gazetteer 5.35 Viewpoint 9 - Existing view and wireline 5.36 Viewpoint 9 - Photomotage 5.37 Viewpoint 10 - Location plan 5.38 Viewpoint 10 - Existing view and wireline FIGURES 5.39 Viewpoint 10 - Photomotage Figure No. ES Title RES D rawing No. 5.40 Viewpoint 11 - Location plan 1.1 Regional Context Map 01988D2209 -01 5.41 Viewpoint 11 - Existing view and wireline 2.1 Land Boundary 01988D2505 -05 5.42 Viewpoint 11 - Photomotage 2.2 Combined Constraints 01988D2101 -11 5.43 Viewpoint 12 - Location plan

2.3 Project Definition Layout (4 x 100m tip) 01988D2208 -01 5.44 Viewpoint 12 - Existing view and wireline 3.1 Proposed Infrastructure Layout and Grid Connect 01988D1001 -12 5.45 Viewpoint 1 2 - Photomontage 3.2 Front & Side Elevations of a Typical Wind Turbine (Vestas V52 01988D2215 -04 5.46 Viewpoint 13 - Location plan dimensions) 5.47 Viewpoint 13 - Existing view and wireline 3.3 Proposed Access Route 01988D2213 -04 5.48 Viewpoint 13 - Photomontage 3.4 Typical Turbine Foundation Design 01988D2301 -02 5.49 Viewpoint 14 - Location plan 3.5 Typical Crane Hardstanding 01988D3801 -02 5.50 Viewpoint 14 - Existing view and wireline 3.6 Access Track Construct ion Types 01988D2210 -01 5.51 Viewpoint 14 - Photomont age 3.7 Temporary Construction Compound 01988D2211 -03 5.52 Viewpoint 15 - Location plan 3.8 Control & Substation Building Plan 01988D2217 -02 5.53 Viewpoint 15 - Existing view and wireline 3.9 Site Entrance 01988D2403 -03 5.54 Viewpoint 15 - Photomontage 5.1 The Study Area 5.55 Viewpoint 16 – Location plan 5.2 Landscape Character Types 5.56 Viewpoint 16 - Existing view and wireline 5.3 Landscape and Scenic Designations 5.57 Viewpoint 16 - Photomontage 5.4 Overlay of Landscape and Scenic Designations and Landscape Character 5. 58 Viewpoint 17 - Location plan Types 5.59 Viewpoint 17 - Existing view and wireline 5.5 Overlay of Landscape Character Types and 'With Screening' ZTV to blade 5.60 Viewpoint 17 - Photomontage tip 5.61 Viewpoint 18 - Location plan 5.6 Overlay of Landscape and Scenic Designations and 'With Screening' ZTV 5.62 Viewpoint 18 - Existing view and wireline to blade tip 5.63 Viewpoint 18 - Photomontage 5.7 Detail of Search Area for Wild Land 5.64 Viewpoint 19 - Location plan 5.8a -e Bare Ground' ZTV to Blade Tip Height 5.65 Viewpoint 19 - Existing view and wireline 5.9 With Screening' ZTV to Blade Tip Height 5.66 Viewpoint 19 - Photomontage 5.10 Viewpoint 1 – Location plan 5.67 Viewpoint 20 - Location plan 5.11 Viewpoint 1 - Existing view and wireline 5.68 Viewpoint 20 - Existing view and wireline 5.12 Viewpoint 1 - Montage 5.69 Viewpoint 20 - Photomontage 5.13 Viewpoi nt 2 – Location plan 5.70 Viewpoint 21 - Location plan 5.14 Viewpoint 2 - Existing view and wireline 5.71 Viewpoint 21 - Existing view and wireline 5.15 Viewpoint 2 - Photomontage 5.72 Viewpoint 21 - Photomontage 5.16 Viewpoint 3 - Location Plan

Volume 2 Contents Page 4

Forss Wind Farm Extension Environmental Statement Contents

5.73 Viewpoint 22 - Location plan 5.74 Viewpoint 22 - Existing view and wireline 5.75 Viewpoint 22 - Photomontage 5.76 Viewpoint 23 - Location plan 5.77 View point 23 - Existing view and wireline 5.78 Viewpoint 24 - Location plan 5.79 Viewpoint 24 - Existing view and wireline

5.80 Viewpoint 24 - Photomontage 5.81 Viewpoint 25 - Location plan 5.82 Viewpoint 25 - Photomontage 5.83 Viewpoint 25 - Existing view and wireline 5.84 Viewpoint 26 - Location plan 5.85 Viewpoint 26 - Existing view and wireline 5.86 Viewpoint 26 - Photomontage 5.87 Viewpoint 27 - Location plan 5.88 Viewpoint 27 - Existing view and wireline 5.89 Routes for Sequen tial Assessment Overlaid with 'With Screening' ZTV' 5.90 Other Wind Farms Considered 5.91 Overlay of ZTV for Forss I and II (existing), Forss III and Strathy North 5.92 Overlay of ZTV for Forss III, Baillie Hill and South Shebster 5.93 Overlay of Z TV for Forss III, Durran Mains and Hill of Lieurary 5.94 Overlay of ZTV for Forss III, Spittal Hill and Bower Hill 5.95 Overlay of ZTV for Forss III, Causeymire and Causeymire Extension 5.96 Overlay of ZTV for Forss III, Flex Hill and Achairn 5.97 Overlay of ZTV for Forss III and Buolfruich 5.98 Overlay of ZTV for Forss III,Dunbeath & Halsary 5.99 Overlay of ZTV for Forss III, Olgrinmore and Wathegar 6.1 Ecology Habitat Surve y 7.1 Distribution of breeding skylarks in the Forss 3 study area, 2008 7.2 Distribution of breeding meadow pipits in the Forss 3 study area, 2008 7.3 Distribution of other breeding birds in the Forss 3 study area, 2008 7.4 Distribution of wintering greylag geese,2008 -09 7.5 Distribution of wintering pink -footed geese, 2008 -09 7.6 Greylag and pink -footed goose seasonal pattern of occurrence at Forss, 2008-09 7.7 Distribution of wintering Greenland white -fronted geese, 2008 -09 8.1 Cultural Heritage: Proposed Development Area 8.2 Cultural Heritage: External Receptors 9.1 Hydrological Survey Results 10.1 Predicted Noise Footprint 12.1 Delivery Route Analysis 01988D2402 -04 14.1 House Layout 01988D0202 -04

Volume 2 Contents Page 5

Chapter 1 Forss Wind Farm Extension Environmental Statement Introduction

1 Introduction 1.1.4 The application is the culmination of a number of design options which have been explored. These are discussed in more detail in Chapter 2. 1.1 The Application 1.1.5 Independent specialist consultants have been appointed to co-ordinate an Environmental Impact 1.1.1 RES UK & Ireland Limited (RES), a subsidiary of Renewable Energy Systems Holdings Limited, Assessment (EIA) to evaluate the potential effects of the Forss Wind Farm Extension, and the is applying to the Highland Council for full planning permission to extend the existing Forss Wind results are presented in this Environmental Statement (ES). A fuller description of the EIA Farm currently comprising 6 wind turbines nominally rated at 1.3 MW and measuring 78m to approach is given in Chapter 4. blade tip. The proposed extension comprises a further 5 turbines with a maximum tip height of

81m rated at 850kW – 1.3MW and is to be known as the Forss Wind Farm Extension. The 1.1.6 The site layout and design evolved to take account of Technical, Engineering and Environmental coastal fringe land in front of Borrowston Mains Farmhouse would be the location for 4 turbines issues and constraints. and 1 turbine would be located within the current wind farm site boundary. The site is approximately 9km to the North West of Thurso and approximately 4km North East of Dounreay. 1.2 The Applicant The A836 passes to the South of the site. 1.2.1 RES is one of the world’s leading wind energy companies and is part of the Sir Robert McAlpine Group, a British, family owned construction firm. 1.1.2 Each turbine would have a tapered tubular tower and be three bladed with an overall height to blade tip not exceeding 81m. Each year the Forss Wind Farm Extension would produce sufficient 1.2.2 At the time of writing, the RES Group had successfully developed and/or constructed 33 wind electrical energy equivalent to approximately 5% of the households in Highland or the average farms worldwide and was operating and maintaining several others. From long term involvement annual requirements of approximately 3000 - 5000 homes, depending on actual turbine chosen - in the wind industry, RES has evolved a high level of expertise in the technical, environmental refer to Appendix A for details (http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2002/08/15336/10568). and financial disciplines essential for the development of a successful wind farm.

1.1.3 In addition to the turbines and their foundations, the Forss Wind Farm Extension would include 1.2.3 Within a Scottish context RES developed, constructed and in 2000 commissioned the Dun Law an extension to the existing network of on-site access tracks, and an extension to the network of wind farm in the Scottish Borders. During the same year RES provided the balance-of-plant for buried cables. As the majority of the turbines would be on land adjoining the existing wind farm Scottish Power’s wind farm at Hare Hill in East Ayrshire. In 2003 RES completed the site a new access route has been proposed using an existing Borrowston Mains Farm access. construction of a two-turbine development at Hill of Forss in Caithness and in 2005 completed a As with the existing turbines, each new turbine location would require an area of hard standing to 20 turbine scheme at Glens of Foudland in Aberdeenshire. RES completed construction of the permit access and lay down for craneage. 22 turbine development at Black Hill near Duns in Scottish Borders in early 2007 and later that year commenced construction of the 35 turbine Dun Law Wind Farm extension. In 2007 the 1.1.3 The Hydro-Electric Power Distribution Limited arm of Scottish and Southern Energy plc (SSE) second phase of construction took place to add 4 additional turbines at Forss Wind Farm. will identify and seek a separate consent under Section 37 of the Electricity Act 1989 on behalf of Construction is currently underway for both a 21 turbine Hill of Towie Wind Farm in Moray and RES for a grid connection for the wind farm. RES has independently commissioned studies to the 19 turbine Kelburn Wind Farm in North Ayrshire. identify the most appropriate grid connection and a number of connection options have been examined. The most likely grid connection will be from the proposed substation located next to 1.2.4 RES operates from its eco-friendly, zero emissions, head office in Kings Langley, Hertfordshire T11 (Figure 3.1, Section 3) and then underground following the boundary between Borrowston but also operates a number of regional offices in key markets worldwide. The Scottish regional Mains and the Forss Wind Farm site boundary. The route would then cross the A836 and follow office, comprising a team of 35 professional staff, is located in Glasgow. the A836 on its south side before veering north and crossing the A836 again and following the track leading to the SSE Forss Primary substation where the existing Forss Wind Farm connects into.

Volume 2 Chapter 1 Page 1

Chapter 1 Forss Wind Farm Extension Environmental Statement Introduction

1.3 The History of the Forss Wind Farm Development 1.4.3 The current application to construct and operate the Forss Wind Farm extension is being made 1.3.1 The former US Navy Base was decommissioned in 1992 when all of the masts and antennae to the Highland Council under the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997. Under were dismantled, leaving only the ground anchor points, access tracks and the main control Schedule 2 of the Environmental Impact Assessment (Scotland) Regulations 1999 (”the building. The land remained unused until 2001, when Abbey Properties (formerly Fivestone Regulations”) the development is one for which an EIA can be required. In the case of the Forss Ltd.) in Cambridgeshire purchased it in October 2001 with a view to developing a wind farm on Wind Farm Extension, RES has determined that an EIA is appropriate. this “brownfield” site. 1.4.4 The ES has therefore been prepared in accordance with the Regulations. It describes the Forss

Wind Farm Extension, the nature of the site and its surroundings, the likely effects of the Forss 1.3.3 The first phase, consisting of two turbines, was built in 2003 (ref: 01/00030/FULCA) and Wind Farm Extension and measures proposed to mitigate any adverse impacts on the performed above expectations given the exposed location; in 2007, a further four turbines were environment. The ES comprises the Non-Technical Summary (NTS) (Volume 1), the Full erected (ref: 2007(01/00380/FULCA). Environmental Statement (Volume 2) and the Planning Statement and the Visualisation

Appendix (Volume 3). 1.3.3 An application for 10 x 93m tip height turbines at Borrowston Mains (directly to the west of Forss Wind Farm) was submitted by CRE Energy, a subsidiary of Scottish Power, in April 2002 1.4.5 The Full ES consists of the following Chapters: and refused by the Highland Council on 19th September 2003 due to landscape and visual and residential amenity grounds (ref.: 02/00166/FULCA). A subsequent Public Inquiry resulted in Chapter 1 Introduction the Reporter also refusing to allow planning permission to be granted. Chapter 2 Design Development Chapter 3 Description of the Project 1.3.4 The Forss Business & Technology Park was the building complex of the former US naval base Chapter 4 Environmental Impact Regulations and a planning application to the Highland Council was made to upgrade and renovate. Chapter 5 Landscape & Visual Consent was given in 2004 to the owners, New Park Management, by The Highland Council to Chapter 6 Ecology upgrade and renovate the buildings to provide office space mainly for contractors working at Chapter 7 Ornithology the Dounraey Nuclear Installation. The upgrades/renovation project was completed in 2004 Chapter 8 Cultural Heritage with tenants moving into the offices in 2005. Chapter 9 Hydrology and Hydrogeology Chapter 10 Acoustic Assessment 1.4 The Environmental Statement Chapter 11 Electromagnetic Interference and Aviation 1.4.1 The ES provides information to the local planning authority, statutory consultees, local residents Chapter 12 Access, Transport and Traffic and other interested parties, about the Forss Wind Farm Extension and its likely environmental Chapter 13 Socio-Economic effects. The purpose is to inform the decision as to whether planning consent should be granted Chapter 14 Health and Safety for the Forss Wind Farm Extension.

