Faw Side Community Wind Farm – EIA Report Section 9 – Cultural Heritage

Section 9 Figures CULTURAL HERITAGE Figure 9.1 Cultural Heritage Study Areas Contents Figure 9.2 Heritage Assets within the ISA – North Figure 9.3 Heritage Assets within the ISA – South 9.1 Introduction ...... 3 Figure 9.4 Heritage Assets discussed in text within the OSA – North 9.2 Policy And Guidance ...... 3 Figure 9.5 Heritage Assets discussed in text within OSA – South and Insets Figure 9.6 SM4543: Eskdalemuir Manse, cairn 230m west of 9.3 Consultations ...... 6 Figure 9.7 SM4409: Rigfoot, settlement 9.4 Methodology ...... 7 Figure 9.8 SM4411: Sorbie, settlement 650m NW of 9.5 Baseline Conditions ...... 10 Figure 9.9 SM4691: Lyneholm, settlement 500m WSW and homestead 250m SW of

9.6 Impact Assessment ...... 14 Figure 9.10 SM646: Bogle Walls, fort Figure 9.11 SM4393: Brieryshaw Hill, fort and settlement 9.7 Proposed Mitigation ...... 23 Figure 9.12 SM4401: Loch Hill, fort 745m NNE of Hoghill 9.8 Residual Effects...... 23 Figure 9.13 SM12740: Craig, two forts 650m SSW of

9.9 Cumulative Effects ...... 23 Figure 9.14 SM12750: Eweslees, watch tower 1980m NW of Figure 9.14a SM12750: Eweslees, watch tower 1980m NW of Figure 9.15 LB9727: Arkleton House Tables

Table 9.1 Summary of issues identified from consultations Table 9.2 Archaeological potential Appendices Table 9.3 Criteria for Assessing the Importance of Heritage Assets

Table 9.4 Criteria for Assessing the Magnitude of Impacts on Heritage Assets Appendix 9.1 Gazetteer Of Heritage Assets Within The Inner Study Area Table 9.5 Criteria for Assessing the Significant of Effects on Heritage Assets Appendix 9.2 Undesignated Assets In The Inner Study Area Excluded From Assessment Table 9.6 Heritage Assets within the ISA included in the Assessment Appendix 9.3 Scheduled Monuments In The Outer Study Area Excluded Table 9.7 Scheduled Monuments included in the Assessment Appendix 9.4 Listed Buildings In The Outer Study Area Excluded Table 9.8 Listed buildings included in the Assessment Table 9.9 Listed buildings within Langholm CA included in the Assessment

Table 9.10 Undesignated Heritage Assets in the OSA included in the Assessment Table 9.11 Listed Buildings within NIDLs included in the Assessment Table 9.12 Heritage Assets subject to potential Construction Impacts

Section 1 – Page 1

Section 9 – Cultural Heritage Faw Side Community Wind Farm – EIA Report

Glossary Abbreviations

Term Definition Abbreviation Description Scheduled A scheduled monument is a nationally historic building or site that is included in AOD Above Ordnance Datum Monuments the Schedule of Monuments kept by Historic Environment Scotland. The ASA Archaeologically Sensitive Areas particular significance needed to define the monument as of ‘national’ CA Conservation Areas importance may be established in terms of one or more of the following: CIFA Chartered Institute for Archaeologists a. its inherent capability or potential to make a significant addition to the DGC Dumfries and Galloway Council understanding or appreciation of the past; EIA Environmental Impact Assessment b. its retention of the structural, decorative or field characteristics of its kind to a HER Historic Environment Record marked degree; HES Historic Environment Scotland c. its contribution, or the contribution of its class, to today’s landscape and/or HESPS Historic Environment Scotland Policy Statement the historic landscape; IGDL Inventory Garden and Designed Landscape d. the quality and extent of any documentation or association that adds to the ISA Inner Study Area understanding of the monument or its context; LDP Local Development Plan e. the diminution of the potential of a particular class or classes of monument to MCHE Managing Change in the Historic Environment contribute to an understanding of the past, should the monument be lost or damaged; and NCAP National Collection of Aerial Photography f. its place in the national consciousness is a factor that may be considered in NRHE National Record of the Historic Environment support of other factors. (HESPS 2016, Annex1) NSR Non-Statutory Register Category A listed Buildings of national or international importance, either architectural or historic, OSA Outer Study Area building or fine little-altered examples of some particular period style or building type SBC Scottish Borders Council (HESPS 2016, Note 2.17) SG Supplementary guidance Category B listed Buildings of regional or more than local importance, or major examples of some SNH Scottish National Heritage building particular period, style or building type. (HESPS 2016, Note 2.17) SPP Scottish Planning Policy Category C listed Buildings of local importance; lesser examples of any period, style, or building ZTV Zone of Theoretical Visibility building type, as originally constructed or altered; and simple, traditional buildings which group well with others. (HESPS 2016, Note 2.17) Conservation Areas Conservation areas "are areas of special architectural or historic interest, the

character or appearance of which it is desirable to preserve or enhance". (HESPS 2016, Annex 3) Inventory Gardens The inventory includes gardens and designed landscapes of national importance. and Designed Sites are assessed for their: Landscapes a. value as individual works of art in their own right;

b. historic value; c. horticultural, arboricultural or silvicultural value; d. architectural value; e. scenic value; f. nature conservation value; and g. archaeological value. (HESPS 2016, Annex 5) World Heritage Sites World Heritage Sites are cultural and/or natural sites considered to be of ‘Outstanding Universal Value’, which have been inscribed on the World Heritage List by the World Heritage Committee. (ICOMOS 2017)

Section 1 – Page 2

Faw Side Community Wind Farm – EIA Report Section 9 – Cultural Heritage

Section 9: Cultural Heritage “In the exercise, with respect to any buildings or other land in a conservation area, of any powers under any of the provisions in subsection (2), special attention shall be paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of that area.” 9.1 Introduction 9.2.6 The Historic Environment Scotland Act 2014 defines the role of the new public body, Historic Environment 9.1.1 This chapter presents an assessment of the effects of the Faw Side Community Wind Farm on the historic Scotland (HES), and the processes for the designation of heritage assets, consents and rights of appeal. environment. The assessment was undertaken by Headland Archaeology (UK) Ltd. The objectives of this assessment are to: Planning policy

• Describe the location, nature and extent of any known heritage assets or areas of archaeological National Policy potential which may be affected by the proposed development; 9.2.7 The Scottish Government’s planning policies in relation to the historic environment are set out in paragraphs • Provide an assessment of the importance of these assets; 135-151 of Scottish Planning Policy (SPP) (The Scottish Government, June 2014). The historic environment is • Assess the likely scale of any impacts on the historic environment posed by the development; defined as “the physical evidence for human activity that connects people with place, linked with the • Outline suitable mitigation measures to avoid, reduce or offset significant adverse effects; and associations we can see, feel and understand” and includes “individual assets, related settings and the wider • Provide an assessment of any residual effects remaining after mitigation. cultural landscape”. The policy principles are stated in paragraph 137:

9.1.2 A heritage asset (or historic asset) is any element of the historic environment which has cultural significance. 9.2.8 “The planning system should: Both discrete features, and extensive landscapes defined by a specific historic event, process or theme, can be defined as heritage assets; and assets may overlap or be nested within one another. promote the care and protection of the designated and non-designated historic environment (including individual assets, related settings and the wider cultural landscape) and its contribution to sense of place, 9.1.3 Designated assets include Scheduled Monuments, Listed Buildings, World Heritage Sites, Conservation Areas, cultural identity, social well-being, economic growth, civic participation and lifelong learning; and enable Inventory Gardens and Designed Landscapes, Inventory Historic Battlefields and Historic Marine Protected positive change in the historic environment which is informed by a clear understanding of the importance of Areas. Other assets may also be locally designated through policies in the Local Plan. the heritage assets affected and ensure their future use. Change should be sensitively managed to avoid or minimise adverse impacts on the fabric and setting of the asset, and ensure that its special characteristics are 9.2 Policy and Guidance protected, conserved or enhanced.” 9.2.9 The SPP applies these principles to all designated assets (paragraphs 141-149). In particular, it states that: 9.2.1 The assessment has been undertaken with reference to relevant legislation, policy and guidance relating to Cultural Heritage. • Regarding developments affecting Listed Buildings, “special regard must be given to the importance of preserving and enhancing the building, its setting and any features of special architectural or historic Legislation interest”; 9.2.2 Scheduled Monuments and Listed Buildings are protected by statute. • Proposals “which will impact on its appearance, character or setting [of a Conservation Area], should preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the conservation area”; 9.2.3 Legislation regarding Scheduled Monuments is contained within The Ancient Monuments and Archaeological • “Where there is potential for a proposed development to have an adverse effect on a scheduled Areas Act 1979. Legislation regarding Listed Buildings is contained in The Planning (Listed Buildings and monument or on the integrity of its setting, permission should only be granted where there are Conservation Areas) (Scotland) Act 1997. exceptional circumstances”;

9.2.4 The 1979 Act makes no reference to the settings of Scheduled Monuments. The 1997 Act does, however, place • “Where a development proposal has the potential to affect a World Heritage Site, or its setting, the a duty on the planning authority with respect to Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas, and their settings. planning authority must protect and preserve its Outstanding Universal Value”; Section 59 of the 1997 Act states (in part): • “Planning authorities should protect and, where appropriate, seek to enhance gardens and designed landscapes included in the Inventory of Gardens and Designed Landscapes and designed landscapes of “In considering whether to grant planning permission for development which affects a listed building or its regional and local importance”; and setting, a planning authority or the Secretary of State, as the case may be, shall have special regard to the • “Planning authorities should seek to protect, conserve and, where appropriate, enhance the key desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest landscape characteristics and special qualities of sites in the Inventory of Historic Battlefields”. which it possesses.” 9.2.10 The SPP also requires planning authorities to protect archaeological sites and monuments, preserving them in 9.2.5 Section 64 states: situ where possible, or otherwise ensure “appropriate excavation, recording, analysis, publication and archiving before and/or during development” (paragraph 150). “Non-designated historic assets and areas of

Section 1 – Page 3

Section 9 – Cultural Heritage Faw Side Community Wind Farm – EIA Report

historical interest, including historic landscapes, other gardens and designed landscapes, woodlands and conservation area through the appropriate design, use of materials, detailing, scale and general massing and routes such as drove roads” should also be preserved in situ wherever feasible (paragraph 151). arrangement of such development; the quality of views within, from and into the conservation area will be maintained or enhanced.” 9.2.11 ‘Our Place in Time: The Historic Environment Strategy for Scotland’ (2014) presents the Scottish Government’s strategy for the protection and promotion of the historic environment. The Historic Environment Scotland 9.2.16 Policy HE3: Archaeology Policy Statement 2016 (HESPS) and the Historic Environment Circular 1 (2016) complement the SPP and provide further policy direction. In particular, HESPS provides more detailed policy on historic environment “a) The Council will support development that protects significant archaeological and historic assets, and the designations and consents. wider historic environment from adverse effects. • In considering development proposals the Council will need to be satisfied that: Local Policy • the development preserves or enhances the appearance, fabric or setting of the site or asset in-situ; Dumfries and Galloway Local Development Plan (2014) and/or • where there is uncertainty about the location, extent or significance of these assets an agreed scheme 9.2.12 Dumfries and Galloway Council (DGC) adopted the Local Development Plan (LDP1) in September 2014. Local of assessment and evaluation to inform the application is included with the proposal; and/or Development Plan 2 (LDP2) was submitted to the Scottish Government for public examination in September • due consideration has been given to the significance and value of the site or asset in relation to the 2018. LDP2 is intended to be adopted and in place by September 2019, until then LDP1 still applies. In June long-term benefit and specific need for the development in the location proposed. 2017, DGC produced Supplementary Guidance (SG) on the Historic Built Environment. Excerpts of local policies from the LDPs and Key Principles from the SG relevant to this assessment are summarised below; 9.2.17 b) Where, due to exceptional circumstances, development is to proceed and the preservation of historic assets in-situ including buildings is not possible, a scheme of mitigation involving excavation, recording, analysis, 9.2.13 Policy OP1: Development Considerations publication and archiving and any other measures appropriate to the case has been agreed with the Council.” “b) Historic Environment Development proposals should protect and/or enhance the character, appearance 9.2.18 Policy HE4: Archaeologically Sensitive Areas and setting of the region’s rich historic environment principally by ensuring they are sympathetic to nearby buildings, sites and features, integrate well and complement the surrounding area. The information contained “The Council will support development that safeguards the character, archaeological interest and setting of within the Council’s Historic Environment Record and Scottish Historic Environment Policy, and any subsequent Archaeologically Sensitive Areas (ASAs) as designated by the Council.” revised or amended document, will be a material consideration in the assessment of proposals.” 9.2.19 Policy HE6: Gardens and Designed Landscapes 9.2.14 Policy HE1: Listed Buildings “a) The Council will support development that protects or enhances the significant elements, specific qualities, “a) Alterations character, integrity and setting, including key views to and from, gardens and designed landscapes included in the Inventory of Gardens and Designed Landscapes or the Non-Inventory List. The Council will support development that makes effective, efficient and sustainable use of listed buildings. In considering development that impacts on the character or appearance of a listed building or its setting the • In considering development proposals the Council will need to be satisfied that: Council will need to be satisfied that: • the development protects or enhances the significant elements of the garden or landscape in-situ; and • • proposals to extend or alter a listed building respect the appearance, character and architectural due consideration has been given to the significance and value of the asset in relation to the long-term benefit and specific need for the development in the location proposed. features which contribute to its listing and do not seek to overwhelm or otherwise damage its original character and appearance; and b) Developers will be required to submit the results of an assessment of the impact of their proposals on the • the layout, design, materials, scale, siting and the future use shown in any development proposals sites and their settings plus details of any potential mitigation measures. are appropriate to the character and appearance of the listed building and its setting; and • proposals for a change of use will not result in loss of character or special architectural or historical c) Proposals that would have a detrimental effect on the specific quality, character or integrity of a garden or features.” designed landscape will not be approved unless it is demonstrated that the proposal has benefits of overriding public interest.” 9.2.15 Policy HE2: Conservation Areas Dumfries and Galloway Council, Local Development Plan, Supplementary Guidance; Historic Built Environment “The Council will support development within or adjacent to a conservation area that preserves or enhances 9.2.20 Key Principle; Views, Landmarks and Setting the character and appearance of the area and is consistent with any relevant conservation area appraisal. In considering such development the Council will need to be satisfied that: new development as well as alterations 9.2.21 “Proposals will be supported where they demonstrate that they will retain or reinforce the established layout, or other redevelopment of buildings preserves or enhances the character, appearance or setting of the scale and massing of the historic built environment."

Section 1 – Page 4

Faw Side Community Wind Farm – EIA Report Section 9 – Cultural Heritage

9.2.22 “Proposals will be supported where they complement or preserve the setting of historic buildings and a) the development offers substantial benefits, including those of a social or economic nature, that clearly established views to and from landscapes or landmarks; this may include the creation of appropriate new views outweigh the national value of the site, and and vistas.” b) there are no reasonable alternative means of meeting the development need.” Dumfries and Galloway Council, Local Development Plan, Supplementary Guidance; Part 1 Wind Energy Development: Development Management Considerations (June 2017) “Development proposals which will adversely affect an archaeological asset of regional or local significance will only be permitted if it can be demonstrated that the benefits of the proposal will clearly outweigh the 9.2.23 Development Management Considerations, F. Historic Environment and Cultural Heritage heritage value of the asset.”

“All proposals will be assessed for their impact on the historic environment and cultural heritage. Site-specific “Where development proposals impact on a Scheduled Monument, other nationally important sites or any assessments will be required to identify potential issues and effects. Proposals should identify mitigation for other archaeological or historical asset, developers may be required to carry out detailed investigations.” identified effects.” “Any proposal that will adversely affect a historic environment asset or its appropriate setting must include a Dumfries and Galloway Local Development Plan 2 (forthcoming, expected in 2019) mitigation strategy acceptable to the Council” 9.2.24 Historic Environment Policies HE1, HE2, HE3, HE4 and HE6 are carried over verbatim from the LDP (2014) to 9.2.29 Policy EP9: Conservation Areas LDP2. “The Council will support development proposals within or adjacent to a Conservation Area which are located 9.2.25 Overarching Policy OP1 is also carried over, albeit with a minor rewording to reflect the 2016 publication of and designed to preserve or enhance the special architectural or historic character and appearance of the HESPS: Conservation Area. This should accord with the scale, proportions, alignment, density, materials, and boundary Policy OP1: Development Considerations treatment of nearby buildings, open spaces, vistas, gardens and landscapes.”