1.4.2 Extensive preliminary consultation has taken place and an exercise has been undertaken to 1.4.6 These Chapters are supported by Appendices located at the rear of this document. confirm the scope of the environmental assessment and the content of the ES. This has included 1.5 Rationale for the Project – the Environmental Need for Greenhouse Gas written and verbal consultation with the Highland Council and statutory consultees such as Reduction Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH). Details of the consultation and scoping undertaken are 1.5.1 Wind farm projects such as that being proposed for the Forss Wind Farm Extension are required provided in Chapter 4. to ensure diversity, security, economy and environmental sustainability in energy supply. Global emphasis is currently being placed on the final factor. This section gives an overview of the

Volume 2 Chapter 1 Page 2

Chapter 1 Forss Wind Farm Extension Environmental Statement Introduction

environmental need for renewable energy and outlines the particular importance of wind energy 1.7 Greenhouse Gases and Electricity Production

in a Scottish context. The ensuing section outlines more specifically the government policies that 1.7.1 Fossil fuel combustion is the major source of the UK’s CO2 emissions (DEFRA, 2001). are seeking to encourage such developments. Generation of electricity from fossil fuels not only contributes towards greenhouse gas emissions but, by emitting sulphur dioxide and oxides of nitrogen, is also a factor in acid rain. In reducing 1.5.2 As described more fully in Chapter 4, adopting the process of Environmental Assessment as a the impact of energy use on the atmosphere, it will be increasingly important to both reduce key element in wind farm design ensures that adverse impacts are limited in both significance energy demand by conservation and efficiency measures, and also to replace polluting sources and duration. In judging the acceptability of a scheme it is important to balance these residual of energy with more benign and sustainable ones. effects, which are often very local, against the positive environmental effects of the scheme, which are of wider national and global importance and benefit. 1.7.2 Great Britain currently depends on fossil fuels (oil, coal and natural gas) and uranium for the bulk of its energy supply (DTI, 2004). In 2007, the UK was responsible for 1.8% of the world’s carbon 1.6 Greenhouse Gases and Climate Change dioxide emissions; this almost twice the world per capita average. About 40% of this total is 1.6.1 There is clear evidence that the global climate is changing as a result of human activities, emitted through burning fossil fuels for electricity generation. primarily as a result of burning fossil fuels (DoE, 1996). 1.7.3 It might be expected that Scotland with its high proportion of hydro and nuclear electricity plants 1.6.2 The composition of the atmosphere affects how heat, which the earth absorbs from the sun, is would have lower per capita impact on the atmosphere than other parts of the UK, and this is re-radiated back out to space. Should the gas composition in the atmosphere change and true within the confines of the electricity sector. Unfortunately, due to higher emissions from other suppress the re-radiation then the global temperature will slowly rise. Given that it is atmospheric sectors such as agriculture, Scotland has a higher combined output of CO2 (Baggot et al, 2004). temperature that drives creation and circulation of the earth’s weather systems, then a In 1990 the Scottish per capita output was 4 tonnes of carbon equivalent, compared with a UK consequence of changing global temperature will be modification of weather patterns. This has average of 3.7 tonnes. Although lower than elsewhere in the UK, more than one third of serious environmental, economic and social consequences. Climate change will threaten electricity supplied in Scotland currently comes from fossil sources and there is scope for habitats, put pressure on global water resources and global food supply and will increase reducing this figure. flooding (IPCC, 2001). 1.8 Renewable Energy and Greenhouse Gas Reduction 1.6.3 As part of the UK’s contribution to the science of climate change, the Department for the 1.8.1 Since production of electricity from renewable energy sources either has no gaseous emissions Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) supports a team at the UK Meteorological Office’s (in the case of wind, solar and hydro power) or is at worst CO2 neutral (in the case of biomass), Hadley Centre, which has developed one of the world’s most advanced climate models. Records there is no net contribution to climate change or acid rain. By displacing polluting fuels, show that the mean global temperature is already some 0.6ºC higher than at the end of the renewable sources reduce global emissions, thus helping to meet the international and national nineteenth century and that the corresponding figure for the UK is 0.5ºC. The Hadley Centre’s targets that have been set to combat climate change. Every kilowatt-hour (kWh) or unit of climate model shows that the temperature rise experienced over the last decade lies outside the electricity generated by wind energy displaces a unit of conventionally generated energy (Welsh range of natural variability. Observed patterns of temperature change provide further evidence Affairs Committee, 1994). that human activities are changing the climate (DETR/The Met Office 1999). 1.8.2 Each unit of electricity generated by a renewable source avoids on average the production of 1.6.4 The Hadley model predicts that global temperatures will rise by a further 3ºC by 2100. between 370 g and 955 g of CO2, (see Appendix A) and in the region of 10 g of SO2, 3g of NOx, (DETR/The Met. Office, November 1998). In a UK context, rainfall could increase by as much as and small amounts of other pollutants (BWEA, 2005). The total amounts of CO2, SO2 and NOx 10% over England and Wales, and 20% over Scotland by the 2080s and climate induced sea that would be prevented annually from entering the atmosphere by the Forss Wind Farm level rise could be 41 cm in East Anglia and 21 cm in the West of Scotland by the 2050s Extension are shown in Table 1.1[1]. (DEFRA, 2001).

Volume 2 Chapter 1 Page 3

Chapter 1 Forss Wind Farm Extension Environmental Statement Introduction

Table 1.1 Atmospheric Pollutants Saved – Forss Wind Farm Extension 1.9.3 Approximately 90% of the materials used in constructing a wind turbine (excluding the foundation) can be recycled. For the size of turbine being considered for the Forss Wind Farm Pollutants Saved CO2 SO2 N0x Extension, roughly 260 tonnes of material are used per turbine, 85% of which consists of steel Per kWh ‘unit’ generated 370-955 g circa 10 g circa 3 g for construction of the tower and drive-train components. The materials that can be recycled are Wind farm extension, annual 4,132 – 16, 313 111 - 170 tonnes 33 - 51 tonnes steel, aluminium and copper. Plastics and composite materials such as glass fibre which are average tonnes used for the blades must at present be disposed of (Schleisner, 2000), although R&D projects 1.8.3 The British Wind Energy Association recommends the use of a displacement value of 430 g/kWh have looked at more sustainable options. of CO2 in accordance with advice from the Advertisement Standards Authority. On this basis the Forss Wind Farm Extension would prevent the annual release into the atmosphere of 11,797 – 1.10 Government Environmental and Energy Policy 30,452 tonnes of carbon dioxide. The exact figure is open to debate, but 430 g/kWh of CO2 does 1.10.1 Policy on renewable energy is driven by global environmental considerations. Effective action represent a plausible level between the figures of 370 g/kWh and 955 g/kWh, which can be has required co-ordination at an international level but implementation at a national or local one. regarded as being upper and lower displacement limits and which would imply an overall saving International Policies of between 4,132 – 16, 313 tonnes per annum (considers turbines ranging from 850kW to 1.3MW). 1.10.2 The effects that industrial society’s emissions of greenhouse gases are having on the atmosphere and global climate were recognised in the 1992 United Nations Framework 1.8.4 The benefits of using renewable forms of energy are not confined to tackling climate change. Convention on Climate Change Treaty (UNFCCC, 2002), which resulted from the Earth Summit Environmental costs of conventional generation are avoided, including the health implications held in Rio de Janeiro. This treaty, put into force by the UK in March 1994, recognised that associated with poor air quality, the damage to the natural and built environment caused by acid human-induced changes to the atmosphere were affecting the climate and set out to ensure that rain and radiation related health and safety problems. In terms of energy-security, renewable the so-called greenhouse gases were stabilised at a safe level. The concept of sustainability was energies such as wind are inexhaustible, being free are not subject to fuel-price uncertainty, are recognised as a key platform to achieving this. not subject to the vagaries and politics of the international fuel markets, and have no requirement 1.10.3 The UNFCCC established a foundation upon which specific actions and targets could for fuel transportation, drilling, or mining. Furthermore wind farms are easily, quickly and cost subsequently be constructed. The key building block that has been added so far is the Kyoto effectively decommissioned, leaving no significant adverse legacies either at the Protocol of 1997. In the interim period since Rio, the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate decommissioned site or in terms of waste management. Change (IPCC) has drawn together scientific knowledge from around the world and has helped 1.9 Energy Payback and Recycling to co-ordinate on-going research. By Kyoto, the IPCC concluded that climate change and global 1.9.1 The above operating advantages must be set against any adverse effects experienced during warming were already occurring. construction. 1.10.4 The Kyoto Protocol set legally binding targets and timetables for cutting emissions from 1.9.2 For a power station, a comparison of ‘energy used in manufacture’ with ‘lifetime energy developed countries, the aim being for a basket of emissions to be reduced by 5% over 1990 production’ is known as the energy balance and can be expressed as an ‘energy pay-back time’, levels by 2010. The UK signed the protocol in April 1998. The full protocol entered into force on i.e. the time needed to generate the equivalent amount of energy used in manufacturing and 16 February 2005. constructing the wind turbine or power station. The calculation takes into account the energy European Union’s Policies used in the manufacture of the various components together with that used in the transportation and the physical assembly of the plant. The average wind farm in the UK will pay back the 1.10.5 The European Union’s contribution to the Kyoto targets is an 8% cut in emissions. Within the EU, energy used in its manufacture within several months of coming into operation (Schleisner, it has been decided that targets should be distributed non-uniformly in recognition that some 2000). countries are currently more polluting than others whilst some are less developed industrially. At

Volume 2 Chapter 1 Page 4

Chapter 1 Forss Wind Farm Extension Environmental Statement Introduction

the extremes, Luxembourg is required to make cuts of 28% whilst Portugal is being allowed to “If we are to maintain a rigorous planning system that does not disincentivise raise emissions by 27%. The UK has been set a target of a 12% reduction, although the UK investment in renewable generation, it must also enable decisions to be taken in government has repeatedly stressed that it plans to achieve a more ambitious 20% figure. reasonable time. Decision makers should ensure that planning applications for renewable energy developments are dealt with expeditiously while addressing 1.10.6 Given that the electricity generation sector is responsible for a significant proportion of carbon the relevant issues.” dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions, there has been a particular focus on encouraging 1.10.10 At the end of 2008 the world’s first legally binding legislation to tackle the dangers of climate a move away from fossil fuels towards more sustainable renewable resources. change, the Climate Change Act 2008, was passed. The Act will seek to commit to the actions 1.10.7 In 2001, the EU issued its Renewable Energy Directive (2001/77/EC), (European Commission, outlined in the 2003 Energy White Paper. This was supported by the Energy Act 2008 which 2001), which promoted an increase in the contribution of renewable energy sources to electricity was enacted to ensure that legislative change underpins the long term delivery of energy and production in the internal market for electricity. The aim of the EC Directive was to achieve an climate change strategy. increase in the renewables share of the total energy consumption across the community from 6% 1.10.11 In the foreword to the Climate Change Bill the then Prime Minister stated: to 12% by 2010. As this has been achieved the revised targets now centre around a legally-

binding European target for 20% of all energy types - electricity, heat and transport fuels - to “The threat from climate change is perhaps the greatest challenge facing our world. come from renewable sources from 2020 (Directive 2009/28/EC). Without decisive and urgent action it has the potential to be an economic disaster and an United Kingdom Policies environmental catastrophe”

1.10.8 The UK Government has recently undertaken a number of studies designed to inform its 1.10.12 The Department for Energy and Climate Change (DECC) was set up in 2008 to coordinate climate change and renewable energy policies. Since 1997 there have been developments in how the UK will reduce carbon emissions and maintain a secure energy supply. DECC’s UK policy and targets for reducing emissions in the UK. Low Carbon Transition Plan (DECC 2009a) describes how the government aims to deliver emissions reductions of 18% of 2008 levels by 2020 and one third reduction on 1990 levels. 1.10.9 The Energy White Paper (2003) and its subsequent reviews ‘Creating a Low Carbon Ecology’ Alongside energy efficiency strategies, carbon capture programmes, reducing emissions from have reaffirmed the government’s commitment to cutting carbon dioxide emissions. This has transport and making the UK a centre of green industry, the Plan sets targets for renewable been further supported by the Energy Review published in July 2006 (DTI, 2006b) which electricity generation. contains a specific Renewable Energy Statement of Need as Annex D. This Annex states that: 1.10.13 The UK Renewable Energy Strategy (DECC 2009b) builds on the targets described in the Low

Carbon Transition Plan and sets out how the UK will achieve its legally-binding target of “New renewable projects may not always appear to convey any particular local obtaining 15% of all energy from renewable sources by 2020 to ensure a secure supply of benefit, but they provide crucial national benefits. Individual renewable projects energy and to tackle climate change. To achieve this, the Strategy suggests that the UK may are part of a growing proportion of low-carbon generation that provides benefits need more than 30% of electricity to be generated by renewables: currently less than 6% of shared by all communities both through reduced emissions and more diverse our electricity is generated by renewables. It is anticipated that the move to a low carbon supplies of energy, which helps the reliability of our supplies. This factor is a economy will provide about £100 million of investment opportunities and up to 500,000 more material consideration to which all participants in the planning system should give jobs in the renewables sector. significant weight when considering renewable proposals. These wider benefits are not always immediately visible to the specific locality in which the project is sited. However, the benefits to society and the wider economy as a whole are significant and this must be reflected in the weight given to these considerations by decision makers in reaching their decisions.

Volume 2 Chapter 1 Page 5

Chapter 1 Forss Wind Farm Extension Environmental Statement Introduction

• A joint study undertaken in 2001 involving Scottish Power and Scottish and Southern Scottish Policies Energy looking at the Impact of Renewable Generation on the Electrical Transmission 1.10.14 Although energy policy is an area where Westminster has reserved powers, the Scottish Network in Scotland (SP & SSE, October 2001) highlighted the need for strategic Parliament has devolved authority over matters of environment, planning and renewable energy upgrading of the network but nevertheless concluded that there was sufficient capacity implementation. within the existing network to accommodate the renewables targets being set by the Renewables Obligation (Scotland) 1.10.15 In the development of UK policies relevant to renewable energy, there have been parallel consultations in Scotland which have concentrated on particular Scottish themes and • Planning Advice Note 45 (PAN 45) Annex 2 Spatial Frameworks and Supplementary capabilities. Planning Guidance for Wind Farms gives advice to planning authorities on supplementary planning guidance for wind farms, particularly on the process of 1.10.16 A Scottish Climate Change Programme was published in 2000 (Scottish Executive, November preparing spatial frameworks for wind farms of over 20 megawatts of capacity. 2000), which recognised that Scotland had a higher per-capita contribution to UK carbon dioxide

emissions and that these were reducing more slowly than elsewhere in the UK, dropping only 3% • Scottish Planning Policy 6 (SPP6) superseded NPPG6 in March 2007, which in turn between 1990 and 1998 rather than by 9% for the UK as a whole. was superseded by the new Scottish Planning Policy (SPP) which incorporates 1.10.17 As part of the Scottish Climate Change Programme, the Scottish Government increased the shortened versions of all SPPs. The Renewable Energy policy sets out the proposed 12.5% target from renewables by 2003 by a further 5% by 2010, taking the Scottish total to land use planning policy to enable both the 2010 renewable energy target of 18% (of 17.5%. The policy recognises that Scotland has a significantly higher starting point in renewables generation) to be achieved but more significantly it sets out the policy to achieve the penetration than the rest of the UK due to its long-established hydro-electric capacity. The target previous 2020 target of 50% renewable generation in Scotland (and it is expected that increase was achieved by introducing a new Renewables Obligation (Scotland) which applies to this will be updated shortly in relation to the new 80% target). SPP provides strategic licensed electricity suppliers who buy electricity from generators and sell it on to customers. planning policy intended to guide development plans along side the reforms to the Suppliers are obliged to source a certain percentage of their electricity from renewable Scottish planning system. This will effectively see Local Plans replaced by Local generators, or pay a penalty if they fail to do so. Beyond the above mentioned target, the Scottish Development Plans without the need for the tier of Structure Plans which currently Government (in September 2010) increased the target of 50% (with an interim target of 31% by exists. Some of the key issues arising from the SPP regarding development planning 2011) of Scotland’s electricity to 80% being generated from renewable sources by 2020 to make are: an equitable contribution to the UK’s obligation under the Kyoto Protocol’s interim target of 31% • Development plans should set out a spatial framework supported by broad criteria for by 2011. the consideration of wind farm proposals over 20 megawatts; 1.10.18 In encouraging and enabling renewable energy projects, the Scottish Government has • Local planning authorities should identify areas of search for onshore wind farm commissioned a number of studies and implemented a number of policies. These include: developments based on environmental constraints, viability and grid connection; • An updated study into Scotland’s Renewable Resource published in 2001 (Garrad • Policies should indicate that all other areas should be considered on the individual Hassan and Partners, 2001), which identified that once various economic and merits of a planning application subject to consideration of criteria based policies; environmental constraints were factored in, Scotland had the potential to produce over

200,000 GW (two hundred billion units of electricity) per annum from renewable energy, • Planning authorities should not impose additional zones of protection around which is roughly five times Scotland’s total current electricity consumption. Onshore designated sites; and wind due to its technical and economic maturity was expected to contribute to the bulk of near-term targets. More information is provided in Section 1.6.

Volume 2 Chapter 1 Page 6

Chapter 1 Forss Wind Farm Extension Environmental Statement Introduction

• Planning authorities should seek to ensure that identified areas of search have a a world leader in renewable energy generation and use”. He went on to say that the Scottish realistic potential to be developed in the plan period. Government “would consult on working towards a figure of 30% of our electricity coming from renewables by 2020. Already that figure looks to be achievable in the long term on the basis of 1.10.19 With regard to development control and the submission of planning applications, some key the very many renewable energy projects now being planned”. policies in the SPP are: 1.10.24 More recently on the 27th June 2008 the Scottish Energy Minister Jim Mather commented on • The SPP is an important material consideration where development plan policy has Scotland’s current targets for renewables in relation to the successful planning application for not been updated; Europe’s largest onshore wind farm at Clyde in the Borders. “Scotland has a vast array of potentially cheap, renewable energy sources, from our waters, waves and wind. We are • Proposals outside areas of search will be considered on their merits however currently turning that potential into a reality with a progressive and distinctive approach to make developers need to demonstrate that there are no alternative sites available within a renewables a driver of sustainable economic growth.” He also highlighted the energy targets defined area of search; (subsequently increased) for Scotland:” to produce 31% of electricity demand from renewable • Developers are required to submit a risk assessment demonstrating how health and sources by 2011 and 50% by 2020”. safety risks will be addressed including risks to members of the public; 1.10.25 The announcement coincided with the launch of the Scottish Government’s policy paper • The existence of aviation and defence constraints is not a reason to refuse new ‘Securing a Renewable Future: Scotland's Renewable Energy’ in which the Scottish development if it can be demonstrated that statutory consultees are content with the Government’s commitment was explained as being "…..driven both by the environmental scheme and mitigation provided; and imperative and by the potential for new economic development". (Scottish Executive, March 2003). • Whether a scheme has a reserved grid connection should not be taken account of in a planning decision however grid capacity is a material consideration. 1.11 The Renewables Obligation (Scotland) Orders 1.11.1 The Renewables Obligation (Scotland) Order first came into force on 1 April 2002 (having been 1.10.20 More details are contained within the Planning Statement accompanying the planning application made under the Electricity Act 1989). The Order has been replaced or amended each April from for the proposed wind farm extension. 2004 through to 2010 and requires power suppliers to supply their customers a specified and increasing proportion of renewable electricity year on year. This started at 3% in 2003, rising 1.10.21 A survey into Public Attitudes towards Wind Farms in Scotland published in 2003 (Scottish gradually to 10% by 2010 and 15% by 2015. If suppliers are unable to meet their targets they Executive Social Research, 2003) showed a large measure of support from that section of the have to pay a buy-out price. Funds collected from the buy-out are redistributed proportionately to Scottish population who currently live close to wind farms (more details are given in Chapter 13, compliant suppliers and thus the system is revenue neutral. The cost to consumers is limited by Socio-Economic Assessment). a price cap and the obligation is guaranteed in law until 2037. 1.10.22 It is appreciated by the Scottish Government that, with a lower population density than elsewhere 1.11.2 This scheme is the primary mechanism to stimulate the renewable energy industry. Wind farms in the UK and with considerably greater renewable energy resources, Scotland can play a will meet the majority of the new capacity required by electricity suppliers under the Renewables disproportionately significant part in ensuring renewable energy contributes in a major way to Obligation. environmental improvement and that this can provide particular economic opportunity for the country. 1.11.3 The auditing of the scheme is carried out by issuing Renewable Obligation Certificates, ROCs, to

1.10.23 On the 6th May 2002 the Scottish Parliament’s Former First Minister, Jack McConnell, speaking the renewable generators who then trade them to suppliers who must redeem them against their at the opening of a new wind turbine factory on the Kintyre peninsula said “I want Scotland to be

Volume 2 Chapter 1 Page 7

Chapter 1 Forss Wind Farm Extension Environmental Statement Introduction

obligation. Electricity from the Forss Wind Farm Extension will qualify for ROCs under the 1.13 Contribution of the Forss Wind Farm Extension Renewables Obligation mechanism. 1.13.1 Conventional, centralised power stations, such as the gas-fired power station at Peterhead of 1,550 MW registered capacity, the 2,304 MW Longannet coal-fired station on the Forth or the 1.12 Renewable Energy Resource 1,210 MW Torness nuclear power station in East Lothian, are large and via the high-voltage 1.12.1 It has been recognised for some time that Scotland has particularly abundant renewable energy transmission network are individually capable of servicing the energy needs of a large proportion resources (prior to the 2004 addition of ten new countries to the EU, the UK possessed 40% of of the country’s population. Europe’s wind resource, 60% of which was in Scotland), but the extent of the country’s potential was not widely appreciated until the publication in 2001 of the results of a study commissioned 1.13.2 Renewable energy schemes are often compared unfavourably against such stations due to their by the Scottish Executive to define ‘Scotland’s Renewable Resource’ (Garrad Hassan and small relative rating. Such criticism belies the fact that conventional power stations have hidden Partners Ltd, 2001). Taking into account economic and environmental constraints, the study set infrastructure such as coal or uranium mines and that renewable energies are inherently dilute out to define the accessible resource given the constraint that the technology should be capable and distributed meaning that to harness them effectively requires a large number of relatively of delivering energy at a cost of less than 7 p/kWh by 2010. In summary the results indicated that small schemes. the capacities shown in Table 1.2 could be expected. 1.13.3 Although wind farms on a project specific basis and like most other renewable technologies can Table 1.2 Scotland’s Accessible Renewable Energy Potential only make a small contribution to national environmental targets, in the context of Local Agenda 21, such schemes can make a major difference to a community’s impact on the environment. Accessible Capacity Resource Collectively, widespread adoption of renewable energy can make a significant national Onshore Wind1 11,500 MW difference, a fact that is now widely recognised in planning decisions. Offshore Wind 25,000 MW

Wave 14,000 MW 1.13.4 The Inspector who dealt with the appeal by Border Wind Farms Ltd against the decision of

Tidal Stream 7,500 MW Castle Morpeth Borough Council to refuse planning permission for three wind turbines near

Agricultural Biomass 630 MW Kirkheaton, Northumberland stated:

Others 470 MW 1.13.5 “Wind power is an integral element of the Governments strategy to provide 10% of UK electricity All Technologies 59,000 MW consumption from renewables by 2010 and the incremental accumulation from wind farms as each project comes on stream represents a valuable contribution to this strategy.”

1.12.2 To put these figures in context, the average demand of Scottish consumers is little over 4,000 1.13.6 In reference to the amount of electricity the proposal would generate his report goes on to say: MW whilst the total installed capacity of the UK electricity industry is 79,000 MW. Onshore wind is the only renewable technology that is currently economically competitive with conventional 1.13.7 “In this case the proposal is for a relatively small wind farm of 3 turbines. The power generated supplies (SDC, 2005; Renewable UK, 2010), and for this reason it will be some time before the may well be minute in relation to overall UK consumption, but to give it perspective, it would other technologies are capable of winning appreciable market share. By 2020 it is projected that generate sufficient electricity to serve a substantial number of homes in the Kirkheaton area.” onshore wind power is likely to be amongst the cheapest of all generating technologies with 1.13.8 In the specific context of the Forss Wind Farm Extension, it is estimated that2: lower costs than fossil fuel sources (BERR 2008b).

1 The 11.50 GW capacity for onshore wind energy is modelled in just under 2% of the area of Scotland 2 See Appendix A for details of the calculations

Volume 2 Chapter 1 Page 8

Chapter 1 Forss Wind Farm Extension Environmental Statement Introduction

• the annual production will be sufficient to the equivalent electricity demand of 1.15 References approximately 2,494 - 4,940 average homes (approximately 2.5 -5% of Highland Baggot, Milne, Misslebrook, Murrells, Thistlewaite & Watterson. Greenhouse Gas Inventories households) for England, Scotland, Wales & Northern Ireland: 1990 - 2001. AEA Technology plc. February 2004 • the CO2 annually displaced from the Forss Wind Farm Extension would be approximately 4,132- 16,313 tonnes per annum British Wind Energy Association (BWEA). Calculations for Wind Energy Statistics. (see www.bwea.com/edu/calcs.html). 1.14 Non-Technical Summary Cabinet Office. Performance and Innovation Unit. The Energy Review. February 2002. 1.14.1 This application for an extension to the existing Forss Wind Farm is for a further 5 turbines involving land within the existing wind farm site boundary and some land on Borrowston Mains Department for Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (BERR). Renewable Energy directly to the west. The existing Forss Wind Farm site was a US Military communications Strategy Consultation. (see http://renewableconsultation.berr.gov.uk/). 2008.

base during the Cold War and then in 1992 all of the masts and antennae were dismantled, Department of the Environment (DoE). Review of the Potential Effects of Climate Change in leaving only the ground anchor points, access tracks and the main control building. The land the United Kingdom. HMSO, London. 1996 remained unused until 2001, when Abbey Properties (formerly Fivestone Ltd.) in Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA). Climate Change – UK Cambridgeshire purchased it in October 2001 with a view to developing a wind farm on it. Programme. 2001.

1.14.2 The first phase, consisting of two turbines, was built in 2003 (ref: 01/00030/FULCA) and Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA). Digest of Environmental performed above expectations given the exposed location; in 2007, a further four turbines were Statistics (see www.defra.gov.uk/environment/statistics/des/chap01.) 2001

erected (ref: 2007(01/00380/FULCA). Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR) / The Met. Office. Climate Change and its Impacts: Some highlights from the ongoing UK research programme: a first 1.14.3 Regardless of the fact that conventional power stations have hidden infrastructure such as coal look at results from the Hadley Centre’s new climate model. November 1998. or uranium mines renewable energy schemes are often compared unfavourably against them Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR) / The Met. Office. Climate due to their small relative rating. Change and its Impacts: Stability of CO2 in the atmosphere. October, 1999.

Department of Trade and Industry (DTI). New and Renewable Energy - Prospects for the 21st 1.14.4 There is a raft of international and national climate change policies which have created the Century. Consultation Paper. March 1999. commercial stimulus for wind farm development. Scotland has particular renewables potential and the Scottish Government has a vigorous policy to encourage and enable development. In Department of Trade and Industry (DTI). Energy Policy – Key Issues for Consultation in the the near term, only onshore wind farms can be expected to play a major role in meeting White Paper. May 2002.

Scotland’s renewable energy objectives. Each year the Forss Wind Farm Extension would Department of Trade and Industry (DTI). Our energy future - creating a low carbon economy. produce sufficient electrical energy to satisfy the average annual requirements of approximately Energy White Paper, (see http://www.dti.gov.uk/energy/white paper/ourenergyfuture.pdf). 3,000 - 5000 homes, equivalent to the annual electrical consumption of approximately 2.5 -5% of February 2003 the homes in the Highlands. The Forss Wind Farm Extension would make a valuable Department of Trade and Industry (DTI). Capacity of, and energy generated from, renewable contribution to meeting Highland’s share of the national CO2 reduction target. sources (DUKES 7.4). www.dtistats.net/energystats/dukes7_4.xls URN No: 06/87a7. 2006

Volume 2 Chapter 1 Page 9

Chapter 1 Forss Wind Farm Extension Environmental Statement Introduction

European Commission. Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Understanding Climate promotion of electricity produced from renewable energy sources in the internal electricity Change: A Beginner’s Guide to the UN Framework Convention and its Kyoto Protocol. (see market. Directive 2001/77/EC. August 2001. http://unfccc.int/resource/beginner_02_en.pdf) Rev July 2002.

Garrad Hassan and Partners Limited. Scotland’s Renewable Resource. Report for the Scottish United Nations Statistics Division, Millennium Development Goals indicators: Carbon dioxide

Executive. 2001 emissions (CO2), thousand metric tons of CO2 (collected by CDIAC)

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Working Group II. Inputs, Adaptation & Welsh Affairs Committee. Report on Wind Energy. HMSO. July 1994. Vulnerability. (see www.ipcc.ch) 2001.

Office of Gas and Electricity Markets (Ofgem). Further thinking on wholesale trading arrangements in Scotland. October 1999.

Oxera Environmental and ARUP Economics and Planning. Regional Renewable Energy Assessments – A Report to the DTI and the DTLR. February 2002

Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution (RCEP). Energy – The Changing Climate. June 2000.

Scottish Executive. Scottish Climate Change Programme. November 2000.

Scottish Executive. Securing a Renewable Future: Scotland's Renewable Energy. March 2003.

Scottish Executive Development Department (SEDD). National Planning Policy Guideline NPPG6: Renewable Energy Developments. November 2000.

Scottish Executive Development Department (SEDD). Planning Advice Note PAN45: Renewable Energy Technologies. January 2002.

Scottish Executive Social Research. Public Attitudes to Wind Farms. MORI Scotland. (see www.scotland. gov.uk/socialresearch/). 2003

Scottish Government. 2007. Scottish Planning Policy 6: Renewable Energy.

Scottish Parliament. Scottish Statutory Instruments – The Renewables Obligation (Scotland) Order 2002. April 2002.

Scottish Power (SP) and Scottish and Southern Energy (SSE). Scottish Executive Renewable Energy Network Study – Network Study Group. Impact of Renewable Generation on the Electrical Transmission Network in Scotland. October 2001.

Schleisner, Lotte. Life Cycle Assessment of a Wind Farm and Related Externalities. Riso National Laboratory. Renewable Energy 20, pg. 279-288. 2000

Volume 2 Chapter 1 Page 10

Chapter 8 Forss Wind Farm Extension Environmental Statement Cultural Heritage Assessment

8 Cultural Heritage document sets out Scottish Ministers’ policies for the historic environment, and provides policy direction for Historic Scotland and a framework that informs the day-to-day work of a range of 8.1 Introduction organisations that have a role and interest in managing the historic environment. Through the 8.1.1 This study considers the potential impacts on cultural heritage interests during the construction, SHEP Scottish Ministers are determined to achieve three outcomes for Scotland’s historic operation and decommissioning of the proposed extension to the wind farm at Forss, Caithness environment: (Forss III). The assessment has been undertaken by CFA Archaeology Ltd, informed by the • That the historic environment is cared for, protected and enhanced for the benefit of National Monuments Record of Scotland, Historic Scotland, the Royal Commission of Ancient our own and future generations; Monuments and cartographic sources available at the National Library of Scotland.