“b) Development proposals should protect and/or enhance the character, appearance and setting of the Scottish Borders Council Supplementary Guidance: Renewable Energy (July 2018)

region’s rich historic environment principally by ensuring they are sympathetic to nearby buildings, sites and 9.2.30 The Scottish Borders Council Supplementary Guidance (SG) on Renewable includes the Historic Environment features, integrate well and complement the surrounding area. The information contained within the Council’s in Chapter 8: Development Management Considerations. Historic Environment Record and the Historic Environment Scotland Policy Statement, and any subsequent revised or amended document, will be a material consideration in the assessment of proposals.” “The Council requires that potentially significantly adverse impacts / effects to the historic environment through development are identified, defined and evaluated through an Environmental Statement (ES) on Scottish Borders Council Local Development Plan (2016) Cultural Heritage, must be conducted by an archaeologist working to the standards of the Chartered Institute 9.2.26 Scottish Borders Council (SBC) adopted the Local Development Plan (LDP1) in May 2016. The Scottish Borders for Archaeologists (CIfA).” Council are currently preparing a new Local Development Plan 2 (LDP2) which will replace the current Local “This should predict the direct and indirect impacts on the resource and propose recommendations for Development Plan. At present this plan is due to be published in the winter of 2019/2020 and no new policies mitigation or off-setting. The ES will identify through desk-based assessment of relevant documents and are yet available. Excerpts of local policies from the adopted LDPs and Key Principles from the SG relevant to records all designated and undesignated historic environment assets within the proposal area, and within an this assessment are summarised below; area beyond this where there might be indirect impacts to the setting of significant (both designated and 9.2.27 Policy EP7: Listed Buildings undesignated) archaeological sites, historic buildings, historic or archaeological landscapes, battlefields and gardens and designed landscapes. This will normally be supplemented by field survey that will seek to assess “The Council will support development proposals that conserve, protect, and enhance the character, integrity the potential impacts to, and current conditions of, known and previously unknown heritage assets.” and setting of Listed Buildings.” 9.2.31 The SG goes on to advise in detail how to assess direct and indirect impacts on cultural heritage assets, “All applications for Listed Building Consent or application affecting the setting of Buildings will be required to directing the reader to the HES guidance; Managing Change in the Historic Environment: Setting (2016) for be supported by Design Statements.” further information on Setting. The section concludes;

“New development that adversely affects the setting of a Listed Building will not be permitted” 9.2.32 “For designated assets, Historic Environment Scotland act as statutory consultee on setting impacts and their views will be balanced along with those of other consultees. Ultimately it is for the planning authority to 9.2.28 Policy EP8 Archaeology determine the acceptability of impacts in line with SPP, Local Plan policies and other material considerations.” “Development proposals which would destroy or adversely affect the appearance, fabric or setting of Scheduled Monuments or other nationally important sites will not be permitted unless:

Section 1 – Page 5

Section 9 – Cultural Heritage Faw Side Community Wind Farm – EIA Report

Guidance Consultee & Issues raised Action taken Correspondence 9.2.33 Planning Advice Note 2/2011: Planning and Archaeology provides technical advice to planning authorities and developers on dealing with archaeological remains. Among other issues it covers the balance in planning scoping response • Potholm Palisaded settlement (SM4408), 9.6 Impact decisions between the preservation of archaeological remains and the benefits of development; the dated 19th March • Little Hill Fort (SM12745), Assessment circumstances under which developers can be required to provide further information, in the form of a field 2018 • Craig Hill settlement (SM12740), evaluation, to allow planning authorities to reach a decision; and measures that can be taken to mitigate • Boyken Burn township (SM4385), adverse impacts. • Mid Knock enclosure (SM5173), • Lyneholm settlement and homestead (SM4691), 9.2.34 HES provides guidance on how to apply the policies set out in the SPP in a series of documents entitled • Effgill settlement (SM4398), ‘Managing Change in the Historic Environment’, of which the guidance note on ‘Setting’ (Historic Scotland • Glenkeil Hill Settlement (SM4367) 2016) is particularly relevant. • Louisa Mine (SM4454) • Bessie’s Hill Settlement (SM10346) 9.2.35 Standards and Guidance published by the CIfA have been followed in preparing this assessment, in particular, • Castle O’er fort (SM651) the ‘Standard and guidance for commissioning work or providing consultancy advice on archaeology and the • Camp Hill fort (SM647) historic environment’ (2014) and the ‘Standard and guidance for historic environment desk-based assessment’ • Whita Hill (MDG20757) (2014). • Ewes Door (MDG8063) • Raeburnfoot Archaeologically Sensitive Area (ASA) 9.3 Consultations • Tanlaw ASA • Boyken Burn ASA 9.3.1 Issues arising from scoping and other consultation carried out in the course of the cultural heritage assessment • King Schaw’s Grave are summarised in Table 9.1. • Westerhall Non-Inventory designed landscape (NIGDL) Table 9.1: Summary of issues identified from consultations • Broomholm NIGDL • Langholm Lodge NIGDL Consultee & Issues raised Action taken DGC additionally requested that nationally significant sites, Correspondence scheduled monuments, A-listed buildings etc. should be assessed out to 10 km as well as regionally significant Historic HES requested that potential setting impacts upon the Potential impacts are landscapes. Regionally significant historic assets out to 5 km Environment following assets are considered; assessed in Section should also be assessed. Scotland, Scoping • Eweslees, watch tower 1980m NW of (SM12750) 9.6 Impact Visualisations to illustrate potential effects should follow SNH 2017 guidelines as outlined in SNH guidance document Response letter • Sorbie, settlement 650m NW 0f (SM4411) Assessment dated 25th January ‘Visual Representations of Wind Farms, Version 2.2’. • Sorbie, cultivation terraces 450m NW of (SM4410) 2018 A digital extract from the DGC Historic Environment Record • Rigfoot, settlement (SM4409) (HER) should be used to inform the assessment. • Brieryshaw Hill, fort and settlement (SM4393) • Meikledale, settlement 800m NNW of (SM4373) Scottish Borders SBC requested that the report should include; Potential impacts are • Louisa Mine, antimony mine and workings, Council, scoping • an interpretive assessment, by prehistoric and historic assessed in Section Glenshanna Burn (SM4454) response dated period, on the existing archaeological and structural 9.6 Impact 20th February 2018 heritage assets within the development boundary Assessment HES noted that this was not an exhaustive list and that a • an assessment on the potential for encountering wider search of the surrounding area is undertaken assisted previously unknown heritage assets based on a systematic by a ZTV. HES also requested that visualisations be used to field survey of all designed infrastructure or areas of search illustrate potentially significant impacts or to support any • interpretive statements on relative importance of heritage conclusions. assets within the site boundary at the local, regional and national levels DGC advised that indirect effects on the following assets Dumfries and Potential impacts are • a statement on potential setting impacts of Scheduled or must be considered in any assessment: Galloway Council, assessed in Section Listed heritage assets within the 5km buffer with Section 1 – Page 6

Faw Side Community Wind Farm – EIA Report Section 9 – Cultural Heritage

• Up to 10km from turbines: all assets of national or regional importance, including Scheduled Consultee & Issues raised Action taken Correspondence Monuments, Category A and B Listed Buildings, Conservation Areas, Inventory Gardens and Designed Landscapes, Inventory Historic Battlefields and undesignated assets of more than local importance. an operational wind farm and an inclusion of visualisations • Up to 20km from turbines: any asset which is considered exceptionally important, and where long- from key heritage receptors distance views from or towards the asset are thought to be particularly sensitive, in the opinion of the • an assessment of potential effects on historic and/or assessor or consultees. In the case of this assessment, no such assets were identified, and so the archaeological landscapes effective OSA as depicted on Figures 9.1 to 9.5 is 10km from the turbines. • A gazetteer of known and new sites and features identified by field survey and desk based assessment Data Sources

SBC recommended that the applicants undertake early 9.4.5 The baseline for the ISA has been informed by a comprehensive desk-based study, based on all readily discussion on Cultural Heritage matters jointly with available documentary sources, following the CIfA ‘Standard and Guidance for historic environment desk- Scottish Borders Council and Dumfries & Galloway Council based assessment’. The following sources of information were referred to: Archaeology Services, along with heritage managers at st Historic Environment Scotland. • Designation data downloaded from the Historic Environment Scotland website on 21 December 2018; • The National Record of the Historic Environment (NRHE), including the Canmore database and associated photographs, prints/drawings and manuscripts held by HES; 9.4 Methodology • Historic Landscape Assessment data viewed through the HLAMap website; • The DGC Historic Environment Record (HER) and the SBC HER. The DGC data was received on 7th The Assessment Process January 2019 and the SBC data was received on 8th January 2019; 9.4.1 The cultural heritage assessment has been carried out in the following stages: • The National Collection of Aerial Photography; • Geological data available online from the British Geological Survey; • Desk-based study leading to the identification of heritage assets potentially affected by the • Historic maps held by the National Library of Scotland; development; • Ordnance Survey Name Books; • Definition of baseline conditions, based on results of the desk-based study and visits to assets; • Unpublished maps and plans held by the National Records of Scotland; • Assessment of the importance of heritage assets potentially affected by the development; • Readily available published sources and unpublished archaeological reports. • Identification of potential impacts on heritage assets, informed by baseline information, site visits, Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) mapping, wireframes and photomontages; 9.4.6 A site visit and walkover survey were undertaken on the 20th and 21st March 2019 by a single qualified • Proposal of mitigation measures, to eliminate, reduce or offset adverse effects; archaeologist. The weather was overcast, with low cloud, and poor long-range visibility. In 2018, Mott • Assessment of the magnitude of residual effects; MacDonald (Cameron, 2018a & 2018b) undertook walkover surveys in advance of forestry works (areas • Assessment of the significance of residual effects, broadly a product of the asset’s importance and the depicted in Figure 9.3). In agreement with the DGC Archaeologist the areas covered by the Mott MacDonald magnitude of the impact; and Surveys were not surveyed as part of the site walkover to avoid unnecessary repetition of work. • Assessment of cumulative effects. Definition of baseline conditions Study Areas 9.4.7 Designated assets within both the ISA and OSA which have been previously recorded on the NRHE are labelled 9.4.2 Two Study Areas were used for this assessment, and they are depicted on Figure 9.1. with the reference number assigned to them by HES (prefixed SM for Scheduled Monuments, and LB for Listed Buildings); undesignated assets are labelled with the reference number in the HER (prefixed with ‘MDG’ for 9.4.3 The Inner Study Area (ISA) corresponds to the site boundary. Within this area, all heritage assets are assessed the DGC HER, ‘SBC’ for the SBC HER and ‘NRHE’ for assets recorded in the NRHE). Assets that have been for construction and operational effects. identified during the course of this assessment are prefixed HA for heritage asset.

9.4.4 The Outer Study Area (OSA) extends to 20km from the turbines, which is taken as the maximum extent of Known heritage assets within the Inner Study Area potentially significant effects on the settings of heritage assets. Within the OSA, assets have been included in 9.4.8 Previously unrecorded heritage assets within the ISA have been assigned an Asset number (prefixed HA for the assessment based on the level of importance assigned to the asset (Table 9.3), so as to ensure that all Heritage Asset). A single asset number can refer to a group of related features, which may be recorded significant effects are recognised: separately in the HER and other data sources. • Up to 1km from turbines: any undesignated assets of local importance. 9.4.9 Assets within the ISA are shown in Figure 9.2 and described and listed in Appendices 9.1 and 9.2. • Up to 5km from turbines: Category C Listed Buildings, and any undesignated asset of local importance which has a wider landscape setting that contributes substantially to its cultural significance. Section 1 – Page 7

Section 9 – Cultural Heritage Faw Side Community Wind Farm – EIA Report

Potential for unknown heritage assets within the Inner Study Area factors such as noise, light or air quality can be relevant in some cases. Impacts may be encountered at all stages in the life cycle of a development from construction to decommissioning but they are only 9.4.10 The likelihood that undiscovered heritage assets may be present within the ISA is referred to as archaeological likely to lead to significant effects during the prolonged operational life of the development. potential. Overall levels of potential can be assigned to different landscape zones, following the criteria in • Indirect impacts describe secondary processes, triggered by the development, that lead to the Table 9.2, while recognising that the archaeological potential of any zone will relate to particular historical degradation or preservation of heritage assets. For example, changes to hydrology may affect periods and types of evidence. The following factors are considered in assessing archaeological potential: archaeological preservation; or changes to the setting of a building may affect the viability of its current use and thus lead to dereliction. • The distribution and character of known archaeological remains in the vicinity, based principally on an appraisal of data in the HER; 9.4.13 Potential impacts on unknown heritage assets are discussed in terms of the risk that a significant effect could • The history of archaeological fieldwork and research in the surrounding area, which may give an occur. The level of risk depends on the level of archaeological potential combined with the nature and scale indication of the reliability and completeness of existing records; of disturbance associated with construction activities and may vary between high and negligible for different • Environmental factors such as geology, topography and soil quality, which would have influenced land- elements or activities associated with a development, or for the development as a whole. use in the past and can therefore be used to predict the distribution of archaeological remains; • Land-use factors affecting the survival of archaeological remains, such as ploughing or commercial 9.4.14 Potential impacts on the settings of heritage assets are identified from an initial desk-based appraisal of data forestry planting; and from HES and the HER, and consideration of current maps and aerial images available on the internet. Where • Factors affecting the visibility of archaeological remains, which may relate to both environment and this initial appraisal has identified the potential for a significant effect, the asset has been visited to define land-use, such as soils and geology (which may be more or less conducive to formation of cropmarks), baseline conditions and identify key viewpoints. Visualisations have been prepared to illustrate changes to key arable cultivation (which has potential to show cropmarks and create surface artefact scatters), views (Figure 9.6 – 9.15 and Chapter 6: Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment, Figure 6.32 a-e). vegetation, which can conceal upstanding features, and superficial deposits such as peat and alluvium which can mask archaeological features. Mitigation measures and identification of residual effects

9.4.15 Proposed mitigation measures are described in Section 9.7. The preferred mitigation option is always to avoid Table 9.2: Archaeological potential or reduce impacts through design, or through precautionary measures such as fencing off heritage assets during construction works. Impacts which cannot be eliminated in these ways will lead to residual effects. Potential Definition High Undiscovered heritage assets of high or medium importance are likely to be present. 9.4.16 Adverse effects may be mitigated by an appropriate level of survey, excavation, recording, analysis and publication of the results, in accordance with a written scheme of investigation (SPP paragraph 150 and Medium Undiscovered heritage assets of low importance are likely to be present; and it is possible, PAN2/2011, sections 25-27). Archaeological investigation can have a beneficial effect of increasing knowledge though unlikely, that assets of high or medium importance may also be present. and understanding of the asset, thereby enhancing its archaeological and historical interest and offsetting Low The study area may contain undiscovered heritage assets, but these are unlikely to be adverse effects. numerous and are highly unlikely to include assets of high or medium importance. Negligible The study area is highly unlikely to contain undiscovered heritage assets of any level of Impact assessment criteria importance. Heritage importance, cultural significance and sensitivity Nil There is no possibility of undiscovered heritage assets existing within the study area. 9.4.17 Cultural heritage impact assessment is concerned with effects on cultural significance, which is a quality that applies to all heritage assets, and as defined by Historic Environment Scotland (Environmental Impact Heritage assets in the outer study area Assessment Handbook, SNH & HES 2018, Appendix 1 page 175 ) relates to the ways in which a heritage asset 9.4.11 Assets that meet the initial criteria for assessment are set out in paragraphs 9.5.23 to 9.5.39. is valued both by specialists and the general public; it may derive from factors including the asset’s fabric, setting, context and associations. This use of the word ‘significance’, referring to the range of values we attach Identification of potential impacts to an asset, should not be confused with the unrelated usage in EIA where the significance of an effect reflects 9.4.12 Effects on the historic environment can arise through direct physical impacts, impacts on setting or indirect the weight that should be attached to it in a planning decision. impacts: 9.4.18 The importance of a heritage asset is the overall value assigned to it based on its cultural significance, reflecting • Direct physical impacts describe those development activities that directly cause damage to the fabric its statutory designation or, in the case of undesignated assets, the professional judgement of the assessor of a heritage asset. Typically, these activities are related to construction works and will only occur (Table 9.3). Assets of national importance and international importance are assigned a high and very high level within the application site. respectively. Scheduled Monuments, Inventory Gardens and Designed Landscapes, Inventory Historic • An impact on the setting of a heritage asset occurs when the presence of a development changes the Battlefields and Historic Marine Protected Areas are, by definition, of national importance. The criterion for surroundings of a heritage asset in such a way that it affects (positively or negatively) the cultural Listing is that a building is of ‘special architectural or historic interest’; following HESPS Note 2.17, Category A significance of that asset. Visual impacts are most commonly encountered but other environmental refers to ‘buildings of national or international importance’, Category B to ‘buildings of regional or more than Section 1 – Page 8

Faw Side Community Wind Farm – EIA Report Section 9 – Cultural Heritage

local importance’, and Category C to ‘buildings of local importance’. Conservation Areas are not defined as development itself, or of the extent to which the setting itself is changed; therefore, Landscape and Visual being of national importance and are therefore assigned to a medium level. Any feature which does not merit Impact Assessment criteria for scale/magnitude cannot be applied directly in determining the magnitude of consideration in planning decisions due to its cultural significance may be said to have negligible heritage impact on the setting of a heritage asset. It is also necessary to consider whether, and to what extent, the importance; in general, such features are not considered as heritage assets and are excluded from the characteristics of the setting which would be changed contribute to the asset’s cultural significance. assessment. 9.4.22 Magnitude is assessed as high/medium/low, and adverse/beneficial, or negligible, using the criteria in Table Table 9.3: Criteria for Assessing the Importance of Heritage Assets 9.4 as a guide. In assessing the effects of a development, it is often necessary to take into account various impacts which affect an asset’s significance in different ways, and balance adverse impacts against beneficial Importance of the impacts. For instance, there may be adverse impacts on an asset’s fabric and on its setting, offset by a Criteria asset beneficial impact resulting from archaeological investigation. The residual effect, given in Section 9.8 and Table Very high World Heritage Sites and other assets of equal international importance 9.17, is an overall measure of how the asset’s significance is reduced or enhanced. Category A Listed Buildings, Scheduled Monuments, Inventory Gardens and Table 9.4: Criteria for Assessing the Magnitude of Impacts on Heritage Assets High Designed Landscapes, Inventory Historic Battlefields, Historic Marine Protected Areas and undesignated assets of national importance Magnitude of Guideline Criteria Category B Listed Buildings, Conservation Areas, and undesignated assets of impact Medium regional importance Changes to an asset and/or its setting resulting in considerable enhancement of Low Category C Listed Buildings and undesignated assets of lesser importance cultural significance. Sites, features and artefacts which have been removed and exist only as High beneficial Or: Nil documentary records Preservation of an asset and/or its setting where it would otherwise suffer considerable loss of cultural significance in the do-nothing scenario.

Changes to an asset and/or its setting resulting in moderate enhancement of 9.4.19 Cultural significance is assessed in relation to the criteria in HESPS Annexes 1-6, which are intended primarily cultural significance. to inform decisions regarding heritage designations but may also be applied more generally in identifying the Medium beneficial Or: ‘special characteristics’ of a heritage asset, which contribute to its cultural significance and should be Preservation of an asset and/or its setting where it would otherwise suffer moderate protected, conserved and enhanced according to SPP paragraph 137. Annex 1 is widely applicable in assessing loss of cultural significance in the do-nothing scenario. the cultural significance of archaeological sites and monuments, for instance, while the criteria in Annex 2 can Changes to an asset and/or its setting resulting in a slight enhancement of cultural be used in defining the architectural or historic interest of buildings, whether listed or not. significance.

9.4.20 The special characteristics which contribute to an asset’s cultural significance may include elements of its Low beneficial Or: setting. Setting is defined in ‘Managing Change in the Historic Environment: Setting’ (HES 2016, Section 1) as Preservation of an asset and/or its setting where it would otherwise suffer slight loss ‘the way the surroundings of a historic asset or place contribute to how it is understood, appreciated and of cultural significance in the do-nothing scenario. experienced’. The setting of an asset is defined and analysed according to Stage 2 of the three-stage approach Changes to an asset and/or its setting resulting in a very slight enhancement of promoted in ‘MCHE: Setting’, with reference to factors listed on pages 9-10. The relevance of these factors to cultural significance. the understanding, appreciation and experience of the asset determines how, and to what extent, an asset’s Negligible beneficial Or: cultural significance derives from its setting. All heritage assets have settings; however, not all assets are Preservation of an asset and/or its setting where it would otherwise suffer very equally sensitive to impacts on their settings. In some cases, setting may contribute very little to the asset’s slight loss of cultural significance in the do-nothing scenario. cultural significance, or only certain elements of the setting may be relevant. No Impact The asset’s cultural significance is not altered. Assessment of the magnitude of impacts on cultural significance Changes to an asset and/or its setting resulting in a very slight loss of cultural 9.4.21 The magnitude of an impact is a measure of the degree to which the cultural significance of a heritage asset Negligible adverse will be changed by the proposed development. This definition of magnitude applies to impacts on the setting, significance. as well as impacts on the physical fabric, of an asset. Impacts on the settings of heritage assets are assessed Changes to an asset and/or its setting resulting in a slight loss of cultural Low adverse with reference to the factors listed in ‘MCHE: Setting’ Stage 3 (evaluate the potential impact of the proposed significance. changes, pages 10-11). It is important to note that the magnitude of an impact resulting from an impact on Changes to an asset and/or its setting resulting in a moderate loss of cultural Medium adverse setting is not a direct measure of the visual prominence, scale, proximity or other attributes of the significance.

Section 1 – Page 9

Section 9 – Cultural Heritage Faw Side Community Wind Farm – EIA Report

Assessment of the significance of effects 9.5.2 More recently in 2018, Mott MacDonald (Cameron, 2018a & 2018b) undertook walkover surveys in advance

9.4.23 The significance of an effect (EIA ‘significance’) on the cultural significance of a heritage asset, resulting from of Forestry works (areas depicted in Figure 9.3). The findings of these walkovers largely included evidence of a direct or indirect physical impact, or an impact on its setting, is assessed by combining the magnitude of the pastoral and small-scale pre-improvement arable farming. impact and the importance of the heritage asset. The matrix in Table 9.5 provides a guide to decision-making Geology and geomorphology but is not a substitute for professional judgement and interpretation, particularly where the asset importance or impact magnitude levels are not clear or are borderline between categories. EIA significance may be 9.5.3 According to the British Geological Survey data (map.bgs.ac.uk), bedrock geology within the ISA comprises described on a continuous scale from negligible to major; it is also common practice to identify effects as sedimentary deposits of Riccarton wacke and mudstone which form the north- east/south-west ridges that significant or not significant, and in this sense major and moderate effects are regarded as significant in EIA cross the ISA. Superficial geology within the ISA comprises glacial tills mantling the hillsides and slopes. terms, while minor effects are ‘not significant’. Prehistoric Period

Table 9.5: Criteria for Assessing the Significance of Effects on Heritage Assets 9.5.4 There is one known, undesignated, heritage asset of possible prehistoric date within the ISA. This is a possible cup-marked stone at the Wisp (NT30SE3). There is however uncertainty in the NRHE as to whether the Magnitude of Impact markings are prehistoric or natural caused by weathering. Asset importance High Medium Low Negligible 9.5.5 In the OSA, evidence of prehistoric activity comprises approximately 100 prehistoric scheduled monuments, there are concentrations of these assets to the south, south-west and north-east of the ISA. These features Very high Major Major Major to moderate Negligible date from the Neolithic through to the Iron Age and include ritual and funerary cairns and stone circles, earthwork enclosures, forts and settlements and agricultural remains. The majority of these assets are located High Major Major or Moderate or Negligible on valley floors and along watercourses or on the lower slopes of the valleys overlooking watercourses. This moderate minor distribution indicates that known and potential prehistoric activity is concentrated in valleys and alongside Medium Major to moderate Moderate or Minor Negligible watercourses on land below approximately 300m Above Ordnance Datum (AOD), as ground above this tends minor to be steeper and less suitable for settlement and cultivation. There are however a small number of assets Low Moderate to minor Minor Negligible Negligible recorded on hilltops or ridges above 300m. These include settlements and forts such as SM3964 (307m AOD), SM12666 (330m AOD) and SM12667 (310m AOD) which would have been located on higher ground for the greater visibility and defensibility. There is also a cairn (Callisterhall Cairn, SM4535) located at approximately Assessment of Cumulative Effects 300m AOD on the southern slopes of Rashy Knowes at 8.3km to the south-west of the ISA. 9.4.24 Cumulative effects can occur when other existing or proposed developments would also be visible in views that are relevant to the setting of a heritage asset. Cumulative effects are considered in cases where an effect Roman Period of more than negligible significance would occur as a result of the proposed development. Other existing or 9.5.6 The valleys and glens of Dumfriesshire provided the shortest, most accessible routes from the Roman province proposed wind energy developments are included in the cumulative assessment where they also lie within into central Scotland, and Dumfriesshire uniquely in Scotland must have been subject to periodic occupation 5km of the asset, or within 20km in cases where an asset’s wider landscape setting is judged to be exceptionally by Roman forces (RCAHMS 1997, 168). This is reflected in the ISA by the Corbie Shank Old Road (NRHE sensitive. A cumulative effect is considered to occur where the magnitude of the combined effect of two or NY39NE19), which runs north/south through the ISA. Lonie (1988) suggests this may have Roman origins due more developments is greater than that of the developments considered separately. to its size and uniformity, though he concludes it is more likely to date to the 12th Century.

9.5.7 In the OSA, there are five scheduled monuments of Roman date; Ewes Doors Roman Signal Station (SM12750),

9.5 Baseline Conditions which is located just beyond the eastern edge of the ISA on the watershed above the valley of Eweslees Burn Archaeological and historical overview of the Inner Study Area and Wrangway Burn. As a signal station/ watch tower it is positioned for long views along these valleys. Raeburnfoot Roman Fort (SM671), Mid Raeburn to Craik Cross Hill Roman road and watch tower (SM675), Previous investigations Craik Cross Hill to Borthwick Water, Roman Road (SM1709), and Fauld Brae to Craik Knowes, Roman Road (SM3834) form a group approximately 6.7km to the west of the ISA, running north-east from Craik Moor to 9.5.1 In the 1990s the Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Scotland (RCAHMS) carried Letterstones to the south-west. As evidence for Roman activity in the surrounding area appears to be military out extensive fieldwork in Eastern Dumfriesshire which cumulated in the production of the monograph; and focussed on the lines of communication it is likely that there was no further Roman military activity within Eastern Dumfriesshire, An Archaeological Landscape (RCAHMS 1997). This extensive volume of work covers the ISA aside from patrolling. all sites and monuments recorded within the area prior to April 1997. Where the Study Areas lie within Dumfries and Galloway the area is covered by this volume.

Section 1 – Page 10

Faw Side Community Wind Farm – EIA Report Section 9 – Cultural Heritage

Medieval to Modern unknown. The HER entry records an arbitrary grid square in the vicinity of Castleweary Farm. NT40SW1 is not

9.5.8 Within the ISA the medieval to modern period is dominated by agrarian remains. While the majority of these considered to be a heritage asset for this assessment. assets are probably post medieval in date, they may have their origins in the medieval period. Of possible 9.5.16 Eighty-four of the undesignated heritage assets within the ISA comprise structures and features relating to medieval date is the Corbie Shank Old Road (NRHE NY39NE19) which runs north south through the centre of upland pasture and farming. They include sheepfolds, sheep washes and sheep shelters; enclosures; small th the area. Lonie suggests that it dates to the 12 century and was commissioned by Melrose Abbey to connect buildings; farmsteads; shepherd’s cairns; fields and areas of rig and furrow; a commemorative stone; a the churches in Teviotdale and Eskdale, which were appropriated to Melrose Abbey, by the shortest route. boundary marker stone, and a quarry. The features are all undesignated and represent examples of locally Lonie considers that these churches would have formed convenient way-stations between the Abbey and common features relating to upland farming and pasture, as well as rural settlement. They are not considered daughter-houses on the Solway shores (Lonie 1988). Also recorded on the HER within the ISA is the possible to be of any more than local importance, and therefore following the criteria outlined in Table 9.3, all 84 sites of the medieval Castleweary Tower house (NRHE NT40SW1). However, the grid reference in the HER heritage assets are of Low importance. records an arbitrary location in the vicinity of Castleweary Farm, as the exact location (or existence) of the tower house has not been determined. 9.5.17 Within the ISA the Corbie Shank Old Road (NY39NE19) may be of medium cultural heritage importance if it is a 12th century road related to Melrose Abbey or an earlier Roman road as suggested by Lonie (1988). It is also 9.5.9 The majority of assets recorded within the ISA by the DGC and SBC HERs and during the course of this possible that Corbie Shank Old Road is a late medieval to post medieval drove road similar to the Caerlan Rig assessment relate to post-medieval to modern activity These assets are generally locally common assets to Eweslees drove road (NT30SE14). It would therefore be a relatively common local site type and both drove representing upland farming and stock management and include sheepfolds, sheep washes, farmsteads roads would be of low cultural heritage importance. However, for this assessment it is assumed that NY39NE19 enclosures and boundary markers. These assets are largely post-medieval to early modern though some may is of Medium importance. have their origins in the medieval period. 9.5.18 Despite uncertainty with regard to the origins of the markings, for the sake of the assessment in assessing the 9.5.10 In the OSA there are four scheduled monuments of medieval date. Meikledale settlement (SM4373) just worst-case scenario it is assumed that the possible cup marked stone at the Wisp (NT30SE3) is a prehistoric beyond the south-east boundary of the ISA and Glenkeil Hill settlement and field system (SM4367) beyond the feature. For this assessment, it is therefore considered to be of Medium importance. south-west edge of the ISA both represent pre-improvement settlements of medieval to post medieval date. These similar settlements comprise building platforms within scooped enclosures bounded by earthen banks 9.5.19 Therefore, there is a total of 86 previously recorded heritage assets within the ISA. Of these, 74 are outside with associated rig and furrow. More substantial monuments comprise the remains of a 13th century church the proposed construction footprint and will not be subject to direct impacts. These 74 heritage assets at Unthank church and burial ground (SM4768) and Wauchope Castle and manse (SM12617). Wauchope comprise features relating to upland farming and livestock management, and include shepherds’ cairns, Castle (SM12617) is the remains of a 12th century motte and bailey castle providing evidence of feudal lordship sheepfolds and enclosures; farmsteads, field systems and cultivation ridges, and a quarry. Wider views and during this period. The scheduled area also contains a later stone castle and a 17th century manse indicating setting make a limited contribution to the cultural significance of these assets, and no operational impacts are the continued importance of this site throughout the late medieval and post medieval periods. anticipated upon them. These 74 assets are therefore excluded from further assessment (Appendix 9.2).

9.5.11 The modern period continued to see the ISA and the OSA being largely used for upland grazing with areas of 9.5.20 The 12 remaining undesignated heritage assets within the ISA (Table 9.6) comprise 7 entries from the DG HER, commercial forestry. The main exception to this is the Louisa Mine (SM4454) in the OSA, an antimony mine 3 entries from the NRHE/SBC HER and 2 features identified during the Mott Macdonald survey. These 12 assets which was the first, and probably the largest, antimony mine in Britain during the 18th century. will be subject to potential direct and/or setting impacts and are therefore included in the assessment.

Known Heritage Assets within the Inner Study Area Table 9.6: Heritage Assets within the ISA included in the Assessment

9.5.12 In this assessment, a selective approach has been adopted. While all assets within the ISA have been Ref. Name Type/Brief Description Easting Northing Importance considered (and listed in the gazetteer in Appendix 9.1), only assets subject to potential impacts are discussed in detail. NY39NE19 Corbie Shank, Old Road Road 335757 598221 Medium NT30SE3 Wisp Possible cup-marked stone 337735 600115 Medium 9.5.13 There are no designated heritage assets within the ISA. HA50 Wolfhope Burn Structure Building 334544 593170 Low 9.5.14 There are 86 undesignated cultural heritage features recorded within the ISA (Appendix 9.1, Figures 9.2 and HA52 The Lady Florance Stone Commemorative Stone 335049 592846 Low 9.3). These include 19 undesignated assets recorded in the SBC HER/NRHE and 12 in the DGC HER. Corbie Shanks Old Road (NY39NE19) and the linear earthworks Ewes Doors (NY39NE5) are recorded in both HERs, MDG8077 Glencat Sike / Stennies Building 332800 595170 Low but for the purpose of this report they are referred to only by their NRHE No. The remaining 57 assets were Water recorded during the course of this assessment and include 11 assets recorded by the Mott MacDonald Surveys MDG8079 Ringle Burn / Upper Building 333600 595960 Low (R Cameron 2018 a &b). Stennieswater

9.5.15 Also recorded by the HER within the ISA are documentary records of the possible site of Castleweary Tower MDG10492 Meikledale Burn Building Platform 336860 596150 Low House (NT40SW1). This cannot be identified on the ground and the house’s exact location, and survival, is Section 1 – Page 11

Section 9 – Cultural Heritage Faw Side Community Wind Farm – EIA Report

Ref. Name Type/Brief Description Easting Northing Importance Table 9.7: Scheduled Monuments included in the Assessment MDG10518 Jock's Hope Burn / Building 335730 594310 Low Ref. Designation Title Easting Northing Importance Arkleton Burn SM646 Bogle Walls, fort 329257 591246 High MDG10519 Jock's Hope Burn Building 335850 594260 Low SM647 Camp Hill, fort, 175m WSW of Bailliehill 325602 590518 High MDG10520 Jock's Hope Burn Building 336073 594025 Low SM651 Castle O'er, fort and linear earthworks 324199 592813 High NT30SE14 Caerlan Rig to Eweslees Road 338336 602370 Low Mid Raeburn to Craik Cross Hill, Roman road & watch NT30SE22 Limiecleuch Rig and Furrow 338194 602069 Low SM675 329144 603451 High tower

Archaeological potential of the Inner Study Area SM1709 Craik Cross Hill-Borthwick Water, Roman road 331169 605368 High

9.5.21 There is evidence of activity throughout history within the ISA and OSA in the form of recorded sites and as SM2346 Bessie's Hill, fort 250m E of summit 325040 595407 High with any large area there is potential for further unrecorded assets to be present. The potential for previously SM2852 Haw Birren, enclosure, Westside 322689 592896 High unrecorded cultural heritage assets varies between the two areas of the ISA: steeper slopes and land above SM3435 Teindside Lodge, cairn 50m N of 343084 607864 High 300m AOD, and the gently sloping ground below 300m along the larger watercourses; Limiecleuch Burn, Frostlie Burn, Meikledale Burn and Stennies Water. The areas below 300m are the areas in which settlements, SM3834 Fauld Brae-Craik Knowes, Roman road 323394 596516 High enclosures and sheepfolds are concentrated. This contrasts with the higher areas which are to be consistently SM3964 Newland Hill, fort 1100m ENE of Capelfoot 324888 586375 High depicted on early maps as rough grazing and heather moorland. Earthen banked and stone-built cultural Glenkeil Hill, settlement & field system 100m SW of heritage assets in these areas, if originally present, would likely survive as upstanding features, as there is no High SM4367 Under Stennieswater 332104 593663 history of intensive agricultural management and ploughing which would have been removed such assets. SM4370 Saugh Hill, barrow 28m NNE of summit of 324317 599118 High 9.5.22 It is considered that steeper slopes and land above 350m AOD within the ISA are of negligible archaeological SM4373 Meikledale, settlement 800m NNW of 337007 593641 High potential. On gently sloping land below 350m AOD there is low archaeological potential. SM4385 Boyken Burn, township 695m W of Westerhall 331245 589204 High Heritage assets in the Outer Study Area SM4393 Brieryshaw Hill, fort and settlement 336946 591639 High Scheduled Monuments Calkin, settlement, farmstead and linear earthworks SM4396 330378 588220 High 500m SSE of 9.5.23 There are 109 scheduled monuments within 10km of the turbines. Thirty-five of these are outside or only SM4398 Effgill,settlement and field system 600m E of 330595 592882 High slightly in the ZTV and there are no views from or across them in which the turbines will be visible. A further 41 SMs comprise a variety of features relating to cultivation and livestock management, farmsteads, SM4401 Loch Hill, fort 745m NNE of Hoghill 337589 589960 High settlements and industry. Wider views and setting make a limited contribution to the cultural significance of SM4408 Potholm, palisaded settlement 850m ENE of 336238 588007 High these assets, and no operational impacts are anticipated upon them. Seventy-six SMs are therefore excluded SM4409 Rigfoot, settlement 337048 593159 High from further assessment (Appendix 9.3). SM4410 Sorbie, cultivation terraces 450m NW of 336471 590535 High 9.5.24 Thirty-three scheduled monuments are included for further assessment (Table 9.7, Figures 9.4 & 9.5), these SM4411 Sorbie, settlement 650m NW of 336310 590660 High include the sites requested by the consultees during scoping and comprise 22 prehistoric monuments consisting of settlement sites, enclosures and forts, linear earthworks, cairns and barrows. Five Roman Louisa Mine, antimony mine and workings, Glenshanna High monuments comprise three sections of Roman road and a watchtower and a camp. Five medieval to post SM4454 Burn 331274 596590 medieval agrarian assets and an antimony mine. SM4514 Tom's Knowe, bank barrow 25m to 350m S of Holm 325003 598102 High Gibb's Hill, unenclosed settlement, palisaded As scheduled monuments, all 33 are considered to be of high cultural heritage importance. SM4518 330878 584168 High settlements & houses