• 8.1.2 The assessment has been conducted in accordance with the Institute for Archaeologists Code of To secure greater economic benefits from the historic environment; and Conduct (IfA 2010) and Standard and Guidance for Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment (IfA • That the people of Scotland and visitors to our country value, understand and enjoy 2008). the historic environment.

8.1.3 The specific objectives of the cultural heritage study were to: Cultural Heritage Resources

• Identify the cultural heritage baseline within and in the vicinity of the proposed 8.2.2 Scottish Planning Policy (SPP) sets out the national planning policy for the historic environment development. and indicates how the planning system will contribute towards the delivery of Scottish Ministers’ policies as set out in the SHEP. Sites with statutory and non-statutory designations are material • Assess the proposed development site in terms of its archaeological and historic considerations in the planning process and the Scottish Government expects local authorities environment potential. and others to maintain and strengthen their commitment to stewardship of the historic environment, and to reflect this planning guidance in their policies and their allocation of • Consider the potential and predicted effects of the construction and operation of the resources. wind farm on the baseline cultural heritage resource, within the context of relevant legislation and planning policy guidelines. 8.2.3 Sites with statutory designations (protected by legislation) include:

• Propose measures, where appropriate, to mitigate any predicted significant adverse • Scheduled Monuments; effects. • Listed Buildings; 8.1.4 Figure 8.1 depicts the proposed development site, the proposed layout of the development and the locations of cultural heritage features identified by this study within and adjacent to the • Conservation Areas; and proposed development site boundary. Appendix 8.1 provides a gazetteer of those cultural • heritage sites and features and an indication of the relative importance of each. Designated Shipwrecks

8.2.4 Sites with non-statutory designations include: 8.2 Planning and Legislative Background

• World Heritage Sites; Legislation and Guidance

8.2.1 Scotland’s historic environment contributes to the Scottish Government’s strategic objectives and • Gardens and Designed Landscapes; to the National Performance Framework. The Scottish Historic Environment Policy (SHEP)

Volume 2 Chapter 8 Page 1

Chapter 8 Forss Wind Farm Extension Environmental Statement Cultural Heritage Assessment

• Historic Battlefields; and 8.2.9 Sites without statutory protection are curated by the local planning authority and SPP and PAN 42 provide national planning policy guidance and advice on the treatment of such resources. • Other Historic Environment Interests SPP requires that planning authorities ensure that development plans provide land-use policy frameworks for the protection, conservation and enhancement of the historic environment within 8.2.5 Those relevant to this assessment are Scheduled Monuments, Listed Buildings and other historic which any development impacts can be properly assessed. PAN 42 indicates that the principle environment interests. Unless directly affected by the development, Gardens and Designed that should underlie all planning decision-making is preservation of cultural resources in situ Landscapes are considered in Chapter 5: Landscape and Visual Assessment, of the where possible and by record if destruction cannot be avoided. It is recognised in PAN 42 that Environmental Statement, which considers the effect of the wind farm on the surrounding preservation may not always be possible and where damage is unavoidable various mitigation landscape. As noted in the Landscape and Visual Chapter, no Gardens or Designed measures may be proposed. Landscapes would be directly affected by the proposed development therefore these are not

considered further in this chapter. Regional and Local Planning Policy

Sites with Statutory Designations 8.2.10 The Highland Structure Plan Written Statement March 2001 establishes the Council’s strategic framework for land use and sustainable development. The Structure Plan notes that Highland’s Scheduled Monuments towns and villages, including their historic and modern buildings, are an integral part of the 8.2.6 Scheduled Monuments are protected under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas region’s heritage, and that Highland contains extensive archaeological remains of national and Act 1979 (1979 Act). The statutory consent of the Scottish Ministers is required before any local importance. It states that it is important that new development is sympathetic to existing works are carried out which would affect a Scheduled Monument. Impacts upon the setting of a patterns of development and that opportunities are taken to preserve and promote the built Scheduled Monument form an important consideration in the granting or refusal of planning heritage. Strategic Policy G2 states that proposed developments will be assessed by The consent. Further information on development control procedures relating to Scheduled Highland Council on the extent to which they impact upon the cultural heritage and demonstrate Monuments is provided in SHEP, SPP and Planning Advice Note 42, Archaeology (PAN 42). sensitive siting and high quality design in keeping with, amongst other considerations, the historic

Listed Buildings environment.

8.2.7 Listed Buildings are classified into Categories A, B and C(S) and are protected under the 8.2.11 Policy BC1 (Preservation of archaeological sites) states that archaeological sites affected by Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) (Scotland) Act 1997 (1997 Act). Under the development proposals should be preserved, or in exceptional cases where preservation is 1997 Act the Scottish Ministers are required to compile a list of buildings of special architectural impossible, the sites will be recorded at the developer’s expense to professional standards. or historic interest. Planning authorities and the Scottish Ministers are required to have special 8.2.12 Policy BC3 (Archaeological Heritage Areas) states that Local Plans will identify and zone areas regard for the desirability of preserving Listed Buildings and their settings and any features of of exceptional archaeological and historic interest, and make appropriate provision for the special architectural or historic importance they possess. Government policy and guidance is protection and interpretation of features of interest. Highland Council’s Heritage Areas include also provided in SHEP and in SPP. Hill of Warehouse/Yarrows, Glenelg, Lairg, Ledmore, Bracadale/Uillinish and Strathnaver. The Sites with Non-statutory Designations proposed development site does not lie within any of the nominated Heritage Areas.

Other Historic Environment Interests 8.2.13 Policy BC5 (Listed buildings and Conservation Areas) seeks to preserve Highland’s buildings 8.2.8 There is a range of other non-designated archaeological sites, monuments and areas of historic and groups of buildings of historic or architectural interest. interest, including historic landscapes, other gardens and designed landscapes, woodlands and 8.2.14 Through the Caithness Local Plan (2002) the Council aims to safeguard and enhance the routes such as drove roads that do not have statutory protection. cultural heritage of Caithness by protecting archaeological sites, landscapes, Listed Buildings,

Volume 2 Chapter 8 Page 2

Chapter 8 Forss Wind Farm Extension Environmental Statement Cultural Heritage Assessment

Conservation Areas and their settings (para 8). General Policy PP3 states that the Council will order to identify any previously identified recorded sites of palaeoenvironmental potential in the presume against development, where there is significant damage to heritage. vicinity of the proposed development area.

8.2.15 In paragraph 1.38 of the Local Plan the Council sets out its strategy for protection of the 8.3.6 The online Historic Land-Use Assessment for Scotland (http://www.rcahms.gov.uk), maintained environment, which follows a hierarchical approach ranging from international sites through by the RCAHMS was consulted for information on the historic land-use character of the proposed national sites to locally important sites. These have varying degrees of protection and development area. development potential. Developments affecting international and national sites are possible if 8.3.7 Bibliographic references and documentary sources were consulted to provide background and they are compatible with maintaining the features for which the sites are designated. Proposals historical information. affecting local sites must have regard to the interest involved but need not preclude

development. 8.3.8 A full record of all sources consulted is provided at the end of this assessment.

8.3 Methodology Reconnaissance Field Survey

Desk-Based Assessment 8.3.9 A walk-over reconnaissance field survey (RCAHMS Level 11) was undertaken of the proposed development area in October 2008 in order to: 8.3.1 Up to date information was obtained from appropriate sources, as detailed below, on the

locations of cultural heritage sites with statutory protection and non-statutory designations within • Record the baseline condition of the known archaeology and heritage features, the proposed development area and in its vicinity. identified through the desk-based assessment.

8.3.2 Information was gathered from the NMRS and the Highland Council Historic Environment • Identify any further features of cultural heritage interest not detected through the Record (HER) in order to identify sites or features that might be directly affected by the proposed desk-based assessment and to identify areas with the potential to contain currently development works and to provide background information on the character of the wider cultural unrecorded, buried archaeological remains. heritage resource and on the archaeological potential of the proposed development area. Information on the locations of scheduled monuments and listed buildings was obtained from the • Assess the potential effects, resulting from the construction of the proposed Historic Scotland Spatial Data Warehouse (a GIS data web-site). development, on cultural heritage sites and areas, and their settings, where appropriate. 8.3.3 Cartographic sources held in the map library of the National Library of Scotland were examined and assessed. The Ordnance Survey 1st Edition, 2nd Edition, 1959 and 1969 6 inch to 1mile 8.3.10 No intrusive archaeological investigations have been carried out as part of this assessment. maps were examined, along with other readily available cartographic sources to gather 8.3.11 Key receptors outside the proposed development area were visited, or as closely as was information on pre-recent land use in the area. possible given access constraints, to assess potential indirect effects on their settings. 8.3.4 An assessment was made of the vertical aerial photograph collection held at the Royal 8.4 Baseline Studies Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Scotland (RCAHMS). Sorties dating

from 1946, 1964, 1988 and 1993 were examined. General

8.3.5 The Scottish Palaeoenvironmental Database (http://xweb.geos.ed.ac.uk/~ajn/spad), which 8.4.1 Thirty sites of cultural heritage interest were identified by the desk-based assessment. Twenty- records the distribution of known palaeoenvironmental sites across Scotland, was consulted in five of these sites are recorded in the NMRS and in the Highland HER.

1 RCAHMS (2004) Survey and Recording Policy

Volume 2 Chapter 8 Page 3

Chapter 8 Forss Wind Farm Extension Environmental Statement Cultural Heritage Assessment

8.4.2 A farmstead (22) and four quarries (23-26) were identified from examination of cartographic relinquished to the state (Historic Scotland)). A nearby spring (18), known as St Mary’s Well, sources. Historic maps also provided background information on some of those sites recorded in may have provided a water supply for the chapel. the NMRS and HER. 8.4.10 Several other remains are also of settlement features of late medieval or post medieval date. 8.4.3 Examination of aerial photographs did not reveal any further sites within the proposed These include the remains of two farmsteads (11 and 14), the remains of two longhouses (2 and development area. 13), other building remains (10) and an enclosure (9). Borrowston Farm (22) also probably has late medieval origins; the farmstead is certainly present during the mid-18th century when it was 8.4.4 The Scottish Palaeoenvironmental Database holds no records of any palaeoenvironmental sites recorded by Roy (1747-55). The remains of a small structure (1) and a field bank (4) are also within 10km of the proposed development. probably of late medieval or post medieval date.

8.4.5 Field survey did not identify any sites or features not identified from other sources. 20th century Military Structures

8.4.6 Figure 8.1 shows the locations of the sites identified by the desk-based assessment and field 8.4.11 The US Naval Communication Unit (17) opened in 1964 and closed in 1992. The site was part survey and Appendix 8.1 provides tabulated gazetteer information on the character, baseline of a world-wide Defence Communications System and included the transmitter site at Forss condition and cultural heritage importance of each site. linked to a receiver site at West Murkle. A photographic survey of the then surviving masts was carried out in 2006 (in advance of phase II of the Forss Wind Farm). The base has been Character of Cultural Heritage Resource demolished and the the masts removed; all that now remains are the former mast bases and

Prehistoric and Roman Periods anchor blocks, and part of the former base is now occupied by a business and technology park. The surviving remains have no special designation and little historic value. 8.4.7 A cairn (5), which may have contained a cist burial, lies on the cliff top overlooking the sea coast and is probably of Bronze Age date. A second short cist (3) containing human remains, and 8.4.12 A probable WWII radio station (8) was formerly located on the edge of the proposed found close to the cairn, is also most likely to be of Bronze Age date. A barbed and tanged development area but this site is now occupied by a modern farm building. arrowhead (ND06NW 16) found at Crosskirk is also of Bronze Age date. The cairn and the Miscellaneous nearby broch (6) are protected together as a scheduled monument. 8.4.13 The NMRS holds records pertaining to plans and elevations for a new house at Borrowston 8.4.8 The remains of the broch (6) that stand on the cliff top close to the cairn (6) are likely to be of late Mains (7). The plans indicate that the house was built in 1921-22. Iron Age to Roman period date. A second broch (21), at Crosskirk, was excavated in the late 1960s and finds included 2nd Century Roman Samian ware and a Pictish Symbol stone. The 8.4.14 Four quarries (23-26) around Borrowston Mains farm have been recorded from cartographic excavations also provided evidence of secondary (Pictish) settlement to the east of the broch. sources. These are likely to have been for the extraction of building stone for the construction of The remains of a third broch (ND06SW 20) are recorded close by, at Tulloch of Lybster, and are homes and/or field walls. also probably of late Iron Age to Roman date. 8.4.15 A mound and rectangular structure (27) and a clifftop wall (28) are unlikely to be of any great Medieval or later rural settlement antiquity. A large mound (29) is of unknown age or character.

8.4.9 The remains of St Mary’s Chapel (20) are considered to be the oldest surviving ecclesiastical Archaeological Potential of the Proposed Development Site remains in Caithness and probably date to around the 12th century. The remains are protected 8.4.16 Four prehistoric sites have been identified within the proposed development and two others lie as a scheduled monument, and the site is a Guardianship Monument (a monument where immediately adjacent to the site boundary. In the wider area are the recorded remains of brochs, ownership remains vested in the original owner but where control and management is chambered cairns and hut circles, sites covering a range from the early Bronze Age (c2500BC)

Volume 2 Chapter 8 Page 4

Chapter 8 Forss Wind Farm Extension Environmental Statement Cultural Heritage Assessment

through to the late Iron Age / Roman period (1st / 2nd century AD). Other sites identified by this Table 8.1 Criteria for assessing the sensitivity of cultural heritage features to direct study include Pictish artefact find-spots (300 AD to 900 AD), medieval ecclesiastical sites (12th impacts century) and late-medieval or later rural settlement sites. The indications are of a landscape that Feature Definition / criteria has had continuity of settlement perhaps from as long ago as 2500BC through to the present Sensitivity day. Sites of national or international importance, including: • World Heritage Sites 8.4.17 The Historic Landscape Assessment map (RCAHMS) shows the proposed development site as • Scheduled Monuments, and sites proposed for scheduling having three distinct land-use types. The western part, around Borrowston Farm is 19th and • Undesignated archaeological sites and areas of likely national importance 20th century enclosed fields, and the field pattern is of large regular polygonal fields divided by High identified in HERs/SMRs • Category A Listed Buildings dry-stone walls. The eastern part of the site, formerly occupied by the naval base, is described • Gardens and Designed Landscapes (Inventory sites) as moorland and rough grazing and has been largely unimproved apart from its development as • Outstanding Conservation Areas a wireless transmitter station. The fields at Tulloch of Lybster are described as crofting land and • Designated Wreck Sites the field pattern here is of small, mainly rectangular, fields divided by dry-stone walls. Since Sites of regional importance, including: • Archaeological sites and areas of distinctive regional importance 2003 the former naval base has been developed as a wind farm which currently consists of six Medium • Archaeologically Sensitive Areas turbines. A watching brief, undertaken during the erection of the first two wind turbines in 2002, • Category B listed buildings produced no finds of archaeological interest. • Conservation Areas Sites of local Importance, including: 8.4.18 The presence of three brochs in the immediate area, finds of burials of Bronze Age and Pictish • Archaeological sites of local importance Low date and of artefacts of prehistoric and possibly early historic date suggests that there is a • Category C(S) listed buildings • Unlisted historic buildings and townscapes with local (vernacular) characteristics moderate to high potential for the presence of buried sites, features or deposits of archaeological Sites of little or no importance, including: interest and possibly significance, particularly in the area close to the scheduled broch and cairn, • Sites of former archaeological features Negligible around Turbines 12 and 13. • Unlisted buildings of minor historic or architectural interest; • Poorly preserved examples of particular types of feature 8.5 Impacts and Mitigation

Criteria for Assessment of Direct Impacts on Cultural Heritage Sites Table 8.2 Criteria for assessing the magnitude of direct impacts on cultural heritage features 8.5.1 Criteria for assessing magnitude of direct physical impact, which measures the degree of change Magnitude to the baseline condition of a feature that would result from the construction of one or more Definition of impact element of the proposed development, are classified according to the criteria set out in Tables Major Total loss or major alteration of the site. 8.1 and 8.2. The assessment of sensitivity of archaeological and heritage assets (Table 8.1) Moderate Loss of one or more key elements of the site. reflects the relative weight which statute and policy attach to them, principally as published in Minor Slight alteration of the site. SHEP and the SPP. The magnitude of the impact is determined according to the definitions in Negligible Very slight or negligible alteration of the site Table 8.2.