SM4543 Eskdalemuir Manse, cairn 230m W of 325309 597155 High Lyneholm, settlement 500m WSW and homestead 250m High SM4691 SW of 327320 591492

Section 1 – Page 12

Faw Side Community Wind Farm – EIA Report Section 9 – Cultural Heritage

Ref. Designation Title Easting Northing Importance Table 9.9: Listed Buildings within Langholm CA included in the assessment SM5173 Mid Knock, enclosure 350m SSW of 329708 590544 High Ref Name & Description Category Easting Northing Importance Lamb Knowe, bank barrow and Roman camp 480m NNW SM7603 325031 599624 High LB37137 Church of Scotland, Langholm Parish Church A 336150 584466 High of Raeburnfoot LB37106 Police Station, Buccleuch Square, Langholm B 336086 584741 Medium SM10346 Bessie's Hill, settlement 150m NE of summit 324911 595543 High LB37108 Pump, Buccleuch Square, Langholm B 336118 584767 Medium SM12740 Craig, two forts 650m SSW of 333849 587843 High LB37110 Lodge, Thomas Hope Hospital, David Street, Langholm B 336419 584508 Medium SM12745 Little Hill, fort 333825 588154 High LB37113 26 Drove Road, Langholm B 336548 584418 Medium SM12750 Eweslees, watch tower 1980m NW of 337251 598609 High LB37117 Erskine Church, Townhead, Langholm B 336372 584681 Medium Listed Buildings LB37118 Townhead House, 11 High Street, Langholm B 336354 584665 Medium 9.5.25 There are 103 Listed Buildings (LBs) within the 10km study area, 20 of these are Category C LBs beyond 5km LB37121 Crown Hotel, High Street, Langholm B 336411 584595 Medium from the turbines and so, according to the methodology for defining baseline Study Areas (paragraph 9.4.4), LB37122 Town Hall, High Street, Langholm B 336477 584481 Medium these are excluded from further assessment. LB37123 Library, High Street, Langholm B 336478 584480 Medium 9.5.26 There are 23 Category A and B LBs are in the Langholm Conservation Area (CA) and are discussed in relation LB37125 Telford Gateway, Library Gardens, High Street, B 336487 584469 Medium to the Conservation Area (9.5.28). Two LBs are in Non-Inventory Designed Landscapes (NIDLs) within 5km of Langholm the turbines and are discussed in relation to those (Table 9.9, paragraph 9.5.39). There is a total of 58 LBs outside NIDLs and the CA and within 10km of the turbines. Twenty-two of the remaining 58 LBs are outside LB37127 Tower, Buccleuch House, Langholm B 336563 584384 Medium the ZTV and there are no views from or across them in which the turbines will be visible. A further 34 LBs LB37128 And Walls, Ashley Bank House, High Street, Langholm B 336669 584319 Medium comprise buildings such as farmsteads, barns, bridges, houses, libraries, mills, monuments, toll cottages, and LB37131 Bank of Scotland, 30 High Street, Langholm B 336367 584601 Medium sundials, stables and schoolhouses to which wider views and setting are of limited relevance, and no operational impacts are anticipated upon them. A total of 78 LBs are therefore excluded from further LB37133 Eskdale Hotel, High Street, Langholm B 336437 584489 Medium assessment (Appendix 9.4). LB37135 Tollbar Cottage South, High Street, Langholm B 336698 584260 Medium

9.5.27 The remaining two LBs included in the assessment are Arkleton House (LB9727) and Arkleton House, Walled LB37138 Gates and Gate Piers, Parish Church Bridge, Langholm B 336188 584512 Medium Garden, Glass Houses and Gardener's Cottage (LB9728) (Table 9.8). In accordance with the criteria in Table LB37139 Boatford Bridge, Langholm B 336234 584515 Medium 9.3, Category B LBs are of Medium importance. LB37142 Schoolhouse, Thomas Telford Road, Langholm B 336090 584783 Medium Table 9.8: Listed buildings included in the Assessment LB37143 Eskvale, Townhead, Langholm B 336339 584689 Medium LB37144 Clinthead, Townhead, Langholm B 336343 584723 Medium Ref Designation Title Category Easting Northing Importance LB37145 Tollbar Cottage North, Townhead, Langholm B 336362 584794 Medium LB9727 Arkleton House B 338010 591463 Medium LB37146 Townhead Bridge, Langholm B 336304 584687 Medium LB9728 Arkleton House, Walled Garden, Glass Houses and B 337853 591608 Medium Gardener's Cottage Other Designated Assets 9.5.29 There are no World Heritage Sites, Inventory Gardens and Designed Landscapes or Inventory Battlefields Conservation Areas within the OSA. 9.5.28 There is one Conservation Area in the OSA; Langholm Conservation Area (CA491). Thirty-seven LBs are within the CA. However, 14 of these LBs are Category C-listed, and as the CA is beyond 5km from the turbines, these Undesignated heritage assets have been excluded from further assessment (in the Listed Buildings section above). There is a total of 23 LBs DG HER within the Langholm CA; these comprise one Category A and 22 Category Bs (Table 9.9). In accordance with the criteria in Table 9.3, Conservation Areas are considered to be assets of medium cultural heritage 9.5.30 DG HER categorise heritage assets on the basis of importance and maintain a non-statutory register (NSR). importance. Categories of significance defined by D&G are explained in Appendix 9.4. In brief they comprise ‘National’ (existing designated assets and undesignated assets considered to be of schedulable/listable quality),

Section 1 – Page 13

Section 9 – Cultural Heritage Faw Side Community Wind Farm – EIA Report

‘Regional’ (undesignated assets of regional significance and interest), ‘Local’ (undesignated assets of local 9.5.38 Of the remaining eighteen SBC HER entries, seven are outside the ZTV and there are no views from or across significance and interest), ‘Regional/Local’ refers to heritage assets identified before 2003 that have not yet the features in which turbines will be visible. Eight are a variety of features associated with upland hill farming, been fully categorised. ‘Unknown’ (undesignated assets identified from documentary sources and whose quarrying and agriculture. There are also two roads, a golf club and the possible site of a town recorded in survival and/or heritage significance has not been ground-truthed). ‘Other’ is used for minor agricultural sixteenth century documents. Wider views and setting make a limited contribution to the cultural significance features, and ‘None’ are sites not considered significant for planning purposes. of these eight assets, and no operational impacts are anticipated upon them.

9.5.31 Following consultation with the D&G Archaeology Officer (Table 9.1), it was agreed that all undesignated 9.5.39 A total of three undesignated heritage assets are therefore included in the assessment (Table 9.10). These assets recorded on the D&G HER within 1km of the turbines would be included in the baseline. Up to 5km include one DG HER entry of ‘Regional/Local’ significance and two SBC HER entries considered to be of ‘Local’ from the turbines, all HER entries of regional and/or regional/local significance would be included, and up to significance. The NIDL includes two Listed Buildings within its boundaries; these LBs are listed in Table 9.11 10km all HER entries of national significance would be included. and will be discussed in conjunction with the NIDL.

9.5.32 The D&G HER records seven undesignated heritage assets within 1km of the turbines. One of the heritage Table 9.10: Undesignated Heritage Assets in the OSA included in the Assessment assets is a linear earthwork of ‘National’ significance, four comprise a linear earthwork, a burnt mound, a farmstead and an enclosure of ‘Regional/Local’ significance and two relate to the sites of features depicted on HER ref Name & Description HER Significance Importance Easting Northing Blaeu’s 1654 map. Wider views and setting make a limited contribution to the cultural significance of these MDG25657 Westerhall Policies, NIDL Regional/Local Medium 331920 589170 assets, and no operational impacts are anticipated upon them. NT30SE1 Caerlan Rig, Fort Local Low 338600 603160 9.5.33 The D&G HER records 148 undesignated heritage assets within 5km of the turbines. These comprise 138 NT30SE2 Watch Knowe, Fort Local Low 339920 604900 categorised as being of ‘Regional/Local’ significance and ten of ‘National’ significance. Of these, 41 are outside the ZTV and there are no views from or across them in which the turbines will be visible. A further 106 comprise sites of tower houses, highly denuded remains of cairns, farm buildings, settlement sites, livestock enclosures, Table 9.11: Listed Buildings within NIDLs included in the Assessment field systems, quarries, industrial features, bridges and roads. Wider views and setting make a limited contribution to the cultural significance of these assets, and no operational impacts are anticipated upon Ref Name & Description NIDL Category Importance Easting Northing them. LB16936 Westerhall Westerhall Policies B Medium 331941 589280 9.5.34 There are 18 D&G HER entries of ‘National’ significance recorded within 10km of the turbines. Of these 18 LB16937 Westerhall Farm Westerhall Policies B Medium 332446 589012 entries, 11 are outside the ZTV and there are no views from or across the features in which turbines will be visible. A further seven HER entries comprise settlement sites, earthworks and cultivation features relating to ‘Do Nothing’ Scenario farming and livestock management. Wider views and setting make a limited contribution to the cultural significance of these seven assets, and no operational impacts are anticipated upon them. 9.5.40 Conditions affecting the survival of archaeological remains within the site boundary are likely to remain unchanged in the absence of the proposed development, and no ongoing processes of change have been 9.5.35 There are also three Archaeologically Sensitive Areas (ASAs) within the 10km Study Area. These are at Boyken identified beyond those represented by the forestry plantations within the ISA. Burn 2.4km to the south-west of the ISA, Tanlawhill 6.8km to the south-west and Raeburnfoot 4.6km to the west. An ASA defines an area of archaeological interest and/or a group of archaeological features sensitive to impacts, rather than comprising a heritage asset in its own right and wider views and setting make a limited 9.6 Impact Assessment contribution to its cultural significance. The ASA is therefore excluded from further assessment, although the Construction Impacts three HER entries of ‘National’ significance within Raeburnfoot ASA are included. 9.6.1 Likely construction impacts could result from topsoil stripping and excavation associated with turbines, borrow SBC HER pits and hardstands, access tracks, site compounds, substations, cable trenches and other infrastructure within 9.5.36 The SBC HER does not maintain an NSR and therefore does not include information on the importance of the the construction footprint. There is also a risk of accidental damage to heritage assets outside the construction assets within its records. The SBC in their Scoping Response requested that this report includes “interpretive footprint from uncontrolled plant movement. statements of relative importance of heritage assets within the site boundary”. Predicted Construction Impacts

9.5.37 The SBC HER records no undesignated heritage assets within 1km of the turbines, and 25 entries within 5km 9.6.2 Of the known heritage assets within the ISA, three will be subject to potential construction impacts (Table of the turbines. However, seven of these record findspots of artefacts, since removed, and are not considered 9.12). to be heritage assets for this assessment.

Section 1 – Page 14

Faw Side Community Wind Farm – EIA Report Section 9 – Cultural Heritage

Table 9.12: Heritage Assets subject to potential Construction Impacts Cairns

9.6.10 Teinside Lodge Cairn (SM3435) is a scheduled monument and therefore an asset of high importance. Ref. Name Type/Brief Description Easting Northing Importance NY39NE19 Corbie Shank, Old Road Road 335757 598221 Medium 9.6.11 This asset is a circular cairn 15m in diameter and 1.5m high it is now covered with turf. This is a funerary monument of Neolithic date. This cairn is located in an improved field at the entrance to Teinside Lodge. NT30SE14 Caerlan Rig to Eweslees Road 338336 602370 Low NT30SE22 Limiecleuch Rig and Furrow 338194 602069 Low 9.6.12 This cairn primarily gains its cultural significance from the intrinsic value of its fabric and its potential for archaeological deposits to provide information on Neolithic funerary and ritual practices. This cairn has been

9.6.3 NY39NE19, the Corbie Shank Old Road, may be subject to a direct impact from the construction of Turbines 7 modified during the laying out of Teinside Lodge’s garden and was excavated in the middle of the 19th century and 8 and approximately 1600m2 of associated hardstand and access track (including a section of access track and a cist and urn were recorded. These previous interventions will have diminished the intrinsic value of this between T8 and T18). As defined by the DG HER, NY39NE19 encompasses a total area of approximately 2.2 asset. Hectares (Ha), within which are traces of the route of a medieval (possibly Roman) road. There may be ground 9.6.13 This cairn is sited on a low river terrace with rising ground of Teinside Hill to the immediate north. Its current disturbance within approximately 0.16 Ha of NY39NE19. In the absence of mitigation, the extent of setting is in a field at the entrance to Teinside Lodge which is visible to the immediate south and surrounded disturbance in relation to the extent of the asset would result in a direct impact of Low magnitude. by the mature mixed deciduous and coniferous woodland. The current setting of this cairn is of very limited

9.6.4 NT30SE14, the course of the Caerlan Rig to Eweslees road, is within the construction footprint and will be relevance to its cultural significance as the landscape is changed in such a way it is difficult to understand or crossed in several places by access tracks. However, for most of its length, the course of the road corresponds appreciate why this asset was sited in this location. to existing forestry tracks and minor roads, and the access tracks would use these existing routes. Within the 9.6.14 The nearest turbine of the proposed development is 9.2km to the south-west of this asset, the ZTV suggests construction footprint, there are three sections of the recorded course of NT30SE14 which do not correspond that two of the turbines will be visible from the cairn. to existing tracks or roads. These are in the areas of hardstand around Turbines 1 and 4, and within the access track immediately south-east of Turbine 6. There would be a direct impact upon approximately 250m of the 9.6.15 In its present surroundings the intervening mature trees to the south-west of the cairn are likely to block the 6km length of NT30SE14 as defined by the SBC HER. In the absence of mitigation, the extent of disturbance in view to the turbines. Given the separation and the lack of cultural significance derived from distant views from relation to the extent of the asset would result in a direct impact of Negligible magnitude. this asset it is considered that even if the trees were felled there would be no operational impact on Teinside Lodge Cairn. 9.6.5 NT30SE22 is an area of rig and furrow cultivation recorded on the NRHE/SBC HER at Limiecleuch towards the north-eastern end of the ISA. Approximately 330m of access track will cross the area of rig and furrow which 9.6.16 Eskdalemuir Manse Cairn (SM4543) (Figure 9.6) is a scheduled monument and therefore an asset of high covers 5.8 Ha as defined on the HER. This will result in ground disturbance within approximately 0.34 Ha of importance. NT30SE22. In the absence of mitigation, the extent of disturbance in relation to the extent of the asset would result in a direct impact of Low magnitude. 9.6.17 This asset is a circular cairn 7.6m in diameter within a shallow penannular ditch, this is a funerary monument of Neolithic date. This cairn is located on the summit of a knoll with open views to the north through the east Potential Construction Impacts to south over the Esk Valley. To the west is the rising ground of Long Craigs.

9.6.6 It is considered that steeper slopes and land above 350m AOD within the ISA are of negligible archaeological 9.6.18 This cairn primarily gains its cultural significance from the intrinsic value of its fabric and its potential for potential. On gently sloping land below 350m AOD there is low archaeological potential. archaeological deposits to provide information on Neolithic funerary and ritual practices.

9.6.7 Approximately 8.3km of proposed access tracks, three turbines and associated hardstands (T1, T3 and T4), the 9.6.19 The asset gains some cultural significance from its setting with the open view over the surrounding landscape construction compound, the site entrance, the substation and substation construction compound, and one above the Esk Valley which enables an appreciation of why the tomb builders chose this location. borrow pit are located in areas below 350m AOD considered to be of low archaeological potential. 9.6.20 The nearest turbine of the proposed development is 6.8km to the south-west of this asset. As depicted in the 9.6.8 A direct construction impact on unknown heritage assets in these areas is possible, although unlikely. Any Wireline (Figure 9.6) approximately 27 of the turbines will be visible from the cairn, although as only the very effect resulting from such an impact is unlikely to be of greater than minor significance. tips of some of these turbines show on the wireline intervening woodland or local topography may reduce this number. Operational Impacts 9.6.9 Potential operational effects could occur because of changes to views towards and from heritage assets. 9.6.21 The presence of the turbines on the north-western horizon at a distance of 6.8km will have no effect on the contribution that setting makes to the cultural significance of this asset. The ability to understand and Predicted Operational Impacts appreciate the location of the cairn in the wider topographic setting of the Esk valley will be unaffected. It is therefore considered that there will be no impact on the cultural significance of this asset. Scheduled Monuments Barrows Section 1 – Page 15

Section 9 – Cultural Heritage Faw Side Community Wind Farm – EIA Report

9.6.22 Saugh Hill Barrow (SM4370) is a scheduled monument and as such an asset of high importance. significance of the asset. It is therefore considered that the proposed development will have no impact on the contribution that setting makes to the cultural significance of Tom’s Knowe Bank Barrow. 9.6.23 This asset is the well-preserved remains of a prehistoric funerary monument, classified by its morphology as an Early Bronze Age barrow. It survives as a turf covered mound 10m long, 8m wide and 0.4m high, the main Late Bronze Age to Iron Age Settlements axis of the barrow lies on a north-east/south-west alignment. As this asset has not been excavated there is no 9.6.32 Nine of the scheduled monuments are defended settlements of late bronze Age to Iron Age date including detailed archaeological record of its structure. The cultural significance of this barrow derives primarily from palisaded enclosures, enclosed settlements. As scheduled monuments these are all assets of high importance. its intrinsic characteristics, being a relatively well-preserved example of a rare monument type, and its potential to increase our knowledge of funerary and ritual practice in the Early Bronze Age. 9.6.33 As Iron Age settlements these assets primarily gain their cultural significance from the intrinsic value of the settlements themselves and the potential for archaeological deposits to provide information on the social, 9.6.24 The wider landscape setting appears to have had a bearing on the siting of this barrow. It is sited on the north economic and domestic activities of the Iron Age. shoulder 30m to the NNE of the summit of Saugh Hill. From this location the barrow affords panoramic views from the south-east through the east and north to the west along and over the White Esk valley and its 9.6.34 The contribution that setting makes to the cultural significance of Iron Age defended settlements largely confluence with Garwald Water. derives from an appreciation of why a site was chosen for a settlement. As settlements it is unlikely that these assets have been sited with particular reference to views but rather placed in areas of ground attractive to 9.6.25 The nearest turbine of the proposed wind farm will be located approximately 8.4km to the south-east of this settlement; i.e. dry ground close to good agricultural land. It is considered that distant views are unlikely to be barrow. The ZTV suggests up to 39 turbines will be visible from the scheduled area. relevant to the understanding and appreciation of the cultural significance of Iron Age settlements. 9.6.26 At this range the proposed wind farm would have no effect on the immediate setting of the monument and 9.6.35 Haw Birren enclosure (SM2852) is the remains of a defended settlement of Iron Age date. It is oval, measuring while there would be a change to the wider rural landscape setting of the monument, this is a modern 95m by 75m in plan and enclosed by two ramparts and a ditch. Internally there are traces of at least three hut landscape. The presence of the turbines would not appreciably diminish the limited contribution that this platforms. The settlement is located on the summit of Haw Birren Hill. wider setting makes to the cultural significance. The barrow will continue to be in an open rural setting with wide panoramic views and it is these characteristics of its setting that are relevant to the cultural significance 9.6.36 The contribution that setting makes to the significance of this asset relates to the understanding of the of the asset. It is therefore considered that the proposed development will have no impact on the contribution topographic position of the settlement on the summit of Haw Birren Hill overlooking the valley of the Black that setting makes to the setting of Saugh Hill Barrow. Esk to the east, which can be appreciated in views out from this asset.

9.6.27 Tom’s Knowe Bank Barrow (SM4514) is a scheduled monument and as such an asset of high importance. 9.6.37 The proposed development will be visible 9.8km to the east of the scheduled area with up to 44 turbines visible. 9.6.28 This asset is the well-preserved remains of a prehistoric funerary monument, classified by its morphology as a Neolithic bank barrow. It survives as an oval terminal mound 10.5m long, 9m wide and 1.5m high with a 225m 9.6.38 The presence of the turbines will have no effect on the contribution that setting makes to the cultural long tail mound attached which slopes downhill to the north. This barrow is orientated on a north to south significance of this asset. The ability to understand and appreciate the location of the settlement in the wider axis. As this asset has not been excavated there is no detailed archaeological record of its structure. The topographic setting of Haw Birren Hill and the valley of the Black Esk will be unaffected. It is therefore cultural significance of this barrow derives primarily from its intrinsic value as a well-preserved example of a considered that there will be no impact on the cultural significance of this asset. rare monument type with potential to increase our knowledge of funerary and ritual practice in the Neolithic. This potential is increased as it will cover a well-preserved section of the contemporary land surface which 9.6.39 Calkin, settlement, farmstead and linear earthworks (SM4396) is the remains of an Iron Age defended could increase knowledge of the local prehistoric environment. settlement with related linear earth works. It is an oval settlement, measuring 68m by 53m within double banks and a ditch with entrances to the north-west and north-east. It is overlain by a later, smaller (28m by 9.6.29 The wider landscape setting appears to have had a bearing on the siting of this bank barrow, as it is sited on a 26m) scooped enclosure in the north-west of the interior. The settlement is also associated with two large prominent rocky knoll. From this location the bank barrow affords wide views particularly to the south and linear earthworks comprising a bank and ditch. Also included in the scheduled area are a farmstead and field east along and over the river valley of White Esk. system of the pre-improvement period. The asset is located on the north-east facing slopes of Shaw Hill.

9.6.30 The nearest turbine of the proposed wind farm will be located 7.4km to the south-east of this barrow. The ZTV 9.6.40 The contribution that setting makes to the significance of this asset relates to the understanding of the suggests up to 28 turbines will be visible from the scheduled area, the number of turbines increasing to 28 as topographic position of the settlement on the north-east facing slopes of Shaw Hill overlooking the valley of the slope ascends. Boyken Burn, which can be appreciated in views out from this asset.

9.6.31 At this range the proposed wind farm would have no impact on the immediate setting of the monument and 9.6.41 The proposed development will be visible 4km to the north-east of the scheduled area with up to 41 turbines while there would be a change to the wider rural landscape setting of the monuments, this is a modern visible from the upper slopes of this asset. landscape. The presence of the turbines would not appreciably diminish the limited contribution that this wider setting makes to the asset’s cultural significance. The barrow will continue to be in an open rural setting 9.6.42 The presence of the turbines will not alter the contribution that setting makes to the cultural significance of with wide panoramic views and it is these characteristics of its setting that are relevant to the cultural this asset. The ability to understand and appreciate the location of the settlement in the wider topographic Section 1 – Page 16

Faw Side Community Wind Farm – EIA Report Section 9 – Cultural Heritage

setting of Shaw Hill and the valley of Boyken Burn will be unaffected. It is therefore considered that there will 9.6.54 The presence of the turbines to the west at a distance of 2km will have no effect on the contribution that be no impact on the cultural significance of this asset. setting makes to the cultural significance of this asset. The ability to understand and appreciate the location of the settlement in the wider topographic setting of Ewesdale will be unaffected. It is therefore considered 9.6.43 Potholm palisaded settlement (SM4408) is a palisaded settlement of later Bronze Age to Iron Age date. Oval that there will be no impact on the cultural significance of this asset. in plan, it measures 50m by 35m, within two palisaded trenches and an external bank. Internally there are approximately nine hut platforms. The settlement is located on the northern spur of Potholm Hill. 9.6.55 Gibb's Hill, unenclosed settlement, palisaded settlements & houses (SM4518) is the remains of a complex multi-phase Iron Age settlement of timber house platforms including both unenclosed and palisaded phases. 9.6.44 The contribution that setting makes to the significance of this asset relates to the understanding of the Included in the scheduled area are the remains of houses dating to the pre improvement period. The topographic position of the settlement on Potholm Hill, on a ridge overlooking Ewesdale to the east and settlement is located on the summit of Gibb’s Hill. Eskdale to the west, which can be appreciated in views out from this asset. 9.6.56 The contribution that setting makes to the significance of this asset relates to the understanding of the 9.6.45 The proposed development will be visible 3.7km to the north-west of the scheduled area with up to five topographic position of the settlement on the summit of Gibb’s Hill overlooking the valley of Logan Water to turbines visible. the east, which can be appreciated in views out from this asset.

9.6.46 The presence of the turbines to the west at a distance of 3.7km will have no effect on the contribution that 9.6.57 The proposed development will be visible 7.3km to the north-east of the scheduled area with up to 13 turbines setting makes to the cultural significance of this asset. The ability to understand and appreciate the location visible. of the settlement in the wider topographic setting of Ewesdale and Eskdale will be unaffected. It is therefore considered that there will be no impact on the cultural significance of this asset. 9.6.58 The presence of the turbines to the north-east at a distance of 7.3km will have no effect on the contribution that setting makes to the cultural significance of this asset. The ability to understand and appreciate the 9.6.47 Rigfoot settlement (SM4409) Figure 9.7, is a scooped settlement of Iron Age date. It is oval in plan and location of the settlement in the wider topographic setting of Gibb’s Hill and the valley of Logan Water will be measures 60m by 45m, enclosed by a natural scarp and a stony bank. Internally there are traces of at least unaffected. It is therefore considered that there will be no impact on the cultural significance of this asset. two hut platforms. It is located on the lower south-west slope of Bellstone Rig. 9.6.59 Lyneholm Settlement (SM4691) (Figure 9.9) is a probable Iron Age homestead and a defended settlement 9.6.48 The contribution that setting makes to the significance of this asset relates to the understanding of the which are located 300m apart on Lyneholm Hill. The homestead is located on the east flank of the hill and is a topographic position of the settlement on the bottom slopes of Bellstone Rig overlooking the Meikledale Burn scooped enclosure containing a possible house platform enclosed by a stony bank. The defended settlement and its confluence with Wolfhope Burn, which can be appreciated in views out from this asset. is on the summit of the hill and is an oval enclosure comprising a stone-faced bank with external ditch. Internally there is one circular house platform. 9.6.49 The proposed development will be visible 1.4km to the east of the scheduled area with up to 6 turbines visible, although as depicted in the wireline (Figure 9.7) only one turbine (T34) will be visible to almost full height. 9.6.60 This settlement derives a limited amount of its cultural significance from the siting of these assets in close proximity to each other, enabling the appreciation of the fact that these assets were built for intervisibility. 9.6.50 The presence of the turbines will not alter the contribution that setting makes to the cultural significance of this asset. The ability to understand and appreciate the location of the settlement in the wider topographic The contribution that setting makes to the significance of this asset also relates to the understanding of the setting on low slopes overlooking the confluence of the Meikledale and Wolfhope Burns will be unaffected. It topographic position of the homestead and settlement on Lyneholm Hill above the valley of the River Esk is therefore considered that there will be no impact on the cultural significance of this asset. which can be appreciated in views from the asset.

9.6.61 The proposed development will be visible 5km to the east of the scheduled area, as depicted in the wireline 9.6.51 Sorbie Settlement (SM4411) Figure 9.8, is a sub oval enclosed Iron Age settlement, a stone wall forms the enclosure and while there is no visible trace of internal house platforms it is possible that they survive (Figure 9.9) up to 41 turbines will be visible. subsurface. The settlement is located on the south-east flank of Paron’s Rig. Downslope to the east of this 9.6.62 The presence of the turbines to the west at a distance of 5km will have no effect on the contribution that settlement are the Sorbie Cultivation terraces (SM4410) which have been designated as medieval cultivation, setting makes to the cultural significance of this asset. The ability to understand and appreciate the location but which may be contemporary. of these settlements in relation to each other and their wider topographic setting on Lyneholm Hill in the Esk valley will be unaffected. It is therefore considered that there will be no impact on the cultural significance of 9.6.52 The contribution that setting makes to the significance of this asset relates to the understanding of the topographic position of the settlement on Paron’s Rig, above Ewesdale, which can be appreciated in views this asset. from the asset. 9.6.63 Mid Knock enclosure (SM5173) is the remains of a defended settlement of Iron Age date. It is sub-circular, measuring 49m by 46m. Internally there are at least four house platforms, and externally there are traces of 9.6.53 The proposed development will be visible 2km to the north-west of the scheduled area with up to four turbines visible. As depicted in the wireline (Figure 9.8), only one turbine (T44) will be visible to hub height, the an earthen bank. The settlement is situated between two gullies on the lower northern slopes of Mid Knock remaining three visible as tips. hill.

Section 1 – Page 17

Section 9 – Cultural Heritage Faw Side Community Wind Farm – EIA Report

9.6.64 The contribution that setting makes to the significance of this asset relates to the understanding of the 9.6.72 The contribution that setting makes to the cultural significance of Iron Age forts largely derives from an topographic position of the settlement between two gullies overlooking Eskdale to the north-east, which can appreciation of why a particular site was chosen – often in a naturally defensible location with strategic views be appreciated in views out from this asset. available from, towards, and between forts. As elements within the landscape have changed considerably since the Iron Age the details of what is visible from such forts is of less relevance. However, defensive and/ 9.6.65 The proposed development will be visible 3.5km to the north-east of the scheduled area with up to 13 turbines or commanding views from the forts – where such views still exist – are also considered a key characteristic, visible. and the maintenance of these particular views is considered desirable, as the underlying topographic features within the landscape may be relevant to an understanding and appreciation of the forts’ cultural significance. 9.6.66 The presence of the turbines will have no effect on the contribution that setting makes to the cultural significance of this asset. The ability to understand and appreciate the location of the settlement in the wider 9.6.73 Bogle Walls Fort (SM646) (Figure 9.10), is a wedge-shaped fort consisting of an inner rampart, ditch and topographic setting within the gullies on Mid Knock Hill and Eskdale will be unaffected. It is therefore counterscarp. Unlike other forts in this area, this fort is located on a low-lying river terrace on the southern considered that there will be no impact on the cultural significance of this asset. bank of the River Esk approximately 45m from the river. The B709 road runs north-west to south-east along to the immediate north of the fort. 9.6.67 Bessie’s Hill Settlement (SM10346) is the substantial remains of an Iron Age enclosed settlement, unusually for an Iron Age site this settlement is square in plan with an outer bank and ditch and internally approximately 9.6.74 This asset gains some cultural significance from its setting, though at present the fort is surrounded by mature seven house platforms. The square shape of this settlement may indicate that it is of later Iron Age date and deciduous woodland, which largely blocks all views into and out from this fort. However, it is likely that the influenced by Roman activity in the region. Although this settlement is surrounded by a substantial rampart fort was sited to command views along the River Esk from the north through to the east. It may also have been and ditch it has been scheduled as a settlement as it is overlooked to the north and therefore could not have sited in proximity to the cultivable lands of the river terraces which its builders farmed. served a primarily defensive purpose. 9.6.75 The nearest turbines of the proposed development are 3.7km to the north-west, and as depicted in the 9.6.68 This settlement lies approximately 190m to the north-west of Bessie’s Hill fort (SM2346), and if contemporary wireline (Figure 9.10) up to seven turbines will be visible; two to hub height and five to tip. this asset may have been built to house the builders of the fort, if of a later date it may have been built to provide larger, less defensive accommodation. It is clear that whether contemporary or not, the builders of 9.6.76 The key characteristics of the asset’s setting which contribute to its cultural significance – the relationship with this settlement would have known that the fort would was downslope and would have chosen this site at least the River Esk and its river terraces – will not be affected. While the proposed development will be a prominent partially for this proximity. The settlement therefore derives a limited amount of its cultural significance from feature in the views to the north, the turbines will not dominate or detract from any understanding or the siting of this settlement for its proximity to Bessie’s Hill fort (SM2346). This importance is increased as appreciation of this asset. It is therefore considered that the proposed development will not impact on the both these assets survive to an extent, upstanding allowing the relationship between these two assets to cultural significance of Bogle Walls fort. remain readily appreciable. The contribution that setting makes to the significance of this asset also relates to the understanding of the topographic position of the settlement on Bessie’s Hill above the valley of the River 9.6.77 Esk Valley Hill Forts; Castle O’er fort and linear earthworks (SM651), Camp Hill fort (SM647), Bessie’s Hill Esk which can be appreciated in views from the asset. fort (SM2346). Castle O’er fort and linear earthworks (SM651), (Chapter 6: Landscape and Visual, Figures 6.32 a-e) is the central fort of this group and is the largest of the Esk Valley forts with large ramparts, banks and 9.6.69 The proposed development will be visible 7.1km to the east of the scheduled area, up to 44 turbines will be ditches and traces of approximately 30 hut circles in its interior. As the largest of the forts it has been identified visible filtered through the intervening coniferous forest and beyond the hills that form the eastern edge of as the main fort of the area and probably the base for an important branch of the Selgovae tribe who ruled Esk Valley. much of south-west Scotland in the Iron Age (https://scotland.forestry.gov.uk/managing/work-on-scotlands- national-forest-estate/conservation/archaeology/investigation/castle-o-er-hillfort). Although smaller than 9.6.70 While the proposed development will be a prominent feature in views to the east from this fort it will not Castle O’er, Camp Hill (SM647) and Bessie’s Hill fort (SM2346) are both substantial forts in themselves with affect the aspects of this forts setting from which it derives some of its cultural significance. The ability to large ramparts and interior hut circles. The forts are all located on eponymous hills on the southern edge of understand and appreciate the location of the settlement in relationship to Bessie’s Hill fort and it’s wider the Esk Valley with wide views along and over the valley. topographic setting on Bessie Hill in the Esk valley will be unaffected. It is therefore considered that there will be no impact on the cultural significance of this asset. 9.6.78 These assets gain some cultural significance from their setting in that there is intervisibility between the forts and as these are well preserved forts with large ramparts, it remains possible to see these forts from one Iron Age Forts another. As these forts are probably contemporary it has been suggested that these forts worked together as 9.6.71 There are nine scheduled Iron Age forts within 10km of the turbines. As scheduled monuments these are a frontier, with Camp Hill to the south-east and Bessie’s hill to the north-west, acting as lookout posts for assets of high importance. The forts are all located to the south of the proposed development. These assets Castle O’er Fort. The smaller two forts observing any potential threats approaching along the valley and primarily gain their cultural significance from the intrinsic value of the forts themselves and the potential for informing Castle O’er Fort. In addition to the intervisibility between these forts, views along the Esk Valley, archaeological deposits to provide information on the defences, construction techniques and domestic which allow an appreciation of the communication corridor the forts defended and the fertile land of the valley activities of the Iron Age. which they would have farmed, are relevant to the setting of these assets. The Esk Valley also contains remains of contemporary with the forts. These remains are also relevant to the ability to understand and appreciate

Section 1 – Page 18

Faw Side Community Wind Farm – EIA Report Section 9 – Cultural Heritage

why these assets were sited along the Esk Valley. It is not considered that more distant views beyond the Esk (SM4400) approximately 200m to the south-west is also of relevance. It is considered that more distant views Valley add to the cultural significance of these forts. to and from this asset are not of importance to its cultural significance.