Volume 2 Chapter 8 Page 5

Chapter 8 Forss Wind Farm Extension Environmental Statement Cultural Heritage Assessment

8.5.2 Sensitivity of the receptor and the magnitude of impact are then used to inform a professional • The current landscape and visual surroundings of the receptor; judgement of the likely significance of the physical impact. Table 8.3 summarises the criteria for • assigning significance of a physical effect. The aesthetic and experiential properties of the receptor within its surroundings;

• Table 8.3 Criteria for assessing the significance of direct impacts on cultural heritage The social value (actual or potential) of the receptor as a recreational / leisure or features educational resource.

Magnitude of Feature Sensitivity 8.5.5 Sensitivity of setting has been assessed by considering two factors: Impact Negligible Low Medium High • The relative weight which statute and policy attach to the receptor and its setting; and Negligible Moderate Major Major Major significance Significance Significance Significance • The degree to which the baseline setting contributes to the understanding and/or Negligible Minor Moderate Major Moderate Significance Significance Significance Significance appreciation, and hence value, of the receptor. Negligible Negligible Minor Moderate Minor Significance Significance Significance Significance 8.5.6 The relative weight that statute and policy attach to the receptor and its setting is determined Negligible Negligible Negligible Minor using the sensitivity of archaeological and heritage resources set out in Table 8.4. Where Negligible Significance Significance Significance Significance individual designated receptors are present within larger designated areas (e.g. Listed Buildings

within a Conservation Area; Scheduled Monuments within an Archaeologically Sensitive Area), the sensitivity is stated as the higher of the two designations. None of the categories of sites Criteria for Assessing Impacts upon the Setting of Sites of Cultural Heritage Interest considered for impacts on their settings is of ‘negligible sensitivity’.

8.5.3 For each receptor where a potential impact on setting has been identified, the assessment of Table 8.4 Criteria for assessment of sensitivity of a site to an impact on its setting impact follows a four-stage approach: Feature Definition / criteria • Identification of the characteristics of the setting of the receptor (see below 8.5.4); Sensitivity Sites of national or international importance, including: • Assessment of the sensitivity of that setting; • World Heritage Sites • Scheduled Monuments, and sites proposed for scheduling • Identification of how the presence of the proposed development will affect that setting • Undesignated archaeological sites and areas of likely national importance identified in HERs/SMRs High (magnitude of impact); and • Category A Listed Buildings • Gardens and Designed Landscapes (Inventory sites) • Assessment of the significance of the impact. • Outstanding Conservation Areas • Designated Wreck Sites 8.5.4 The baseline setting of each receptor or related group of receptors is characterised on a case- • Historic Battlefields by-case basis, based upon its properties and location, and takes into account factors identified in Sites of regional importance, including: guidance issued by Historic Scotland (Historic Scotland 2009). The baseline setting of each • Archaeological sites and areas of distinctive regional importance Medium • Archaeologically Sensitive Areas receptor is characterised principally in terms of: • Category B listed buildings • Conservation Areas • The archaeological / historical context of the receptor; Sites of local Importance, including: Low • Category C(S) listed buildings

Volume 2 Chapter 8 Page 6

Chapter 8 Forss Wind Farm Extension Environmental Statement Cultural Heritage Assessment

urbanised or industrialised landscape.

8.5.7 Sensitivity of the receptor and the magnitude of impact are then used to inform a professional Negligible A setting which does not contribute positively to the understanding and/or appreciation of the siting and/or historical/archaeological/architectural context of a judgement of the likely significance of the impact on setting. Table 8.5 summarises the criteria receptor. for assigning significance of an effect. E.g. immediate surroundings that are not relevant to understanding the context of the receptor, such as a location within a single species commercial forestry or an industrial development. Table 8.5 Criteria for assessing the magnitude of impacts on the settings of cultural heritage receptors

Magnitude 8.5.9 These two criteria are combined to assess the overall sensitivity of a setting, as set out in Table Definition of impact 8.7. Fundamental impacts obviously changing the surroundings of a receptor, such that its Major baseline setting is substantially or totally altered. Table 8.7 Criteria for assessing the sensitivity of the setting of a receptor Impacts discernibly changing the surroundings of a receptor, such that its baseline Moderate setting is partly altered. Sensitivity of Contribution of Setting receptor Slight, but detectable impacts that do not alter the baseline setting of the receptor High Moderate Low Negligible Minor materially. High High High Medium Low Negligible A very slight and barely distinguishable change from baseline conditions. Medium High Medium Low Low Low Medium Low Low Low

8.5.8 The degree to which the baseline setting contributes to the understanding and/or appreciation of the receptor is assessed according to the criteria set out in Table 8.6. 8.5.10 The significance of the impact on setting depends on both the magnitude of the impact and the

Table 8.6 Criteria for assessing the contribution of setting to understanding and appreciation sensitivity of the setting of the receptor. Table 8.8 presents the matrix used, with professional of a cultural heritage receptor judgement, to inform the determination of the significance of impact on setting.

Contribution Definition Table 8.8 Criteria for assessing the significance of impacts on the setting of a receptor High A setting which makes a strong positive contribution to the understanding and/or appreciation of the siting and/or historical/archaeological/architectural context of a Magnitude of Receptor Sensitivity receptor. Impact Low Medium High E.g. a prominent topographic location; surroundings that include related monuments in close association; surroundings that are believed to be little Major Minor Significance Major Significance Major Significance changed from those when the receptor was created. Moderate Minor Significance Moderate Significance Major Significance Moderate A setting which makes some positive contribution to the understanding and/or Minor 2 appreciation of the siting and/or historical/archaeological/architectural context of a Negligible Significance Minor Significance Minor Significance receptor. Negligible Negligible Significance Negligible Significance Negligible Significance E.g. surroundings that complement the siting and appearance of a receptor, such as the presence of a feature of the rural past within a more recent farming landscape containing little or no urban or industrial development.

Low A setting which makes little positive contribution to the understanding and/or 8.5.11 The results of the assessment are tabulated in Appendix H and are discussed below (Section appreciation of the siting and/or historical/archaeological/architectural context of a receptor. 8.6) where relevant. E.g. where surroundings only partially complement the siting and appearance of a receptor, such as the presence of a feature of the rural past within a partly 2 A non-material change to baseline conditions cannot by its nature lead to a significant effect. A significant effect arises from a material change to baseline conditions. This distinction explains why this particular significance assessment finding is not ‘moderate’

Volume 2 Chapter 8 Page 7

Chapter 8 Forss Wind Farm Extension Environmental Statement Cultural Heritage Assessment

8.6 Assessment of Construction Effects Grid Connection

8.6.1 Any ground-breaking activities associated with the construction of the proposed Forss III 8.6.5 The proposed underground grid connection, from the on-site substation near Turbine 11 to the extension (such as for turbines bases and crane hard-standings, access tracks, cable routes, Forss primary sub-station at Hill of Lybster, would pass close to, but would not disturb, an old compounds, etc) have the potential to disturb or destroy features of cultural heritage interest. quarry pit (25). The works associated with installation of the below ground cables would not Construction activities, such as vehicle movements, soil and overburden storage and directly affect any known archaeological site or feature. There would however be a direct impact landscaping have the potential to cause direct, permanent and irreversible effects on the cultural on a several historic drystone walls during the laying of the cables, several of which would need heritage. to be temporarily dismantled to enable the installation of the cables. The walls have no special designation but are of some historic value, adding character to the farming landscape. Direct Impacts

8.6.6 There is a possibility that any buried archaeological features, artefacts or deposits that might be Wind Farm Layout present along the cable route could be disturbed or damaged as a result of the excavation of 8.6.2 The layout of the Forss III extension: the positioning of turbines, layout of access tracks and the cable trenches. siting of the sub-station and construction compounds, has been arrived at through a series of iterative stages to develop the best layout within the context of all environmental and technical Mitigation of Direct Impacts constraints (see Chapter 2 for details of the development design process). The results of the General Measures desk-based study and field survey were provided as GIS data, with appropriate stand-offs identified to ensure the preservation of important remains in situ. The layout shown on Figure 8.6.7 In accordance with the guidance contained in PAN 42, the preferred option for mitigation is 8.1 therefore embeds mitigation into the siting of the turbines and ancillary development features preservation of important remains in situ wherever practicable and by record where preservation to avoid all identified archaeological constraints as far as these have been established without is not possible. The mitigation measures presented below take account of this planning intrusive archaeological investigation through trial trenching. guidance and offer various options for recording and ensuring that, where practical, upstanding sites and features are preserved intact in order to retain the present historic elements of the 8.6.3 There would be no direct impact on any identified or previously recorded archaeological site or landscape and, where disturbance is unavoidable, to ensure proper recording of any features feature resulting from the construction of the proposed Forss III extension. There would however that come to light. be a direct impact on a number of historic drystone walls during the construction of the access track from the main road, past West Borrowston to the turbines. The walls are all of probable Specific Measures

19th century date, being shown on the Ordnance Survey 1st edition map (1876) dividing the 8.6.8 All construction phase mitigation measures are subject to the agreement and approval of farmland into a regular pattern of rectangular fields. Several of these walls would need to be Highland Council and would be set out in a Written Scheme of Investigation (WSI) for the breached where they would be crossed by the access track. The track layout has been devised Council’s approval, through its archaeological advisors, prior to the commencement of to run either parallel to these walls or to cross perpendicular to the wall alignments, thereby construction works on site. The WSI would include the following elements: reducing the disruption to the historic field pattern. The walls themselves have no special designation but are of some historic value, adding character to the farming landscape. Preservation in Situ / Fencing off 8.6.9 There are no sites with upstanding remains that would require to be fenced off during the 8.6.4 There is a possibility that any buried archaeological features, artefacts or deposits that might be construction phase. The remains of a former quarry (25), which lies along the route of the present within the limited footprint of the proposed development could be disturbed or damaged proposed grid connection underground cable, is of lesser archaeological or historic environment as a result of construction works. The probability of this likelihood has been assessed as interest and no mitigation is required to preserve it. A group of remains (1, 2, 4-6, 23 and 26-28), moderate to high; being highest close to the scheduled broch and cairn (5 and 6). which includes the scheduled broch and cairn (5 and 6) lie along the cliff edge on the north side

Volume 2 Chapter 8 Page 8

Chapter 8 Forss Wind Farm Extension Environmental Statement Cultural Heritage Assessment

of existing dry-stone walls, which would be a sufficient barrier to prevent any direct impact on support in the event that buried archaeological remains of potential archaeological interest (such those features. All other identified sites lie well clear of development locations. as building remains, human remains, artefacts etc) should be discovered in areas not subject to archaeological monitoring. The guidance will make clear the legal responsibilities placed upon • Signs would be erected on the wind farm side of the boundary wall adjacent to both those who disturb artefacts or human remains. the broch (6) and cairn (5), identifying them as archaeological sites and scheduled monuments to be avoided, throughout the duration of the construction phase. 8.7 Assessment of Operational Effects

• Preservation of the integrity of the many drystone walls affected will be ensured. Impacts on Settings Where breaches are required, for the passage of access tracks and for the laying of 8.7.1 The presence of wind farm features can have indirect impacts on the setting of cultural heritage the grid connection cables, these will be appropriately reinstated by a suitably sites. Wind turbines and, to a lesser extent, anemometer masts have the potential to cause qualified professional. Where permanent breaks are required along access tracks the indirect visual impacts over a wide area. In particular, there is potential for the turbines to be wall terminals will be properly consolidated. present in views of and from SMs, Listed Buildings and other cultural heritage sites and areas in

Watching Briefs and Excavation the near vicinity of the development.

8.6.10 Any requirement for the archaeological monitoring of works through watching briefs would be 8.7.2 Analysis of the ZTV indicates that there would be theoretical visibility of the new turbines from 45 agreed in consultation with Highland Council Archaeology Unit (HCAU). To allow the SMs, and from six Category A, 18 Category B and five Category C(S) listed buildings within the identification and recording of any currently buried and unidentified remains of archaeological 15km study radius but this does not take into account the mitigating effects provided by significance present within proposed development locations, a watching brief, if required, would screening from woodland and forestry, built features or intervening micro-topography (for be conducted during topsoiling works in archaeologically sensitive areas, to a strategy to be explanation of the limitations of the ZTV see the Landscape and Visual Assessment, Chapter 5 agreed with HCAU. It is envisaged that a watching brief would be carried out at the following Section 5.3.4.) The ZTV shows that visibility of the wind farm is in fact limited to relatively location: discreet areas. The proposed new turbines would be visible over quite large areas from the seaward side but from the landward side visibility would be restricted by topography to points • In the vicinity of the scheduled broch and cairn (5 and 6) where there is judged to be along the coastal plain between Dounreay and Ness of Litter, and from high ground on the a high potential for the presence of buried archaeological features, artefacts or northward side of Beinn Ratha in the west and from the strath along the Forss Water. deposits. A short cist burial containing human remains (3) was discovered in this location in 1871 and other remains may await discovery here. 8.7.3 There are clusters of monuments from which the wind farm would be visible (Figure 8.2). In particular, there is a significant group of scheduled monuments around Loch Calder and Loch 8.6.11 If significant discoveries are made during archaeological monitoring, and preservation in situ of Shurrery, along the Forss Water, a small group of scheduled monuments around Dounreay, any sites or features is not possible, provision would be made for the excavation, where another at Achvarasdal, and a group of scheduled chambered cairns on Cnoc Freiceadain and necessary, of any archaeological remains. This provision would include the consequent Hill of Shebster. There are also groups of listed buildings around Reay, including a specific production of written reports on the findings, with post-excavation analyses and publication of the group associated with Sandside House. results of the work, where appropriate. 8.7.4 A number of the viewpoints generated for the Landscape and Visual Assessment are also Construction guidelines representative of the views that can be obtained from several of the scheduled monuments and 8.6.12 Written guidelines will be issued on behalf of RES for use by all construction contractors, listed buildings in the vicinity of the proposed extension. Where relevant to the impact on the outlining the need to avoid causing unnecessary damage to known archaeological sites. That settings of cultural heritage sites these are referenced in the following text. The photomontages document will contain arrangements for calling upon retained professional archaeological can be found in Chapter 5 of this volume.