9.6.79 The nearest turbines of the proposed development are between 7.1km and 8.5km to the east of these forts 9.6.87 The nearest turbine (T44) of the proposed development is 3.5km to the north-west of this asset. As depicted beyond the hills that form the eastern edge of Esk Valley. As demonstrated in the visualisations (Figures 6.32 on the wireline (Figure 9.12) 32 turbines of the development will be visible varying between tip and hub height. a-e) the turbines will all be visible on the eastern horizon. 9.6.88 The key characteristics of the asset’s setting which contribute to its cultural significance; the proximity of the 9.6.80 While the proposed development will be a prominent feature in views to the east from these forts it will not fort to the Hoghill settlement, the defensive location of the fort and the extensive views from the fort over affect the aspects of their setting from which they derive some of their cultural significance. It is therefore Ewesdale, will remain readily appreciable. While the proposed development will be a prominent feature in the considered that the proposed development will not have an operational impact on the cultural significance of views to the north-west of Ewesdale, the turbines will not dominate or detract from this asset. It is therefore the Esk Valley forts; Castle O’er fort and linear earthworks (SM651), Camp Hill fort (SM647), Bessie’s Hill fort considered that the proposed development will not impact on the cultural significance of Loch Hill fort. (SM2346). 9.6.89 Craig two forts (SM12740) (Figure 9.13), is the remains of two Iron Age forts of a fort and outlying earthworks. 9.6.81 Brieryshaw Hill, fort and settlement (SM4393) (Figure 9.11), the fort is oval in plan and measures It survives as a roughly oval fort measuring 42m by 36m internally, enclosed by a rampart and external ditch approximately 64m by 57m internally. It is enclosed by two large ramparts with an intervening ditch 10m wide, around the south and west sides. It may be that the circuit was never completed or extended round the north with a single entrance on the east side of the fort. The interior contains at least 14 hut platforms and the and east in a different form which has not survived. Only one house platform has been identified in the interior. remains of a larger sub-rectangular building. The settlement is an enclosed settlement 100m to the south- The forts are located on a lower plateau of Craig Hill with open views along and across the valley of Eskdale west of the fort. Measuring 60m by 55m and enclosed by a large bank, at least two house platforms survive from the west through the north to the south-east and overlooking Little Hill fort (SM12745) on the lower on the interior, and the entrance lies on the west of the bank. The settlement lies on the southern flank of slopes 260m to the north. The summit of Craig Hill rises to the south. Brieryshaw Hill in a poorly defended location. The fort is sited on the rounded shoulder of Brieryshaw Hill with large open views to the north through the east to the south along Ewesdale. 9.6.90 This asset gains some cultural significance from its setting in that it has clearly been located for the defensive nature of the site. The wide views it commands along Eskdale allowed the fort’s occupants to observe this 9.6.82 These assets gain some cultural significance from their setting in that they have been sited in relation to each important communication route as well as watching over the more fertile land of Eskdale in which its builders other and can be presumed to be contemporary. The fort has also clearly been located for the defensive nature farmed and lived. The relationship with the probably contemporary Iron Age settlements of Little Hill fort of the site and for the wide views it commands along the Ewesdale. These allow the fort’s occupants to observe (SM12745) is also of relevance. It is considered that more distant views to and from this asset are not of any traffic approaching along this important communication route, as well as watching over the more fertile importance to its cultural significance. land of Ewesdale in which its builders farmed and lived. It is considered that more distant views to and from this asset are of limited relevance to its cultural significance. 9.6.91 The nearest turbine of the proposed development is 3.2km to the north of this asset. As depicted on the wireline (Figure 9.13), 17 turbines of the development will be visible to varying degrees from tip to full height. 9.6.83 The nearest turbine (T42) of the proposed development is 1.8km to the north-west of this asset. As depicted As only the very tip of six of these assets are visible on the bare earth wireline it is probable that local on the wireline (Figure 9.11) only the tip of this turbine (T42) and the next closest turbine (T43) will be visible. topography and intervening forestry will remove these turbines from view. Further from the settlement T44 will be visible to hub height 2.5km to the south-west and T20, T21 & T22 will be visible to hub height 3.9km to the north. 9.6.92 The key characteristics of the asset’s setting which contribute to its cultural significance; the relationship with Little Hill fort, the defensive location of the fort and the extensive views from the fort over Eskdale, will remain 9.6.84 The key characteristics of the asset’s setting which contribute to its cultural significance; the proximity of the readily appreciable. While the proposed development will be a visible feature in the views to the north of fort to the settlement, the defensive location of the fort and the extensive views from the fort over Ewesdale, Eskdale, the turbines will not dominate or detract from this asset. It is therefore considered that the proposed will remain unchanged. The proposed development will not dominate or detract from this asset. It is therefore development will not impact on the cultural significance of Craig two forts. considered that the proposed development will not impact on the cultural significance of Brieryshaw Hill, fort and settlement. 9.6.93 Little Hill fort (SM12745) is a pear-shaped fort, measuring approximately 121m by 60m. Only a small section of ramparts and ditch survives on the southern side, and it is enclosed to the north-west by an artificially 9.6.85 Loch Hill fort (SM4401) (Figure 9.12), is an oval fort measuring approximately 87m by 65m internally. Enclosed enhanced slope. The fort has one entrance to the west and one to the north-east. Internally there is evidence by a large rampart and ditch, the fort has two entrances, one to the north and one to the south-east. The of approximately 16 house platforms. It is located on the summit of Little Hill approximately 260m downslope interior of the fort contains traces of at least 15 house platforms. The fort is located on the summit of Loch Hill and north of Craig two forts (SM12740) overlooking the valley of the River Esk to the west through the north with wide views over the valley of Ewesdale to the north through the west to the south. to the south-east. The rising ground of Craig Hill is to the south.

9.6.86 This asset gains some cultural significance from its setting in that it has clearly been located to exploit the 9.6.94 This asset gains some cultural significance from its setting in that it has clearly been located for the defensive naturally defensive qualities of the site. The wide views it affords along the Ewesdale overlook this important nature of the site. The wide views it commands along the Eskdale allowed the fort’s occupants to observe this communication route as well as watching over the more fertile land of Ewesdale in which the fort’s occupants important communication route as well as watching over the more fertile land of Eskdale in which the fort’s farmed and lived. The visual relationship with the probably contemporary Iron Age settlements of Hoghill builders farmed and lived. The relationship with the probably contemporary Iron Age settlements of Little Hill Section 1 – Page 19

Section 9 – Cultural Heritage Faw Side Community Wind Farm – EIA Report

fort (SM12745) approximately 260m to the north is also of relevance. It is considered that more distant views across the wider landscape. Watch towers were typically sited with intervisibility to associated roads and with to and from this asset are not of importance to its cultural significance. adjacent watch towers, forts or fortlets. While this tower has good visibility along the line of the road it is unclear whether there would have been visibility with the forts of the River White Esk Valley; Lamb Knowe 9.6.95 The nearest turbine of the proposed development is 2.9km to the north of this asset with 8 turbines visible to Roman Camp (SM7603) and Raeburnfoot Roman Fort (SM671). varying degrees. 9.6.104 The proposed development will be visible 7km to the south-east of the scheduled area, the visibility of the 9.6.96 The key characteristics of the asset’s setting which contribute to its cultural significance; to the relationship turbines will vary greatly along the route of this road with no visibility along the 2.1km stretch as the scheduled with Craig two forts, the defensive location of the fort and the extensive views from the fort over Eskdale, will section ascends from Raeburnside to Humphrey Law or on the 1km scheduled area going south-west from remain readily appreciable. While the proposed development will be a prominent feature in the views to the Whitefaced. Where the road runs along the top of the ridges there is increased visibility of the proposed north of Eskdale, the turbines will not dominate or detract from this asset. It is therefore considered that the development with between 11 and 44 turbines visible along the route, although visibility will currently be proposed development will not impact on the cultural significance of Little Hill fort. affected by the plantation forestry that surrounds much of this route. From the watch tower, 44 turbines will be visible. 9.6.97 Newland Hill fort (SM3964) located on the lower summit of Newland Hill. The nearest turbines of the proposed development are 9.8km to the north-east. At this distance and taking into account the screening 9.6.105 The presence of the turbines to the west at a distance of 7.5km will not alter the contribution that setting effects of intervening forestry, topography and development (including the operational Ewe Hill Wind Farm) makes to the cultural significance of this asset. The ability to understand and appreciate the route of the it is considered that the proposed development will not impact on the cultural significance of Newland Hill Roman Road and the commanding position of the watch tower will be unaffected. It is therefore considered fort. that there will be no impact on the cultural significance of this asset.

Roman 9.6.106 Lamb Knowe bank barrow and Roman Camp (SM7603) is a scheduled monument of high importance. This 9.6.98 Mid Raeburn to Craik Cross Hill, Roman road & watch tower (SM675) Craik Cross Hill-Borthwick Water, scheduling includes two monuments; a bank barrow dating to the Neolithic period and a Roman Camp. Roman road (SM1709) and Fauld Brae-Craik Knowes, Roman road (SM3834) are three scheduled sections of 9.6.107 The cultural significance of the barrow derives primarily from its intrinsic value as a well-preserved example the Roman road also known in Canmore as the Torwood-Raeburnfoot-Newstead Roman Road (NHRE NT20SE of a rare monument type and its potential to increase our knowledge of funerary and ritual practice in the 24). As sections of the same Roman road these assets are considered here as a group. Also included in this Neolithic. This importance is increased as it is likely to cover a well-preserved section of the contemporary group is the Craik Cross watch tower. These assets are scheduled monuments of high importance. land surface which could increase our knowledge of the local prehistoric environment. 9.6.99 The Roman Road was constructed largely in substantial cuttings in some areas, using the bedrock as road 9.6.108 The cultural significance of the Roman Camp derives primarily from its intrinsic value as a well-preserved surface. In other areas the road was constructed of embankments and terraced sections with metalled example of a rare ‘Stracathro’ type and the only camp of this type to preserve upstanding remains. The surfaces. The road follows a high route north-east to south-west across Craik Muir down to the valley floor of archaeological deposits have the potential to increase our understanding of the domestic, social and economic the River White Esk, past Lamb Knowe Roman Camp (SM7603) and Raeburnfoot Roman Fort (SM671) before activities of the Romans and enhance knowledge of Roman military structures and logistics. continuing south-west out of the River White Esk valley. 9.6.109 The wider landscape setting had a bearing on the siting of both the Barrow and the Roman Camp. Both are 9.6.100 The watch tower comprises a mound on the summit of Craik Cross. A trial excavation on the site was carried sited on the south-west flank of Lamb Knowe, a ridge hill lying between the Rae and Moodlaw Burns, it slopes out in 1946, however the lack of finds from this excavation meant the mound remained of indeterminate date south-west towards the valley floor of the River White Esk. From this location the Roman Camp would have and the question of whether it was a prehistoric barrow or a Roman watch tower was unconfirmed. However, been able to monitor the important communication route of the White Esk valley and the smaller passes of its morphology indicates that it is a watch-tower. the Rae and Moodlaw Burns. Also of relevance is the camp’s association with the Torwood-Raeburnfoot- 9.6.101 The cultural significance of both the watch tower and the road derives primarily from their intrinsic Newstead Roman Road (NHRE NT20SE 24) which runs to the east of the Camp and the Raeburnfoot Roman archaeological value, and their potential to increase our knowledge of Roman military engineering, Fort (SM671) which lies on the low slopes to the immediate south of the camp. The bank barrow would have architecture and patterns of development and distribution as well as the social and economic interactions of had wide views particularly to the south-east along and over the valley of the White Esk River. the period. It is considered that the fabric of this monument has the potential to inform answers to this 9.6.110 The proposed development will be visible 7.5km to the west of the scheduled area, 32 turbines will be visible question. at the northern end of the barrow and up to 18 turbines will be visible within the area of the Roman Camp. 9.6.102 The landscape setting had a bearing on the siting of this road in that it was constructed up and along a high 9.6.111 The presence of the turbines to the west at a distance of 7.5km will not alter the contribution that setting pass. The road’s current landscape context, surrounded by plantation forestry, places it in a modern landscape makes to the cultural significance of this asset. The ability to understand and appreciate the location of the and diminishes the ability to appreciate its original landscape setting. Roman camp for its commanding position and proximity to contemporary assets and the relationship between 9.6.103 The landscape setting had a bearing on the siting of the watch tower. Along the line of this Roman Road the the barrow and the wider topographic setting of the White Esk valley will be unaffected. It is therefore Watch Tower is located at the point with the most extensive views along the route of the Roman road and considered that there will be no impact on the cultural significance of this asset.

Section 1 – Page 20

Faw Side Community Wind Farm – EIA Report Section 9 – Cultural Heritage

9.6.112 Eweslees, watch tower (SM12750) (Figure 9.14), is a scheduled monument of high importance. 9.6.121 As agrarian sites these assets primarily gain their cultural significance from their intrinsic value as archaeological resources and their potential to inform our knowledge of the development of agricultural 9.6.113 The monument is the remains of a sub-circular earthen mound enclosed by a shallow ditch and bank 14.5m in practices through the medieval and post medieval period prior to the improvement era in the 18th century. diameter. While originally interpreted as a barrow, further work on the site including a measured survey by The archaeological deposits of the settlements and farmsteads also have the potential to provide information the Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Scotland (RCAHMS) in 2015, has led to the on the architecture, social, economic and domestic activities of rural society in the medieval to post medieval asset being reinterpreted as the remains of a Roman watch tower. periods.

9.6.114 The tower is located on the crest of a natural knoll, near the foot of Pikethaw Hill. The tower overlooks the 9.6.122 The contribution that setting makes to the cultural significance of medieval to post medieval agrarian valley of Eweslees Burn to the south-east and the valley of Wrangway to the north. To the south the ground settlements, farmsteads and field systems largely derives from an appreciation of why a site was chosen for a rises steeply to the summit of Pikethaw Hill, to the west is the rising ground of Haggis Side and to the north settlement and farmed. As agrarian assets it is unlikely that they have been sited with particular reference to the ground rises to the summit of Merrypath Rig. The hillside is currently used for rough grazing. views, but rather placed in areas of ground attractive to settlement and farming; dry ground close to good agricultural land. These assets were not sited with regard to distant views and therefore that distant views are 9.6.115 The cultural significance of this watch tower derives primarily from its intrinsic archaeological value and its potential to increase our knowledge of Roman watch towers, their construction, architecture and patterns of unlikely to be relevant to the understanding and appreciation of the cultural significance of medieval to post development and distribution, as well as the social and economic interactions of the period. The importance medieval agrarian settlements, farmsteads and field systems. of this watch tower is increased as it is evidence of previously unrecorded Roman activity in the local area. 9.6.123 It is considered that the presence of turbines in views from and of these five monuments will not alter their There are the remains of a number of old roads in the area; Ewesdale-Ewes Doors – Wrangway Burn cultural significance. There will be no operational impacts upon Glenkeil Hill settlement and field system (MDG11875) and Corbie Shank (MDG8055), though neither have been verified as Roman. (SM4367), Meikledale settlement (SM4373), Boyken Burn township (SM4385), Effgill settlement and field system (SM4398) or Sorbie cultivation terraces (SM4410). 9.6.116 The landscape setting will have had a bearing on the siting of this watch tower. It is located on the crest of a knoll at the head of Ewes Door pass. Located on a watershed the asset has open views along the valley of Industrial Eweslees Burn to the south-east and north along the valley of Wrangway. It is clear that this asset was sited in relation to these views and the importance of these communication routes through the hilly uplands. Watch 9.6.124 Louisa Mine (SM4454) is a scheduled monument and as such is an asset of high importance. The monument towers were typically sited with intervisibility to associated roads and with adjacent watch towers, forts or comprises the remains of what was the first, and probably the largest, antimony mine in Britain and was fortlets, though none have been recorded to date in the area. worked from 1793 until 1798. As the scheduling document states, this asset is of national importance “as the well-preserved remains of the first antimony mine in Britain. It has an important place in the history of mining 9.6.117 To summarise, the cultural significance of this watch tower derives primarily from its intrinsic, archaeological in this country and has the potential to enhance our understanding of early modern mining and non-ferrous value and its potential to increase our knowledge of Roman activity in the area. The additional contribution smelting”. The value of this asset is intrinsic and functional, it was sited for the potential of mining antimony, that setting makes to this significance relates to the appreciation of the apparent deliberate siting of this asset it was not located in relation to any views in or out. It is therefore considered that wider views are of no to overlook the communication routes of the valley of Eweslees Burn and the valley of Wrangway. relevance to the cultural significance of the Louisa Mine.

9.6.118 The nearest turbine of the proposed development is Turbine 6 which will be 751m to the north-west of the 9.6.125 The nearest turbine of the proposed wind farm will be located approximately 750m to the south-east. Up to scheduled area. Turbine 7 will be 757m to the west of the scheduled area with seven of the remaining turbines seven turbines will be visible from the scheduled area, however given the very limited value this asset derives visible further to the west as depicted in the wireline (Figure 9.14). from its setting it is considered that there will be no impact on the cultural significance of the Louisa Mine.

9.6.119 The proximity of turbines 6 and 7 would introduce a degree of visual distraction to the immediate setting of Listed Buildings the asset. This would slightly diminish, but not prevent, the appreciation of the siting of this watch tower. The 9.6.126 Arkleton House (LB9727) (Figure 9.15), and Arkleton House, Walled Garden, Glass Houses and Gardener's landscape setting of the watch tower would remain essentially open and unenclosed, despite the proximity of Cottage (LB9728) are treated here as a group. All are Category B listed buildings and as such are of medium the closest turbines. To the limited extent that the view to the west contributes to the cultural significance of importance. this asset, this change would slightly diminish that positive contribution. It is considered that this would be an adverse impact of negligible magnitude, resulting in an effect of negligible significance on the Eweslees, watch 9.6.127 Arkleton House was built in the late 19th century in the style of a large asymmetrical Scots Baronial Mansion tower. and may encase an earlier late 17th to 18th century house. The walled garden, glass houses and gardener’s cottage lie to the north-east of the main house. The house faces NNE towards the rising ground of Hartrith Medieval to Post Medieval agrarian settlements and field systems Rig. The house and buildings are set in well-established grounds surrounded by dense mature deciduous 9.6.120 Five of the scheduled monuments requested by consultees for setting assessments are the remains of woodland giving them a secluded nature with only glimpsed views into the grounds possible. medieval to post medieval agrarian settlements, farmsteads and field systems. As scheduled monuments these are all assets of high importance. 9.6.128 The setting adds to the cultural heritage significance of this group as the principal building; Arkleton House has clearly been orientated to capture the view to the north-east towards the rising ground of Hartrith Rig. In

Section 1 – Page 21

Section 9 – Cultural Heritage Faw Side Community Wind Farm – EIA Report

addition to this, the planting of trees around the buildings has added to the sense of privacy and seclusion in A small road has been cut through the centre of this fort from the north-east to south-west. This fort is not the estate. located on Caerlan Rig next to a steep slope which drops away to the south-east.

9.6.129 The nearest turbine of the proposed developments is 2.9km to the north-west of this asset. As depicted on 9.6.137 This asset gains some cultural significance from its setting in that it has clearly been located for the defensive the wireline (Figure 9.15) 20 turbines of the development will be visible varying between tip and hub height. nature of the site. The wide views it commands along the valley of Limiecleuch Burn allowed it to observe any potential threats approaching along this important communication route. It is considered that more distant 9.6.130 The key characteristics of the assets’ setting which contribute to their cultural significance are the group value views to and from this asset are not relevant to its cultural significance. of and relationship between the buildings, the secluded nature of the grounds and the view from Arkleton House to the north-east. The turbines will not dominate or detract from these characteristics. It is therefore 9.6.138 The nearest turbine (T1) of the proposed development is 2.8km to the south of this asset with 28 turbines considered that the proposed development will not impact on the cultural significance of Arkleton House visible. (LB9727) or Arkleton House, Walled Garden, Glass Houses and Gardener's Cottage (LB9728). 9.6.139 The key characteristics of the assets setting which contribute to its cultural significance; the defensive location Conservation Area of the fort and the extensive views from the fort over valley of Limiecleuch Burn will remain unchanged. The proposed development will not dominate or detract from this asset. It is therefore considered that the 9.6.131 Langholm Conservation Area encompasses the area around Langholm Castle, the area to the east of the River proposed development will not impact on the cultural significance of this asset. Esk to Tolllbar Cottage South, at the southern end of the High Street, and the area west of the River to the Schoolhouse on Thomas Telford Road and south to the park to the rear of Langholm Parish Church. The 9.6.140 Watch Knowe Fort (NT30SE 2) is the highly denuded remains of a rectilinear fort approximately 75m by 50m boundary of the Conservation Area is shown on Figure 9.5. There are 37 listed buildings within the comprising a single ditch and rampart. Historically recorded as a prehistoric fort this was reclassified as a Conservation Area including banks, bridges, churches, hotels, a police station, a school house and the town possible Roman fort or fortlet. This fort is located on the summit of the low ridge of Carlenrig immediately hall. There is no finalised or adopted Conservation Appraisal for Langholm presently available. As a above the Watch Knowe house. Conservation Area this is an asset of medium importance. 9.6.141 This asset gains some cultural significance from its setting in that it has clearly been located for the defensive 9.6.132 The cultural significance of a Conservation Area is primarily derived from the architectural character of its nature of the site. The wide views it commands along the valley of the River Teviot to the west and of buildings and their arrangement in a characteristic street pattern that reflects the history of the settlement. Limiecleuch Burn to the east and their confluence to the north at Teviothead would have allowed it to observe In the case of Langholm, its origins date back to the time of the Border Reivers. However, much of the any potential threats approaching along these important communication routes. It is considered that more development came in the late 18th and 19th centuries as the industrial revolution brought the textile industry distant views to and from this asset are not relevant to its cultural significance. to Langholm. 9.6.142 The nearest turbine (T1) of the proposed development is 4.9km to the south-west of this asset with 18 turbines 9.6.133 The setting of Langholm adds to its cultural significance in that it is built on the confluences of the River Esk visible and Ewes Water and Wauchope Water. Langholm prospered in the industrial period due to the textile mills that were built along these waterways. Langholm is also experienced as a small rural settlement surrounded 9.6.143 The key characteristics of the assets setting which contribute to its cultural significance; the defensive location by hills which are visible in glimpsed views throughout the Conservation Area. There are no directed or of the fort and the extensive views from the fort will remain unchanged. The proposed development will not designed views out of the Conservation Area. dominate or detract from this asset. It is therefore considered that the proposed development will not impact on the cultural significance of this asset. 9.6.134 The proposed development lies 6.4km to the north-west of the Conservation Area, it will not be visible from a large part of the Conservation Area including the area of Langholm Castle, Townhead Bridge and the area to Non-Inventory Designed Landscapes the east of the High Street. In the rest of the Conservation Area, the intervening buildings will largely block 9.6.144 Westerhall NIDL (MDG25657) is the grounds and gardens of the category B listed Westerhall House (LB16936), views towards the proposed development. also within the NIDL is the category B listed Westerhall Farm (former stables) (LB16937). As a NIDL and B listed buildings these assets are considered to be of medium importance. 9.6.135 It is therefore considered that the majority of the Conservation Area will not be affected by the proposed development and where visible, the proposed development will not affect the ability to understand and 9.6.145 The Westerhall NIDL is orientated north-west to south-east on a low river valley terrace on the north-west appreciate the characteristics of its setting from which it gains cultural heritage significance. It is therefore side of the River Esk. Trees have been planted surrounding the houses and creating tree-lined drives through considered there will be no impact on the cultural significance of this asset. the grounds. These trees and the more recent coniferous forestry on the edge of the area create a sense of seclusion and privacy within the NIDL. Westerhall House is surrounded by maintained gardens and there are Undesignated Heritage Assets improved pasture fields in the south of the area. This asset has added associative significance in that 9.6.136 Caerlan Rig (NT30SE 1) is a small fort or fortified settlement. It is oval in plan, measuring approximately 60m alterations made to the house and grounds in 1783 are the earliest known of Thomas Telford’s projects. by 50m internally and is enclosed by two large ramparts with an intervening ditch, and traces of an outer ditch. 9.6.146 From the northern limit of the NIDL to south of Westerhall House the NIDL is outwith the ZTV and there will be no potential for views to the proposed development. The exception to this is on the upper slopes of the Section 1 – Page 22

Faw Side Community Wind Farm – EIA Report Section 9 – Cultural Heritage

north-east limit of the NIDL where the turbines would be visible if the current woodland was felled. The 9.8 Residual Effects remainder of the NIDL falls within the ZTV including the area of Westerhall Farm, within this area there is potential for up to 11 turbines to be visible at a distance of 2km to the north. Summary of Residual Effects

9.6.147 It is considered that the current mature woodland and intervening plantation forestry is likely to remove the Residual Construction Effects potential for visibility of the proposed development from the NIDL area. In either case there will be no visibility 9.8.1 There is a risk that Corbie Shank Old Road (NY39NE19), Caerlan Rig to Eweslees Drove Road (NT30SE14) and from the main house of the NIDL and the planted grounds. The ability to understand and appreciate the reason Limiecleuch, Rig and Furrow (NT30SE22) will be subject to direct impacts. Impacts on currently undiscovered why this location was chosen for this NIDL and the seclusion and privacy achieved by the planting will be archaeological remains elsewhere in the ISA may also occur during the construction phase. unaffected. It is therefore considered that there will be no impact on the cultural significance of this asset. 9.8.2 The programme of archaeological evaluation will identify any significant undiscovered remains and allow for Decommissioning Impacts effects upon them to be mitigated by avoidance and preservation in situ where possible, or otherwise by 9.6.148 The extent of ground disturbance associated with decommissioning will not extend beyond the construction excavation and recording. Any adverse effect on a heritage asset’s archaeological interest, due to the loss of footprint and so decommissioning impacts on heritage assets within the ISA will not occur. in situ archaeological remains, would be offset to some extent by the beneficial effect on its archaeological interest due to the increase in understanding resulting from archaeological investigation.

9.7 Proposed Mitigation 9.8.3 The risk of significant effects on unknown archaeological remains is judged to be low; and the overall effect, taking into account mitigation, is highly unlikely to be of more than negligible significance. Mitigation During Construction

9.7.1 Construction impacts upon Corbie Shank Old Road (NY39NE19), Caerlan Rig to Eweslees Drove Road Residual Operational Effects (NT30SE14) and Limiecleuch, Rig and Furrow (NT30SE22) will be mitigated by a programme of archaeological 9.8.4 There will be no significant operational effects on cultural heritage assets during the operation of the wind evaluation. The location and scope of evaluation works will be detailed in a Written Scheme of Investigation, farm. The residual effect on the setting of cultural heritage assets would be no greater than negligible adverse which will be agreed with DGC or SBC as appropriate. It is proposed that this work comprises topographical and therefore not significant. survey of the upstanding features, followed by archaeological monitoring of groundworks during construction.

9.7.2 Where construction effects are unavoidable, these will be offset by excavation and recording of the remains 9.9 Cumulative Effects in accordance with SPP, paragraph 150 and PAN2/2011, sections 25-27, and Dumfries & Galloway Local 9.9.1 The cumulative effects of the proposed development with the developments of the 38 wind farms within a Development Plan Policy HE3 and Supplementary Guidance; Part 1 Wind Energy Development: Development 45km Study Area from the proposed development (as described in Chapter 6: Landscape and Visual Impact Management Consideration F Historic Environment and Cultural Heritage. Assessment) have been considered. 9.7.3 Impacts on currently undiscovered archaeological remains elsewhere in the ISA may also occur during the 9.9.2 No cumulative construction impacts are predicted for known cultural heritage assets from any combination of construction phase. developments. Furthermore, due to the nature of previously unrecorded cultural heritage assets likely to be 9.7.4 The programme of archaeological evaluation will identify any significant undiscovered remains and allow for found in this area (relatively small prehistoric features) it is considered that there is no potential for cumulative effects upon them to be mitigated by avoidance and preservation in situ where possible, or otherwise by construction impacts on previously unrecorded cultural heritage assets. excavation and recording. Any adverse effect on a heritage asset’s archaeological interest, due to the loss of 9.9.3 Cumulative operational effects can occur when the proposed development would be visible in the setting of in situ archaeological remains, would be offset to some extent by the beneficial effect on its archaeological an asset in combination with other operational or consented wind farms. The assessment of effects uses interest due to the increase in understanding resulting from archaeological investigation. precisely the same methodology applied in considering the current application alone. All analyses of asset 9.7.5 The risk of impacts on unknown archaeological remains is judged to be negligible; and the overall effect, in the significance and the contribution made by setting remains unchanged. All that is altered is the nature of visual absence of mitigation, is highly unlikely to be of more than minor significance. change predicted for the one or more scenarios under consideration.

Mitigation during Operation 9.9.4 Cumulative operational effects are considered in cases where an effect of minor or greater significance has been predicted on the setting of an historic asset as a result of the proposed development. The purpose of 9.7.6 No significant operational effects are predicted on the setting of cultural heritage assets from the operation this threshold is to ensure that the assessment remains proportionate and focused on those cases where there of the proposed development. No mitigation is therefore proposed is potential for an EIA-significant effect to arise.

Mitigation during Decommissioning 9.9.5 As no operational effects of minor or greater significance have been identified it is considered that there is no 9.7.7 Decommissioning impacts on heritage assets within the ISA will not occur and no mitigation is proposed in potential for significant cumulative impacts on cultural heritage assets from the proposed development and respect of this. any combination of the cumulative developments. Section 1 – Page 23

Section 9 – Cultural Heritage Faw Side Community Wind Farm – EIA Report

References

Bibliographic references Cameron R, 2018a Ewes Farm Woodland Creation Scheme, Historic Environment Desk-based Assessment, Grey Literature unpublished client report by Mott MacDonald for Tilhill Forestry

Cameron R, 2018b Stennieswater Forest, Archaeological Assessment and Condition, Grey Literature unpublished client report by Mott MacDonald for Tilhill Forestry

Lonie, W. (1988e) 'Corbie Shank of Causeway Grain Head (Teviothead Westerkirk parish), early road', Discovery Excav Scot, 1988. Page(s): 8

Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Scotland, 1997 Eastern Dumfriesshire: An Archaeological Landscape Edinburgh

Stell, G. 1996 Dumfries and Galloway Edinburgh

OSA, 1795 Ewes, County of Dumfries Vol XIV P465-469

NSA, 1845 Ewes, County of Dumfries Vol IV, p437-441

Historic maps

Ordnance Survey Six-inch 1st edition 1860 - Dumfriesshire, Sheet V (includes: Kirkconnel; New Cumnock)

1860 - Dumfriesshire, Sheet VI (includes: Kirkconnel; Sanquhar)

1860 - Dumfriesshire, Sheet XIII (includes: Penpont; Sanquhar)

Section 1 – Page 24

Faw Side Community Wind Farm – EIA Report Section 9 – Cultural Heritage

Appendix 9.1 – Gazetteer of Heritage Assets within the Inner Study Area Appendix 9.2 – Undesignated Assets in the Inner Study Area excluded from assessment

Ref Name Description Easting Northing Ref Name Type Easting Northing NY39NE19 Corbie Shank, Old A major early road can be traced for about 3km 335757 598221 HA1 Corrie Sike Sheepfold Sheepfold 340085 602808 Road from the forest gate at NY 368 998 on Carlenrig HA2 Limey Sike Sheepfold Sheepfold 339352 602540 by Haggis Side over Corbie Shank to NY 351 974 HA3 Frostlie Rig Sheepfold Sheepfold 340117 602187 on Caple Rig. Beyond these limits survey is hampered by recent land developments. HA4 Frostlie Rig Sheepfold Sheepfold 340518 602059 NT30SE3 Wisp Although the OS map notes "Cup & Ring 337735 600115 HA5 Short Hope Sheepfold Sheepfold 338649 602108 Marks", the artificiality of the hollows is most HA6 Frostlie Rig Sheepfold Sheepfold 339840 601921 questionable and there are no vestiges of any HA7 Frostlie Rig Cairn Shepherds Cairn 340202 601637 rings. Mr R Eckford of the British Geological Survey, who examined the stone, was unable to HA8 River Teviot Sheepfold Sheepfold 337371 601565 give a positive opinion as to whether the HA9 Wispmoor Cleuch Sheepfold Sheepfold 338450 601405 hollows were natural or not. It may be that it HA10 Sheperd's Cairn sheepfold 337789 601248 has been made by weathering and chemical reactions to moss HA11 Limey Cleuch Sheepfold Sheepfold 338068 601190 HA50 Wolfhope Burn Small possible building located on the side of 334544 593170 HA12 Hill Head Sheepfold Sheepfold 335919 601370 Structure Wolfhope Burn HA13 Giddenscleuch Sheep Shelter Sheep Shelter 337132 601085 HA52 The Lady Florance Stone placed to commemorate a daring horse 335049 592846 HA14 Giddenscleuch Sheep Shelter Sheep Shelter 336716 600374 Stone ride by Lady Florence Cust on 20th feb 1861 MDG8077 Glencat Sike / On the E side of Glencat Sike, 100m above its 332800 595170 HA15 Merrypath Sike Sheepfold Sheepfold 337437 600301 Stennies Water junction with the Stennies Water, there are the HA16 Wrangway Burn Sheepfold Sheepfold 337839 600473 building remains of a single rectangular building. HA17 Long Hope Sheepfold Sheepfold 338102 600221 MDG8079 Ringle Burn / At the foot of the Ringle Burn 220m ENE of 333600 595960 HA18 Long Hope Sheepfold Sheepfold 338513 600385 Upper Upper Stennieswater farmstead (NY39NW 35) Stennieswater there are the remains of up to four rectangular HA19 Gedding's Cleuch Sheepfold Sheepfold 336362 599775 buildings buildings; the best preserved is divided into HA20 Ewen's Hope Sheepfold Sheepfold 337841 599582 two compartments and measures 12m by 2m HA21 Teviot Stone Boundary Marker Stone 333569 598510 internally. HA22 Causeway Grain Sheepfold Sheepfold 334895 598320 MDG10492 Meikledale Burn A subrectangular building platform lies on a 336860 596150 building steep W-facing slope overlooking the head of HA23 Haggis Side Sheepfold Sheepfold 337034 598673 the Meikledale Burn. It has been levelled into HA24 Corbie Shank Sheepfold Sheepfold 336245 598017 the slope to a depth of 0.6m and measures 10m HA25 Yellow Sike Sheepfold Sheepfold 334460 597775 from NNW to SSE by 3.8m transversely overall. HA26 Faw Side Sheepfold Sheepfold 334585 597579 MDG10518 Jock's Hope Burn / The remains of a subrectangular building are 335730 594310 Arkleton Burn situated on a narrow ledge overlooking Jock’s HA27 Causeway Grain Sheepfold Sheepfold 335087 597874 building Hope Burn HA28 Pikethaw Hill Cairn Shepherds Cairn 336833 597614 MDG10519 Jock's Hope Burn The remains of a subrectangular building are 335850 594260 HA29 Faw Side Sheepfold Sheepfold 335060 597056 building situated on a terrace on the S side of the Jock's HA30 Dod Sike Sheepfold Sheepfold 333352 596836 Hope Burn MDG10520 Jock's Hope Burn The remains of a subrectangular building are 336073 594025 HA31 Faw Side Sheepfold Sheepfold 334548 596828 building situated on a terrace on the S side of the Jock's HA32 Ringle Shank Sheepfold Sheepfold 333830 596573 Hope Burn HA33 St Martin's Sike Sheepfold Sheepfold 336146 596245 NT30SE14 Caerlan Rig to Post medieval to modern drove road between 338336 602370 HA34 Merikledale Burn Sheepfold Sheepfold 336672 596434 Eweslees drove Caerlan Rig and Eweslees road HA35 Sole Hill Sheepfold Sheepfold 336792 595991 NT30SE22 Limiecleuch Sheepfold marked on the 1st Edition OS map. 338194 602069 HA36 Swin Gill Sheepfold Sheepfold 335621 595414 sheepfold HA37 Murder Gill Sheep Wash Sheep Wash 333288 595583 HA38 Glencat Sike Enclosures Enclosure 332828 595429 HA39 Stenners Water Sheepfold Sheepfold 332881 595195 HA40 Stenners Water Sheepfold Sheepfold 332795 595051 HA41 Glenkeil Burn Sheepfold Sheepfold 332400 594986