Volume 2 Chapter 8 Page 9

Chapter 8 Forss Wind Farm Extension Environmental Statement Cultural Heritage Assessment

Scheduled Monuments close to the proposed development site monuments stand in a setting that is already affected by the presence of the existing turbines of Forss I and II and the nearby Technology and Business Park; the existing turbines in particular 8.7.5 There are two scheduled monuments close to the proposed development site. These are Green having a prominent visual presence within the setting of both the broch and cairn (Plate 8.1). Tulloch broch and cairn (SM 554) which are scheduled together and which stand on the cliff top north-west of Borrowston Farm and Crosskirk St Mary’s Chapel and broch (SM 90086), which stands on the cliff top at Crosskirk Bay, to the north-east of the Business and Technology Park (Figure 8.1).

Green Tullochs, Broch and Cairn (SM 554; Sites No 5 and 6)

8.7.6 These two monuments are prominent grassy mounds that stand on the cliff top overlooking and visible from the coastal waters of the North Atlantic/Pentland Firth. Brochs are commonly found in such coastal settings and may have been deliberately sited in such locations either for defence (to monitor coastal traffic) or for prestige (to be seen by travellers from the water). The broch is one of many in this part of Caithness and there were formerly two others close by (one at Crosskirk, now destroyed) and one at Tulloch of Lybster (ND06NW 21), surviving as a low grassy mound. It is possible that intervisibilty between such sites was important to their social role and political function. Alternatively, it is possible that they were not all contemporary sites or that not all of these were traditional broch towers.

8.7.7 The position is similar in regards to the cairn, believed to be a chambered cairn and therefore of Neolithic, or possibly Early Bronze Age, date. A number of similar cairns are distributed across the coastal plain and on the tops of the range of low hills to the south, between Strath Halladale Plate 8.1 View from Green Tulloch broch towards existing turbines and Thurso, with a particular group on Hill of Shebster. Many, including those on Hill of Shebster, are sited in prominent positions in the landscape and were arguably designed both to 8.7.10 The clifftop setting and close physical association between the two monuments combined with express the pastoral care of the ancestors over the living and to act as social focal points in the the presence close by of similar, related monuments provides an archaeological context which landscape. Intervisibility between these sites may have been important to their social role. indicates that the contribution of the setting to an appreciation of the sites and an understanding of their social roles and functions is high. Consequently the sensitivity of their setting to new 8.7.8 The siting of the proposed western row of turbines has taken into account the possibility of development is also high. The close proximity of proposed turbines T12 and T13 to the broch intervisibility between key monuments and Turbines 12 and 13 have been positioned so as to and cairn would represent a material change to the immediate setting of the two monuments; the avoid directly obstructing distant visual links between the cairn (5) and a group of other two turbines being visually prominent. Views of the monuments from the landward side would chambered cairns which stand in a prominent visual position to the south on Cnoc Freiceadain not be obstructed (e.g. Viewpoint 10), [but the monuments when viewed from the sea would be (2386) (see Viewpoint 10 for view from Cnoc Freiceadain). seen with the turbines close behind them]. The proposed development represents a small scale extension to a small wind farm and the two sites would retain their coastal setting, separated 8.7.9 Two proposed turbines (T12 and T13) would be sited fairly close to the cairn and the broch but from the scheduled monuments by the retention of the existing dry-stone boundary wall. The neither would be within 100m of either monument (less than the blade tip height of the turbines siting of the proposed turbines has taken account of the proximity of the two monuments and the (81m)) and they would be separated from the two monuments by the existing dry-stone wall, nearest turbines have been positioned to avoid obstructing views outwards from the broch and which would act as a boundary between the cliff top setting and the wind farm. The two

Volume 2 Chapter 8 Page 10

Chapter 8 Forss Wind Farm Extension Environmental Statement Cultural Heritage Assessment

views of the cairn from other burial monuments further afield (Viewpoint 10, from Cnoc Freiceadain long cairns). The removal of the turbines following decommissioning at the end of the wind farm’s operating life would ultimately remove the impact on the setting of the two monuments.

8.7.11 Taking account of the changes to the baseline setting of the monuments the effect resulting from the introduction of the additional turbines is judged to be of moderate magnitude and major significance.

Crosskirk St Mary’s Chapel and Broch (SM 90086; Sites No 20 and 21)

8.7.12 The remains of this 12th century chapel stand in rough grassland on the cliff top at Crosskirk Bay overlooking and visible from the coastal waters of the North Atlantic/Pentland Firth. It is probable that this location was deliberately chosen so that the chapel was visible from the sea, perhaps as a symbol of spiritual comfort to seafarers. The chapel was associated with and dependent upon the 9th century Church at nearby Reay, the older and probably more important ecclesiastical site. The broch, which was an earlier settlement on the headland and which formerly lay close to

the chapel, was destroyed following excavation in 1972 and no trace of either it or of the small settlement that was also discovered to the east of the broch is now visible. The chapel remains Plate 8.2 View of St Mary’s Chapel from north-east showing Business Park and existing turbines stand within an enclosed churchyard and are surrounded by a cemetery that is still occasionally

used. The chapel is a Guardianship Monument and is a visitor attraction, signposted and 8.7.13 The contribution that the prominent clifftop setting provides to an appreciation of the site and an provided with a visitor display panel. understanding of its social role and function is high. Consequently the sensitivity of its setting to new development affecting that ability is also high. Viewpoints 4 and 5 provide visual 8.7.13 The monument lies on the north-east side of a dry-stone boundary wall which separates it from representations of the views from the visitors’ car park (Viewpoint 4) and from the immediate the adjoining Business and Technology Park. The existing Forss I and II turbines lie mostly environs of the chapel (Viewpoint 5) and show the change to the present baseline that would beyond the Business and Technology Park, and the closest turbine is approximately 325m result from the introduction of the new turbines. Viewpoint 4 shows the view from the visitors car away, to the south-west (Plate 8.2). At the request of Historic Scotland the siting of turbines park to the east of the chapel and is representative of the view that would be obtained has been excluded from the fields to the south of the chapel (see Chapter 2: Design approaching the chapel along the access path. The proposed extension turbines would be seen Development, for details). beyond the existing Phase I and II turbines and the behind the existing business park buildings. The view would be little different to that currently obtained.

8.7.14 Taking into account the close proximity of the existing turbines and the presence within the monuments setting of the Business and Technology Park, the effect on the setting of the chapel resulting from the introduction of the additional turbines is judged to be of low magnitude and of minor significance.

Volume 2 Chapter 8 Page 11

Chapter 8 Forss Wind Farm Extension Environmental Statement Cultural Heritage Assessment

Scheduled Monuments within 15km of the Proposed Development Site Shurrery

8.7.15 In the wider landscape there are clusters of scheduled monuments (see above Section 8.7.3 – 8.7.20 To the south of the proposed extension there is an extensive group of 29 scheduled monuments, 4). For the most part these sites lie well away from the proposed extension and in any case the between Westfield and Ben Dorrey along the Forss Water and around Loch Calder and Loch existing Forss wind farm is an established feature in the landscape and visible in views from Shurrery. Amongst these sites are 16 funerary monuments (burial cairns) of Neolithic and those monuments. The proposed extension therefore represents a detectable but minor change Bronze Age date, groups of standing stones, a stone circle and two brochs. Together these sites to the baseline settings of the monuments, both individually and collectively. A number of the constitute a relict prehistoric archaeological landscape covering an area approximately 1km viewpoint visualisations provide photomontages showing the degree of the change from north-south by 0.5km east-west. Photomontages showing views towards the wind farm area locations in which there are concentrations of cultural heritage receptors. The following from this general area are presented as Viewpoints 24 and 25. paragraphs refer to these montages where they appropriate to aid the assessment. 8.7.21 Viewpoint 24 shows a view from Buaile Oscar, fort & chambered cairn, (530) on Beinn 8.7.16 Appendix 8.2 provides a tabulated summarised assessment of the impact on the setting of each Freiceadain looking northwards over the group of monuments towards the wind farm. Viewpoint monument within the ZTV from which visibility of the turbines is predicted. For simplicity these 25 is a view from close to the long cairn (497) and chambered cairn (500) at the north end of are described below as groups where appropriate. Loch Calder, near Lieurary.

Hill of Shebster / Cnoc Freiceadain 8.7.22 Viewpoint VP 24, from the south end of the group of monuments, shows that the easternmost turbine of the proposed extension would be visible (13.9km distant) together with the existing 8.7.17 Viewpoint 10 shows the view from Cnoc Freiceadain long cairns (90078) looking towards the turbines, whilst the hubs and blade tips of the western turbines would be visible above the wind farm (the northernmost long cairn is visible just in the foreground at the right edge of the skyline. Viewpoint 25, from the north end of the group of monuments (Loch Calder), shows that photograph). Cnoc Freiceadain long cairns occupy the northern end of the northern ridge of Hill T15 along with the existing turbines and the hubs and tips of the western extension turbines of Shebster from where there are extensive views over the coastal plain, from Dounreay to blade tips would be visible from the roadside at the north end of the loch. From the sites around Scrabster. The long cairns are two Neolithic burial monuments, one aligned north-northeast to the loch itself the visibility is likely to be much less. south-southwest and the second west-northwest to east-southeast. These two are the northernmost of a group of burial monuments of Neolithic and early Bronze Age date on Hill of 8.7.23 Taking account of the separation distance and the limited additional visibility of the proposed new Shebster and indicate a long period of ritual use of the hilltop. The cairns are promoted as a turbines the effect on the setting of this group of monuments would be of negligible magnitude visitor attraction with signed access and a display board. The viewpoint also looks out over the and negligible significance. location of Cnoc Freiceadain stone rows (2386) which lie at a lower altitude in the middle distance. Achvarasdal

8.7.24 Viewpoint 17 provides a representation of the view of the wind farm from close to Achvarasdal 8.7.18 The wind farm would be fully visible from Cnoc Freiceadain, the new turbines (3.8km distant) in where there is a group of four scheduled monuments; two brochs (513 and 514) and two combination with the existing ones. However, the visual link between these cairns and Green standing stones (421 and 441). The photomontage demonstrates that the extension turbines Tullochs cairn (554) is retained through the positioning of Turbine 13. would be visible from those sites (between 4.7km and 6.2km distant) with a row of pylon 8.7.19 Taking account of the limited additional visibility of the proposed new turbines, the effect on the mounted overhead power transmission lines in the foreground. setting of the long cairns and the stone rows would be of negligible magnitude and negligible 8.7.25 Taking into account the limited additional visibility of the proposed new turbines and the presence significance. of existing power lines, the effect on the baseline setting of this group of sites would be of negligible magnitude and negligible significance.

Volume 2 Chapter 8 Page 12

Chapter 8 Forss Wind Farm Extension Environmental Statement Cultural Heritage Assessment

Dounreay and the relationships and intervisibility between the individual buildings of the group would be unaffected by the proposed development. 8.7.26 Three scheduled monuments within the Dounreay Nuclear Power Station complex (444, 564 and 6401); a cairn, a broch and the remains of Dounreay Castle respectively have setting strath are 8.7.30 Taking into account the current settings of these listed buildings, the screening provided by the already considerable affected by the close proximity of the Power Station and associated wooded setting and the presence of the existing wind farm, the additional visibility of the infrastructure elements. The remains of Dounreay Castle (6401) stand on the shore amongst the proposed new turbines would result in effects of negligible magnitude and negligible significance. main power station buildings and the cairn (444) stands beside the complex airfield runway. The remains of Knock Urray broch (564) lie beneath an overhead power transmission line. Viewpoint Brims Castle

19 shows a representative view of the wind farm from the road to the south of Dounreay, close to 8.7.31 Brims Castle (14922) is a former tower house, now in a dilapidated state that lies on the shore the site of Knock Urray. This demonstrates that the extension turbines would be seen in and adjacent and to the east of modern farm sheds at Brims Mains farmstead. This modern combination with the existing turbines, within a slightly wider arc of view, but beyond modern farmstead and the shoreline form the setting for the remains of the tower house. The proposed farm buildings. turbines of the extension would be largely screened from view from this location and the modern farm sheds would block any view of the turbines from the castle. 8.7.27 Taking into account the current settings of these sites and the presence of the existing wind farm,

the additional visibility of the proposed new turbines would result in effects of negligible 8.7.32 The effect on the setting of Brims Castle would be of negligible magnitude and negligible magnitude and negligible significance. significance.