Section 1 – Page 25

Section 9 – Cultural Heritage Faw Side Community Wind Farm – EIA Report

Ref Name Type Easting Northing Appendix 9.3 – Scheduled Monuments in the Outer Study Area excluded HA42 Black Grain Sheepfold Sheepfold 335107 594918 HA43 Black Grain Cairn Shepherds Cairn 335123 594537 Ref. Designation Title Easting Northing HA44 Jock's Hope Burn Enclosure Enclosure 335083 594276 SM12623 Stennieswaterfoot, homestead and enclosure 335m SW of 329406 592452 HA45 Jock's Hope Burn Sheepfold Sheepfold 335513 594435 SM12666 Mid Hill, settlement 1480m SSE of Cairnknowe 327150 584977 HA46 Jock's Hope Burn Sheepwash Sheepwash 335906 594233 SM12667 Newland Hill, settlement 1560m E of Capelfoot 325391 586254 HA47 Jock Hope's Burn Sheepfold 336005 594047 SM12700 Calfield, scooped settlement and farmstead 440m N of 333893 584420 HA48 Wolfhope Burn sheepfold Sheepfold 334387 593291 SM12738 Garage Cottage, scooped settlements 390m SE of 338367 591201 HA49 Wolfhope Burn enclosure Enclosure 334541 593147 SM12762 Gulf Sike, scooped settlement 525m SE of Arresgill 331609 584527 HA51 WolfhopeBurn Sheepfold Sheepfold 334851 593224 HA53 Wolfhope Burn Sheepfold Sheepfold 335486 593060 SM12767 Whiteyett, earthworks 575m SSE to 935m S and 650m S to 1060m S of 324881 593244 HA54 Brown Rig Cairn Shepherds Cairn 333064 592809 SM12775 Over Rig, enclosure 750m SSW of Whiteyett 324569 593482 HA55 Clickdow Sike Sheepfold Sheepfold 333209 592741 SM1693 Crom Rig,earthwork 342868 606699 HA56 Meg's Shank Sheepfold Sheepfold 334144 592056 SM2115 Meadowshaw,earthwork 337805 609717 HA58 Wolfhope Burn Sheepfold Sheepfold 335486 593060 SM2529 Wolfcleughhead, enclosures, Craik Forest 333705 607634 HA59 Crue Gill Sheepfold Sheepfold 336080 592954 SM2851 Tanlawhill, settlement 480m WNW of 323275 591486 HA60 Bellstone Rig Buildings Stock enclosures 336668 593377 SM3366 Change House,enclosure 320m WSW of 343063 607482 HA61 Rigfoot Farmstead Farmstead 336640 593192 HA62 Jock's Hope Burn Sheepwash Sheepwash 336714 593156 SM3413 The Catrail,linear earthwork,350m long,N of Doecleugh Hill 345453 606724 HA63 Wolfhope Burn Stock Enclosure Rectangular enclosure 336918 593187 SM3433 Crom Rig,farmstead 640m SW of Change House 342935 607172 HA64 Brown Rig Cairn Shepherds cairn 333064 592809 SM3434 North House Cottages,cairn 200m SW of 343632 607447 HA65 Clickdow Sike Sheepfold Sheepfold 333209 592741 SM3461 Priesthaugh,earthwork 130m SSE of 346670 604518 HA66 Meg's Shank Sheepfold Sheepfold 336021 592328 SM4006 Lairhope Cottage,deserted settlement 300m WNW of 337959 606358 MDG10457 Glencat Sike Enclosure & building 332850 595330 SM4062 Mid Raeburn,enclosure 200m NNE of 326502 600598 MDG10822 Upper Stennieswater / 'Over Farmstead 333440 595830 SM4333 Bankburnfoot, settlement 375m NW of 326489 592762 Stenniswater'/ 'Uppertown' SM4365 Mosspeeble,enclosure 300m SE of 338485 593278 MDG10870 Upper Stennieswater Farmstead 333386 595902 MDG8069 Stennies Water / Faw Side Burn Enclosure 333900 596500 SM4367 Glenkeil Hill,settlement & field system 100m SW of Under Stennieswater 332104 593663 NT30SE17 Rashiegrain Enclosure 335406 600258 SM4368 Crooks, scooped settlement 290m NNE of 329787 592449 NT30SE18 Mid Cleuch Enclosure 335171 600003 SM4369 The Knowe, settlement 300m S of Castle O'er Farm 324798 592269 NT30SE19 Merrylaw Farmstead 335135 600075 SM4371 Georgefield,settlement 230m NNE of 329970 591632 NT30SE20 Mare Sike Enclosure 336216 600737 SM4372 Shielburn,settlement 350m NW of 328557 591969 NT30SE23 Birn Knowe Enclosure 336623 600669 SM4373 Meikledale, settlement 800m NNW of 337007 593641 NT30SE24 Giddens Cleugh Sheepfold 336787 600690 SM4374 Clerkhill,settlements 800m NNW of 325342 598569 NT30SE25 Giddens Cleugh Sheepfold 336672 600512 NT30SE9 Giddenscleugh Enclosure 336295 600451 SM4380 Bankburnfoot, enclosure 1350m WNW of 325379 592818 NT40SW6 Frostlie Burn Field System 340663 602585 SM4383 Stennieswaterfoot,settlement 625m NNE of 329753 593306 NT40SW7 Corrie Sike Building 340136 602977 SM4384 Shiel Rig,settlement 650m N of Clerkhillgrain 326786 598694 NT40SW8 Teviothead Quarry 340200 604100 SM4385 Boyken Burn, township 695m W of Westerhall 331245 589204 NT40SW9 Corrie Syke Farmstead 340039 603301 SM4386 Tanlawhill Cottages, farmstead 865 m E of 324749 590902 NY39NW37 Lymiecleuch Estate Enclosure 334399 598764 SM4387 Calkin,farmstead 500m WSW of 329786 588389 NY39NW38 Wester Cleuch Enclosure 334741 599655 SM4388 Old Hopsrigg,farmstead 700m SW of 330887 587964 NY39NW39 Lymiecleuch Estate Enclosure 334044 598757 SM4391 Bankburnfoot, settlement 1550m WSW of 325212 592124

Section 1 – Page 26

Faw Side Community Wind Farm – EIA Report Section 9 – Cultural Heritage

Ref. Designation Title Easting Northing Ref. Designation Title Easting Northing SM4392 Becks,settlement 800m N of 334368 585031 SM4736 Unthank,settlement 300m NE of 338903 594865 SM4394 Calkin,settlements and cultivation terraces 300m N of 330479 588975 SM4966 Clerkhill,homestead,unenclosed settlements & field system 400m N of 325703 598270 SM4395 Calkin,settlement 300m E of 330517 588632 SM634 Girdlestanes, stone circle 325348 596154 SM4397 Greencleuch Cottage, settlement 1550m NNW of 329541 583925 SM637 Loupin' Stanes, stone circle 325704 596637 SM4398 Effgill,settlement and field system 600m E of 330595 592882 SM671 Raeburnfoot, Roman fort 200m SW of 325106 599087 SM4399 Henwell,settlement 100m E of 335282 588237 SM7774 Langholm Castle 336179 584940 SM4400 Hoghill,settlements 250m ENE & 500m NNE of 337453 589751 SM4402 Milnholm,settlement 200m WSW of 335293 587287 SM4403 Milnholm Cottage,farmstead 800m SSW of 335103 586144 SM4404 Milnholm Cottage,settlement and farmstead 335328 586871 Appendix 9.4 – Listed Buildings in the Outer Study Area excluded SM4405 Mosspeeble,farmstead 350m W of 337926 593536 SM4406 Old Irvine,settlement 600m NNW of 336480 581613 Ref Designation Title Category Easting Northing LB8126 Burnfoot Farmhouse C 339061 596373 SM4409 Rigfoot,settlement 337048 593159 LB8127 Glendivan Farmhouse C 337193 590839 SM4410 Sorbie,cultivation terraces 450m NW of 336471 590535 LB8128 Meikledale Barn C 337535 592952 SM4411 Sorbie,settlement 650m NW of 336310 590660 LB9719 Staplegordon Old Churchyard B 335222 587921 SM4412 Terrona, scooped settlement 150m SE of 337311 587149 LB9720 Wauchope Churchyard B 335524 584082 SM4431 Mid Knock,unenclosed settlement 600m SW of 329420 590565 LB9729 Arkleton House, Former Stables C 338056 591440 SM4454 Louisa Mine, antimony mine and workings, Glenshanna Burn 331274 596590 LB9730 Ewes Parish Church and Churchyard B 336922 590828 SM4457 Deil's Jingle South, linear earthwork 325492 591389 LB9731 Ewes Parish Manse Including Outbuilding C 336848 590748 SM4458 Deil's Jingle North, linear earthwork 325382 593196 LB9732 Eweslees Old Farmhouse C 338791 597411 LB9733 Langholm Lodge (Both Houses) B 335634 585340 SM4462 Arkleton, farmstead 1700m SE of 339360 590297 LB9734 Langholm Lodge, Duchess Bridge (Over River Esk) A 335593 585239 SM4506 Eweslees,settlements 650m and 750m SSW of 338609 596649 LB9752 Broomholm House And Gatepiers B 337254 581785 SM4535 Callisterhall,cairn 2550m NNE of 329866 584036 LB9753 Broomholm House, Sundial B 337303 581698 SM4541 Castlehill,settlement 200m NNW of 324619 594996 LB9754 Broomholm House , Steading And Former Stables B 337299 581741 SM4542 Old Johnstone,settlement and farmstead 350m WNW of 324342 600002 LB9755 Cleuchfoot B 331479 582821 SM4687 Cleuchfoot,farmstead 1500m NE of 332440 583868 LB9757 Ewesbank House And Adjoining Cottage, Workshops/Stores B 336321 585134 SM4688 Broomholm,farmstead 400m E of 337664 581846 LB9758 Highmill Bridge (A7 Over Ewes Water) B 336881 585834 LB9760 Langholm Lodge, Episcopal Church B 336170 585151 SM4690 Bloch Farm,enclosure 600 m N of 332891 581932 LB9761 Longwood Cottage and Outbuilding with Glass House B 337163 583017 SM4691 Lyneholm,settlement 500m WSW and homestead 250m SW of 327320 591492 LB9761 Longwood Cottage and Outbuilding with Glass House B 337169 582997 SM4692 Tanlawhill,farmstead and field system 1250m NW of 323159 592428 LB9762 Malcolm Monument on Whita Hill B 337935 584686 SM4693 Black Esk Bridge,farmstead and cultivation remains 680m S of 325131 590018 LB9763 Milnholm Farmhouse and Steading A 335516 587288 SM4694 Tanlawhill,settlement 250m S of 323714 591028 LB9764 Skipper's Bridge (A7 Over River Esk) A 337066 583400 SM4695 Tanlawhill,farmstead and cultivation remains 950m ESE of 324660 591024 LB9765 Springhill (Former Wauchope Manse) C 335579 584190 SM4696 Tanlawhill,settlement 1150m SE of 324635 590652 LB9766 Bankhead Burial Ground B 325265 596350 SM4717 Glendivan,settlement 550m SE of 337717 590617 LB9767 Black Esk Bridge C 325217 590730 LB9768 Craighaugh Covenanter's Tomb ("Hislop's Grave") B 324806 598622 SM4718 Glendivan,settlement 200m SE of 337408 590730 LB9769 White Esk Bridge B 325451 597739 SM4720 Watcarrick,earthwork 140m S of Bankhead 325294 596353 LB9770 Fiddleton Toll Bar Cottage, excluding single storey timber extension to B 338842 596203 SM4721 Moodlaw,settlement 600m S of 325584 600707 east and double height brick extension to South, A7, Ewes, near Langholm Section 1 – Page 27

Section 9 – Cultural Heritage Faw Side Community Wind Farm – EIA Report

LB9771 Hoghill Farmhouse and Steading B 337277 589250 LB37132 56 High Street and The Edinburgh Woollen Mill Shop, Market Place C 336425 584529 LB9772 Meikledale Farmhouse B 337552 593007 LB37134 74-80 (Even Nos) High Street C 336458 584473 LB9773 Henry Scott Riddell Memorial B 336814 590009 LB37135 High Street, Tollbar Cottage South B 336698 584260 LB9774 Tarras Bridge at Tarras Lodge C 340309 587046 LB37140 Thomas Telford Road, The Holm C 336083 584761 LB9779 Eskdalemuir Parish Church and Gatepiers C 325252 597897 Thomas Telford Road, Langholm Academy (Block on South Side Of B 335964 584794 LB37141 Road) LB9780 Eskdalemuir Parish Churchyard B 325252 597897 LB49631 Burnfoot House With Former Stable B 333608 588746 LB10793 Teviothead, Bowanhill Cottage, Henderson's Knowe And Old Smithy C 340834 605675 LB13907 Bentpath Village, Esk Cottage C 331154 590219 LB16918 Bentpath Village, Telford Monument at Westerkirk Library C 330889 590048 Bentpath Village, Westerkirk Parish Church, Retaining Wall and B 331180 590310 LB16919 Gatepiers LB16920 Bentpath Village, Westerkirk Old Churchyard B 331180 590310 LB16921 Bentpath Village, Westerkirk Old Churchyard, Johnstone Mausoleum A 331286 590350 LB16922 Bentpath Village, Westerkirk School and Schoolhouse C 330885 590097 LB16923 Bentpath Village, The White House, Garden Wall and Gatepiers B 331226 590374 LB16924 Black Esk Bridge (Minor Road Over Black Esk) C 325217 590730 LB16925 Burnfoot Bridge C 333748 588852 LB16926 Burnfoot Farmhouse and Steading B 333376 589025 LB16927 Craig Farmhouse C 334108 588434 LB16928 Craigcleuch House B 334408 586824 LB16929 Craigcleuch House, North Lodge and Gatepiers C 334298 586884 LB16930 Drove Knowe Monument to Sir F G Johnstone Of Westerhall B 331191 589936 LB16931 Enzieholm Bridge (B709 Over River Esk) B 328549 591370 LB16932 Enzieholm Farmhouse C 328892 591424 LB16933 Hopsrig Farmhouse and Steading B 332281 588638 LB16935 Westerhall, Bridge Over Kirk Burn (Near Bentpath) C 331358 590375 LB16936 Westerhall House B 331941 589280 LB16937 Westerhall Farm (Former Stables) B 332446 589012 LB16938 Westerhall House, North Lodge and Gatepiers C 331415 590303 LB16939 Bentpath Village, Bentpath Bridge (Over River Esk) A 331160 590248 LB16940 Bentpath Village, Westerkirk Library B 330861 590074 LB19710 Colterscleuch Monument. B 341013 606632 LB37107 8 Buccleuch Square, Hamnavoe C 336081 584752 LB37109 Charles Street Old, Langholm Parish Church Hall C 336260 584458 LB37111 Drove Road, House Opposite Number 26 C 336561 584412 LB37112 House to South Of 12 Drove Road, Fronting Un-Named Close C 336461 584590 LB37115 Ewes Bridge (Over Ewes Water) B 336302 585031 LB37116 Glenesk Road, Waverley Mills B 336536 584121 LB37119 15, 17 (Odd Nos) High Street, Buck Hotel Including Barn at Rear C 336365 584645 LB37120 High Street, Royal Bank Of Scotland Building C 336400 584604 LB37124 High Street, Statue of Sir Pulteney Malcolm (In Library Garden) C 336487 584465 LB37126 97 High Street C 336553 584396 LB37129 10 High Street, Bridge House C 336333 584653 LB37130 12, 14 High Street C 336342 584640 Section 1 – Page 28

13 13 Jane Street EH6 5HE Edinburgh 0131 4677705 www.headlandarchaeology.com 1:125,000A3 @ Inner Study Area OuterStudy Area

! 9.1 Figure Cultural Heritage Study Areas ! 0 5,000m

! Key ! SCOTLAND 9 350000

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! Contains OS data © Copyright anddatabase right 201 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! !

! !

! !

! ! 345000

! ! !

! !

!

!

!

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! !

! ! ! !

! ! !

! ! ! ! !

! ! 340000

! ! !

! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! !

! !

!

! !

! !

!

! !

! ! ! ! ! !

! !

! ! ! !

!

!

!

! ! !

! !

!

!

! !

! ! !

!

335000

!

! !

! ! !

!

! ! !

! !

!

!

!

! !

!

! !

!

!

! ! ! !

! !

!

! !

!

!

!

! !

! !

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

! !

!

!

! !

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

1km

! !

!

!

!

!

! !

330000

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

5km ! ! !

!

! !

! !

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! 325000

!

!

!

! !

10km

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! ! ! !

320000

610000 605000 600000 595000 590000 585000