Listed Buildings within 15km of the Proposed Develop ment Site Sandside and Reay Village

8.7.28 There is a group of listed buildings at Bridge of Forss, another at Reay and a group around 8.7.33 The listed buildings at Reay and at Sandside lie 6km and more from the proposed extension and Sandside House. There are also a few stand-alone listed buildings, including Brims Castle which the turbines would be seen in views from these locations beyond and including the existing is also scheduled. The closest listed buildings to the proposed development are those at Bridge Dounreay Nuclear Power Station and its associated overhead transmission lines. The extension of Forss and Brims Castle. The nearest category A listed buildings are at Sandside Harbour and turbines would also always be seen in combination with the existing turbines. Viewpoint 16 at Reay, 6km west of the proposed extension turbines, and beyond Dounreay Power Station. shows the view from Sandside Harbour and Viewpoint 18 shows a view from the east side of Reay. Bridge of Forss

8.7.29 Viewpoint 7 provides a photomontage of the view from the roadside close to Bridge of Forss 8.7.34 Taking into account the current settings of these listed buildings, the presence of the Dounreay looking towards the wind farm. This viewpoint shows that the easternmost of the new turbines (T Power Station and the presence of the existing wind farm, the additional visibility of the proposed 11) would be visible in combination with the existing turbines; the westernmost row of turbines new turbines on their settings, both individually and collectively, would result in effects of would be screened by the intervening micro-topography and trees. The group of listed buildings negligible magnitude and negligible significance. around Forss House (14923) include mills, the miller’s house, a cottage and two bridges. These 8.7.35 The visual impact of the proposed new turbines, in combination with the existing turbines, on buildings all stand within a wooded setting around the Bridge of Forss (14926) on the Forss stand-alone listed buildings is considered, on the basis of the foregoing assessment and the Water. Six of the buildings, including Forss House are category B listed and one, Forss Cottage available photomontages, to be no more significant than those discussed above. The additional (14924) is category C(S) listed. The main, south, elevation of Forss House faces south-west visibility of the proposed new turbines on their settings would result in effects of negligible over the Forss Water and the main entrance is in the north-east elevation. There would be no magnitude and negligible significance. direct views towards the wind farm from either of the principal façades. Views towards the wind farm from other buildings and structures would be largely screened by surrounding woodland

Volume 2 Chapter 8 Page 13

Chapter 8 Forss Wind Farm Extension Environmental Statement Cultural Heritage Assessment

8.8 Non-Technical Summary Institute for Archaeologists (2008) Standard and Guidance for Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment 8.8.1 The assessment has identified the current character of the cultural heritage baseline within and Institute for Archaeologists (2009) Code of Conduct in the vicinity of the proposed Forss III extension. No new sites have been identified by the study New Statistical Account of Scotland 1834-45 vol.15 p.5: Thurso, County of Caithness but the archaeological potential of the site is considered to be high on the basis that there are Statistical Account of Scotland 1791-99 vol.20 p.493: Thurso, County of Caithness several prehistoric sites in close proximity to the development site and in the wider landscape RCAHMS (2004) Survey and Recording Policy

surrounding the site. Cartographic Sources

8.8.2 The wind farm layout has been designed to avoid known archaeological sites and features as far Ordnance Survey 1st Edition (1876) six inch to one mile Caithness: Sheet IV as possible and appropriate mitigation measures have been presented that would address any Ordnance Survey 1st Edition (1876) twenty five inches to one mile: Caithness Sheet IV.7 Ordnance Survey 1st Edition (1876) twenty five inches to one mile: Caithness Sheet IV.10 potential direct impacts on any hitherto undiscovered buried sites, features, artefacts or deposits. Ordnance Survey 1st Edition (1876) twenty five inches to one mile: Caithness Sheet IV.11 Ordnance Survey 2nd Edition (1907) six inch to one mile: Caithness Sheet IV 8.8.3 The effect of the addition of the proposed new turbines to the existing wind farm on the settings Ordnance Survey 1959 Edition six inch to one mile Sheet ND06NW of receptors in the wider landscape has been assessed. One potentially significant effect, on the Ordnance Survey 1969 Edition six inch to one mile Sheet ND06NW setting of the scheduled Green Tulloch broch and cairn, has been identified. Roy, W (1747-55) Military Survey of Scotland Thomson, J (1822) Caithness-shire 8.8.4 Although the effect on the setting of the Green Tulloch broch and cairn is assessed as being of Aerial Photographs major significance, the proposed development represents a small scale extension to a small wind farm. The two sites would retain their coastal setting, views to and from the sites would not be Sortie Frame Date Scale 106G/Scot/UK133 3104 – 3108 30/06/46 1:10000 wholly obstructed and the turbines would be separated from the scheduled monuments by the OS/64/113 020 – 024 22/07/64 1:7500 retention of the existing dry-stone boundary wall. In overall terms, the effect on the setting of the 059 – 055 60888 210 – 209 06/05/88 1:24000 broch and cairn is not necessarily unacceptable. OS/93/559B 394 – 391 18/09/93 1:8000 309 - 305 8.8.5 The effect on St Mary’s Chapel has been determined as being of negligible significance and in all other cases the effect would be of negligible significance. The attributed levels of significance Other Sources have taken into account the fact that this development is a proposed extension to the existing http://www.navy-radio.com/commsta.htm wind farm on this site.

8.8.6 The development proposal has been assessed against the cultural heritage baseline. It is considered that, in overall terms, the impact of the proposed Forss III extension on the cultural heritage resource would not be contrary to the aims of the Structure and Local Plans, nor be significant in terms of the requirements of the EIA Regulations.

8.9 References

Bibliography

Historic Scotland, The Scottish Historic Environment Policy (SHEP) document (2010) Historic Scotland (2009) Scoping of Development Proposals Assessment of Impact on the Setting of the Historic Environment Resource – Some General Considerations

Volume 2 Chapter 8 Page 14

Appendix H Forss Wind Farm Extension Environmental Statement Cultural Heritage Gazetteer

Appendix H: Gazetteer of sites and monuments within the proposed development site

Site ID Site Name Site Type NGR Sources NMRS/SMR NO Description Importance Sensitivity 1 Borrowston Mains Structure ND 0074 6909 NMRS; HER ND06NW 34 / MHG882 The NMRS and HER record a semicircular stone wall, 15m by 10.5m, Lesser Negligible with a 0.5m square setting of stones in the centre. 2 Green Tullochs Building ND 0093 6943 NMRS; HER; ND06NW 51 / MHG901 The NMRS and HER record a longhouse, 9m N-S by 5m by 0.5m to 3m Local Low Historic Maps; in height, rectangular, built of large slabs with one internal division and Field Survey an entrance in the E. The walls vary between 0.5m to 3m high. The Ordnance Survey 1st Edition map (1876) depicts a small square building close to an area of old quarry workings (23, 26). The building is depicted as unroofed on the Ordnance Survey 2nd Edition (1907). The remains survive on the cliff top as described in the NMRS. 3 Green Tullochs Cist ND 0125 6950 NMRS; HER ND06NW 19 / MHG1228 The NMRS and HER record that a stone coffin of small dimensions Local Low containing human remains was found in the summer of 1871 a few paces S of the cairn (5). 4 Green Tullochs Wall ND 0118 6953 NMRS; HER; ND06NW 52 / MHG902 The NMRS and HER record a wall, 32m long, 3m thick and 1m high, Lesser Negligible Field Survey comprising a grass-covered bank with a few large stones protruding. The remains of this wall survive as described. 5 Green Tullochs Cairn; Cist ND 0122 6958 NMRS; HER; ND06NW 23 / MHG1233 The NMRS and HER record a cairn, 15 by 3.5m by 3m high, surviving as National High Field Survey (cairn) MHG39598 (cist) a grass-covered sub-circular mound with stones visible in the W side where it is much robbed. In the SW slope a small excavation pit, 1.0m deep, was visible in 1964 revealing the stones of what appears to be a dry-stone wall face. In 1911 a short cist, which contained only whelk shells, was exposed on the summit at the W side. The regular profile of the cairn has been altered on the NW by the erosion of the cliff edge. The cairn is scheduled (ref 554) together with the nearby broch (6). The cairn survives as described. 6 Green Tullochs Broch; ND 0131 6964 NMRS; HER; ND06NW 18 / MHG1227 The NMRS and HER record the remains of a broch A broch, 13m National High Inhumation Field Survey (Broch) MHG39597 internal diameter, 24 by 20m externally, and 3m high, surrounded at a burial (Inhumation) distance of 6m by a bank 3.5m thick; with a wall, 2m thick, running 4m outside this. The N side of the monument has been destroyed by coastal erosion, with other parts of the monument having been robbed out. In 1815 human remains were found covered by a large flagstone, laid close to the wall. The broch is scheduled (ref 554) together with the nearby cairn (5). The cairn survives as described. 7 Borrowston Mains Building ND 0166 6884 NMRS; HER ND06NW 140 / The NMRS and HER hold a record of house plans and elevations from Local Low (New House) MHG37199 1921. The building is not depicted on the Ordnance Survey 1st (1876) or 2nd (1907) Edition maps. 8 Hill of Lybster Radio Station ND 0241 6919 NMRS; HER; ND06NW 145.00 / The NMRS and HER record a small radio station (identified through Local Low Historic Maps; MHG47565 aerial photographs) of probable WWII date. It is recorded that the site Aerial includes two huts and a small mast. The site lies within a fenced photographs; enclosure. Field Survey The Ordnance Survey 1969 (6 inch to 1 mile) Edition map depicts a square building.

Volume 2 Appendix H

Appendix H Forss Wind Farm Extension Environmental Statement Cultural Heritage Gazetteer

Site ID Site Name Site Type NGR Sources NMRS/SMR NO Description Importance Sensitivity The building is visible on the 1993 vertical aerial photograph. A modern farm building now occupies this location. 9 Hill of Lybster Enclosure, ND 0240 6930 NMRS;HER; ND06NW 55 / MHG905 The NMRS and HER records a rectangular enclosure 30 m (NW-SE) by Local Low Structure Historic Maps; 18m (NE-SW) enclosed by grass covered stone wall 0.5m in height and Aerial 0.5m thick. Attached on the W side is a smaller structure measuring 9 by photographs; 4m. Field Survey A rectangular enclosure is depicted on the Ordnance Survey 1st (1876) and 2nd (1907) Edition maps. The denuded remains of an enclosure are visible on the 1946 and 1993 vertical aerial photograph. The remains of this enclosure survive as a low, rectangular stony bank measuring approximately 16m long SW-NE by 10m wide and up to 0.3m high. 10 Hill of Lybster Structure ND 0236 6928 NMRS; HER; ND06NW 54 / MHG904 The NMRS and HER record a rectangular structure 4m E-W by 2m, Lesser Negligible Historic Maps; enclosed by grass-covered stone walls 0.5m wide. Aerial The Ordnance Survey 1st Edition map (1876) depicts an area of rough photographs; ground, within which an irregular shaped quarry is also depicted Field Survey The structure is visible on the 1946 vertical aerial photograph. The remains of this structure survive as traces of what might be the western end wall measuring 1m wide and 3m long aligned N-S. There is then a slight hollow area separating the wall remains from a low stony mound, 0.5m high, which may conceal the remains of the eastern end wall. These remains extend over an area measuring 6m long E-W by 4m wide. 11 Hill of Lybster Farmstead ND 0235 6940 NMRS; HER; ND06NW 122 / The NMRS and HER record two unroofed buildings depicted on the Local Low Historic Maps; MHG17662 Ordnance Survey 1st Edition (1876) map, one of which is divided into Aerial three compartments. photographs; William Roy’s Military Survey map (1747-55) depicts an unnamed Field Survey farmstead due S of St Mary’s Chapel (‘Sea Chaple’) which most accords with the location of the remains of this farmstead shown on the Ordnance Survey 1st Edition map. The buildings are visible on the 1946 vertical aerial photograph. The remains of this farmstead comprise two buildings. The westernmost building is 7m long E-W overall by 4m wide. The wall remains are 1m wide and 0.3m high. The easternmost building is 19m long overall by 4m wide and is aligned NW-SE. The wall remains are 1m wide and 0.4m high and it is divided into four compartments. 12 Not used 13 Hill of Lybster Structure ND 0228 6954 NMRS; HER; ND06NW 53 / MHG903 The NMRS and HER record a rectangular longhouse, 18m x 6m, within Local Low Field Survey grass-covered stone banks. The structure is divided into three compartments. There are no surviving upstanding remains of this building in what is now a cultivated field. 14 Hill of Lybster Buildings ND 0225 6937 NMRS; HER; ND06NW 123 / The NMRS and HER records two unroofed buildings depicted on the Local Low Field Survey MHG17663 Ordnance Survey First Edition map (1876). There are no surviving remains of these buildings the site of one of which lies in a cultivated field and the other within the former naval base (17).

Volume 2 Appendix H

Appendix H Forss Wind Farm Extension Environmental Statement Cultural Heritage Gazetteer

Site ID Site Name Site Type NGR Sources NMRS/SMR NO Description Importance Sensitivity 15 Not used 16 Not used 17 Forss, Lybster Radio Station ND 022 698 NMRS; HER; ND06NW 131 / The NMRS and HER record the Thurso US Naval Communication Local Low Hill, US Naval Historic Maps; MHG24616 Station and the NMRS holds an small archive of historic photographs of Communication Aerial the site. The station was in operation between 1964 and 1992 and was Unit photographs; part of a world-wide Defence Communications System and included the Field Survey transmitter site at Forrs linked to a receiver site at West Murkle. The Forss site consisted of the headquarters building, transmitter building (and associated antenna field) and other support buildings. The Ordnance Survey 1969 Edition map (6 inch to 1mile) depicts a collection of buildings and clusters of masts. The buildings and masts are visible on the 1964 and 1993 vertical aerial photographs. Little survives of the former naval base. The former buildings have all gone and the masts have been removed. Some of the mast locations can still be seen and there are a numerous concrete anchor blocks. Part of the former base is now a small technology park and part is taken up with the Forss wind farm Phase I and Phase II turbines. 18 St Mary's Well Well ND 0243 6979 NMRS; HER; ND06NW 17 / MHG1226 The NMRS and HER record a natural spring, reported in the 19th Lesser Negligible Field Survey century as being reputed for its medicinal qualities and allegedly the 'holy well' connected to St Mary's chapel. In 1964 the well was recorded as being lined with slabs, approximately 1m deep and in use as a cattle trough. It was recorded as being dry and in a dilapidated state in 1981. The well survives as described in 1964 as a small rectangular stone lined spring. At the time of the field survey the spring was flowing and the well full. 19 Not used 20 Crosskirk, St Cemetery, ND 0249 7008 NMRS; HER ND07SW 1 / MHG 373 The NMRS and HER record the remains of a possibly 12th century National High Mary's Chapel Chapel (chapel) MHG393323 chapel. The chapel is recorded as being the oldest surviving (cemetery) ecclesiastical structure in Caithness and consisting of a nave and reconstructed chancel. Both nave and chancel are roofless, the latter having been rebuilt on the old foundation in 1871 to serve as a burial place for the Gunn family. The chapel contains seven recumbent grave slabs and the graveyard is still in use. The site is a scheduled monument (ref 90086) and a property in care of the Scottish Ministers. 21 Crosskirk Broch Broch (site of) ND 0248 7012 NMRS; HER ND07SW 4 / MHG39521 The NMRS and HER record a broch at Crosskirk Bay. The broch, which National High Pictish Symbol had an internal diameter of approximately 9m – 9.5m and a wall 4.2m to stone, find 4.5m thick was excavated between 1966 and 1972. Finds included spots 'native' pottery, Roman glass and samian ware. Following excavation the broch was bulldozed over the edge of the cliff and a modern cairn now stands in its place. The excavations also revealed evidence of secondary settlement to the E and burial within the settlement. A rectangular Pictish symbol stone is reputed to have been found within the broch and is now lost. The site is included in the scheduling for St Mary’s Chapel (ref 90086). 22 Borrowston Mains Farmstead ND 01573 Historic Maps; The farmstead at Borrowston is first depicted on Roy’s Military Survey Local Low 68951 Field Survey map (1747-55) as a small settlement (Burrowstown / Graham’s Castle) surrounded by cultivation. Thomson’s (1822) map also depicts

Volume 2 Appendix H

Appendix H Forss Wind Farm Extension Environmental Statement Cultural Heritage Gazetteer

Site ID Site Name Site Type NGR Sources NMRS/SMR NO Description Importance Sensitivity Borrowston. The Ordnance Survey 1st (1876) and Ordnance Survey 2nd (1907) Edition maps both depict Borrowston Mains farm as a T-shaped farmhouse with a rectangular outbuilding range set within a small garden plot. A large steading comprised of two adjoining ranges and a small separate building lies to the SW of the farmhouse. A well and a pond with a sluice at its W end are also depicted on the Ordnance Survey 1st Edition map. A dam is annotated on the Ordnance Survey 2nd Edition map. The farmhouse survives within its garden but the former steading has been replaced by a collection of modern farm buildings and sheds. The pond no longer exists (having dried up) and the site of the well lies within an arable field. 23 Quarry ND 00725 Historic Maps A quarry is depicted on the Ordnance Survey 2nd Edition (1907) map. Lesser Negligible 69227 24 Quarry ND 01971 Historic Maps; A quarry is depicted on the Ordnance Survey 1st (1876) and 2nd Edition Lesser Negligible 68821 Field Survey (1907) maps. The site of the quarry is now within an arable field and there is no visible trace of it. 25 Quarry ND 02305 Historic Maps; A quarry is depicted on the Ordnance Survey 2nd Edition (1907) map. Lesser Negligible 68917 Field Survey The site of the now overgrown disused quarry (approximately 16m long x 4m wide) survives in the corner of an arable field. 26 Quarry ND 01004 Historic Maps A quarry is depicted on the Ordnance Survey 1st Edition (1876) and 2nd Lesser Negligible 69402 Edition (1907) maps. ND06NW Crosskirk Mound ND 0261 6981 NMRS; HER MHG1224 The NMRS and HER record a grass-covered mound, 0.7m high and Unknown (Local) Unknown (Low) 15 (possible burnt probably about 16m in diameter originally, situated in a large pasture mound) field. Its size has been reduced by ploughing. A few small burnt stones were found on the surface in 1963, but no evidence of black earth could be seen. A subsequent visit in 1981 found no trace of burnt stones or blackened earth. ND06NW Crosskirk Find-spot (flint ND 0261 6983 NMRS; HER MHG1225 The NMRS and HER record that a barbed and tanged arrowhead of Lesser Negligible 16 arrowhead) black flint, approximately 40mm long, was found at this location in 1960. ND06NW Tulloch Of Lybster Broch ND 0268 6947 NMRS; HER MHG1230 The NMRS and HER record that the 'Tulloch of Lyster' broch has been Local Low 20 cleared out and a wide gap made through the wall on the SE and NW, but small portions of the inner and outer wall faces are still visible. The broch survives as a grass-covered mound about 20m in diameter by 1m high overall. Two outer ramparts with a medial ditch are visible at a distance of 7m from the broch, and to the W is a sub-circular, grass- covered mound, 12mdiameter by 0.8mhigh, probably being the remains of an outwork. ND06NW Crosskirk Find-spot ND 026 698 MHG1234 The NMRS and HER record that a small perforated sandstone whorl Lesser Negligible 24 (spindle whorl) was found about 1960 near the mound at ND 0261 6981 (ND06NW 15). ND06NW Crosskirk Enclosure ND 0260 6985 MHG883 The NMRS and HER record that a sub-circular, grass-covered bank, 7m Unknown (Local) Unknown (Low) 35 by 6m by 0.5m high was identified in 1981close to the mound at ND 0261 6981 (ND06NW 15).

Volume 2 Appendix H

Appendix H Forss Wind Farm Extension Environmental Statement Cultural Heritage Gazetteer

Appendix 8.2 : List of external receptors within 15km of the proposed development site

Ref Site name Status Easting Northing Distance to No of Sensitivity of Contribution Sensitivity of Impact Significance of nearest turbines receptor of setting setting Magnitude predicted effect turbine (km) visible 421 Achvarasdal House, two stones N of SM 298336 964725 5.1 7 High Moderate High Negligible Negligible 426 Bridge of Broubster, standing stones 1350m NE of SM 304728 960843 8.7 4 High High High Negligible Negligible 427 Bridge of Broubster, stone circle 700m ENE of SM 304521 959927 9.6 4 High High High Negligible Negligible Broubster Village 428 Bridge of Broubster, two standing stones 1200m E SM 304796 960105 9.5 4 High High High Negligible Negligible of 437 Carn Liath, cairn, Shurrery SM 303907 958215 11.1 2 High High High Negligible Negligible 440 Carriside, chambered cairn 350m NW of SM 307223 959278 11.1 4 High High High Negligible Negligible 441 Clach Clais an Tuire, standing stone 1000m SE of SM 299160 963166 6.2 7 High Moderate High Negligible Negligible Loanscorribest 444 Cnoc-na-h'Uiseig, chambered cairn SM 299680 967731 1.8 7 High Moderate High Negligible Negligible 458 Knock Stanger, cairn 730m E of Sandside House SM 295994 965240 6.2 4 High Moderate High Negligible Negligible 464 Loch a'Mhuilinn, chambered cairn 300m NE of SM 306272 957060 12.8 4 High High High Negligible Negligible 469 Mill of Knockglass, long cairn 100m SSE of, Bridge SM 305685 963787 6.5 4 High High High Negligible Negligible of Westfield 471 Mill of Knockglass, chambered cairn 320m SSE of, SM 305725 963572 6.7 4 High High High Negligible Negligible Bridge of Westfield 476 Hill of Shebster, chambered cairn SM 301180 964630 4.5 7 High High High Negligible Negligible 477 Shurrery Kirk, chambered cairn SM 304878 958743 10.8 4 High High High Negligible Negligible 478 Shurrery Kirk, standing stone 270m S of SM 304888 958432 11.1 4 High High High Negligible Negligible 479 Shurrery Kirk, chambered cairn 360m SSE of SM 304976 958343 11.2 4 High High High Negligible Negligible 481 Sithean Buidhe, chambered cairn 1000m WSW of SM 306072 957565 12.3 2 High High High Negligible Negligible Brawlbin Mains 482 Sithean Mor, long cairn 160m NW of Loch SM 305890 957035 12.7 4 High High High Negligible Negligible a'Mhuilinn 489 Torr Bann Na Gruagaich, chambered cairn SM 305854 960007 9.9 2 High High High Negligible Negligible 490 Torr Beag, chambered cairn 500m NE of Beinn SM 306312 956217 13.6 4 High High High Negligible Negligible Freiceadain, Brawlbin 491 Torr Mor, cairn 500m NNE of Beinn Freiceadain, SM 306173 956371 13.4 4 High High High Negligible Negligible Brawlbin 492 Tota an Dranndain, broch, Shurrery SM 303755 957922 11.4 4 High High High Negligible Negligible 495 Tulach Gorm, broch near N end of Loch Shurrery SM 304188 957104 12.3 4 High High High Negligible Negligible 497 Tulach an t'Sionnaich, long cairn 900m SSW SM 307045 961929 8.8 7 High High High Negligible Negligible of,Lieurary Mains 498 Tulach Buaile Assery, chambered cairn SM 305734 960185 9.7 2 High High High Negligible Negligible

Volume 2 Appendix H

Appendix H Forss Wind Farm Extension Environmental Statement Cultural Heritage Gazetteer

Ref Site name Status Easting Northing Distance to No of Sensitivity of Contribution Sensitivity of Impact Significance of nearest turbines receptor of setting setting Magnitude predicted effect turbine (km) visible 500 Tullochs of Assery, chambered cairns 1000m SW of SM 306794 961872 8.7 4 High High High Negligible Negligible Lieurary Mains 513 Achunabust, broch NNW of SM 299432 964637 4.7 7 High Moderate High Negligible Negligible 514 Achvarasdal House, broch SM 298350 964693 5.1 7 High Moderate High Negligible Negligible 523 Brawlbin, hut circle 550m NE of Beinn Freiceadain SM 306458 956064 13.8 4 High High High Negligible Negligible 530 Buaile Oscar, fort & chambered cairn, Beinn SM 305934 955790 13.9 7 High High High Negligible Negligible Freiceadain 542 Cnoc an Ratha, fort SSE of Shurrery Kirk SM 305261 957738 11.9 4 High High High Negligible Negligible 554 Green Tullochs, broch & cairn 640m NNW of SM 301300 969644 0.1 7 High High High Moderate Major Borrowston Mains 564 Knock Urray, broch 400m NNE of Gunnscroft SM 298383 966304 3.7 7 High Moderate High Negligible Negligible 615 Reay, burial ground, old church and cross slab SM 296910 964823 5.8 7 High High High Negligible Negligible 175m E of Parish Church 616 Sandside House, Reay, two carved stones SM 295210 965175 6.9 7 High High High Negligible Negligible 2386 Cnoc Freiceadain, stone rows 640m N of, Upper SM 301161 965960 3.2 7 High High High Negligible Negligible Dounreay 2660 Creagan a'Bheannaich, chapel & graveyard SM 304083 957835 11.5 4 High High High Negligible Negligible 5299 Lorg an Fhamhair, footprint carving SM 305817 959292 10.6 7 High High High Negligible Negligible 5305 Carriside, hut circle 350m N of SM 307388 959320 11.2 4 High High High Negligible Negligible 5306 Bridge of Broubster, limekilns 1450m ENE of SM 304871 960820 8.8 4 High Moderate High Negligible Negligible 5406 Carriside, cairns 750m NW of SM 306743 959351 10.9 4 High High High Negligible Negligible 5510 Brims Castle SM and Category B 304334 971010 2.3 4 High High High Negligible Negligible listed 6401 Dounreay Castle SM 298314 966945 3.3 7 High Low Medium Negligible Negligible 90078 Cnoc Freiceadain, long cairns SM 301286 965375 3.8 7 High High High Negligible Negligible 90086 Crosskirk, St Marys Chapel and broch S of Chapel SM 302493 970116 0.4 7 High High High Minor Minor Pool

14986 Sandside House Kiln Barn and Single Storey Category A listed 295216 965234 6.8 7 High High High Negligible Negligible Range of former Byres, Cottage and Dairy, and Implement Shed 14986 Sandside House Kiln Barn and Single Storey Category A listed 295238 965218 6.8 7 High High High Negligible Negligible Range of former Byres, Cottage and Dairy, and Implement Shed 14988 Sandside Harbour 1 and 2, Sandside and Fishing Category A listed 295819 966070 5.9 7 High High High Negligible Negligible Store 14988 Sandside Harbour 1 and 2, Sandside and Fishing Category A listed 295748 966092 5.9 7 High High High Negligible Negligible Store

Volume 2 Appendix H

Appendix H Forss Wind Farm Extension Environmental Statement Cultural Heritage Gazetteer

Ref Site name Status Easting Northing Distance to No of Sensitivity of Contribution Sensitivity of Impact Significance of nearest turbines receptor of setting setting Magnitude predicted effect turbine (km) visible 14988 Sandside Harbour 1 and 2, Sandside and Fishing Category A listed 295762 965990 6.0 7 High High High Negligible Negligible Store 14992 Reay Parish Church and Enclosure Wall Category A listed 296733 964822 6.0 7 High High High Negligible Negligible 7795 Westfield, Bridge of, over Forss Water Category B listed 305557 964194 6.1 4 Medium Moderate Medium Negligible Negligible 14922 Brims Castle Category B listed 304331 971018 2.3 4 Medium High High Negligible Negligible 14923 Forss House Category B listed 303585 968768 1.4 4 Medium High High Negligible Negligible 14925 Forss Mill and Miller's House (East) Category B listed 303684 968702 1.5 4 Medium High High Negligible Negligible 14925 Forss Mill and Miller's House (East) Category B listed 303704 968693 1.5 4 Medium High High Negligible Negligible 14926 Forss Bridge of Forss over Forss Water Category B listed 303724 968663 1.5 4 Medium High High Negligible Negligible 14953 Lythmore Farm Steading, Centre Range Category B listed 305369 966385 4.3 7 Medium Moderate Medium Negligible Negligible 14984 Sandside House Category B listed 295215 965155 6.9 7 Medium High High Negligible Negligible 14985 Sandside House, Garden Walls, 2 Walled Gardens, Category B listed 295262 965125 6.9 7 Medium High High Negligible Negligible Dovecote and Privy 14985 Sandside House, Garden Walls, 2 Walled Gardens, Category B listed 295127 965211 6.9 7 Medium High High Negligible Negligible Dovecote and Privy 14985 Sandside House, Garden Walls, 2 Walled Gardens, Category B listed 295243 965154 6.9 7 Medium High High Negligible Negligible Dovecote and Privy 14985 Sandside House, Garden Walls, 2 Walled Gardens, Category B listed 295015 965200 7.0 7 Medium High High Negligible Negligible Dovecote and Privy 14987 Sandside House Gate Lodge and Gate Piers Category B listed 295083 964629 7.3 7 Medium High High Negligible Negligible 14989 Upper Dounreay Farm Steading Category B listed 299820 965985 3.3 7 Medium Moderate Medium Negligible Negligible 14990 Forss Mill (West Bank of Forss Water) Category B listed 303644 968681 1.4 4 Medium High High Negligible Negligible 14991 Lybster Farm Steading Category B listed 302483 968529 0.8 7 Medium Moderate Medium Negligible Negligible 18831 Reay Village Market Cross adjacent to the terrace Category B listed 295900 964553 6.7 7 Medium Moderate Medium Negligible Negligible New Reay 44721 Forss Water, Humpback Bridge Category B listed 304113 967501 2.6 7 Medium High High Negligible Negligible 14924 Forss Cottage Category C(S) 303792 968693 1.6 4 Low High Medium Negligible Negligible listed 14981 Reay Village, Brackside Bridge over Brackside- Category C(S) 295728 964615 6.8 7 Low High Medium Negligible Negligible Sandside Burn listed 14982 Reay Village,Smithy Cottage and Steading Range Category C(S) 295629 964567 6.9 7 Low High Medium Negligible Negligible (Former Dwellings at right angles) listed 14982 Reay Village,Smithy Cottage and Steading Range Category C(S) 295623 964568 6.9 7 Low High Medium Negligible Negligible (Former Dwellings at right angles) listed 14982 Reay Village,Smithy Cottage and Steading Range Category C(S) 295662 964565 6.9 7 Low High Medium Negligible Negligible (Former Dwellings at right angles) listed

Volume 2 Appendix H

FORSS WIND FARM PHASE III

FIGURE 2.1

INITIAL LAND BOUNDARY

REPRODUCED FROM ORDNANCE SURVEY DIGITAL MAP DATA © CROWN COPYRIGHT 2010. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. LICENSE NUMBER 0100031673.

LAY OUT DWG T-LA Y OUT NO. N/A N/A

DRA WING NUMBER 01988D2505-05

SCALE - 1:10,000

ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT

THIS DRAWING IS THE PROPERTY OF RENEWABLE ENERGY SYSTEMS LTD. AND NO REPRODUCTION MAY BE MADE IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT PERMISSION FORSS III, WIND FARM EXTENSION, CAITHNESS

FIGURE 8.1

CULTURAL HERITAGE: PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AREA

Scale - 1:10,000 @ A3

ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT FORSS III, WIND FARM EXTENSION, CAITHNESS

FIGURE 8.2

CULTURAL HERITAGE: EXTERNAL RECEPTORS

1-2 turbines visible

3-5 turbines visible

Note: ZTV based on Phase 3 extension turbines only

Scale - 1:90,000 @ A3

ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT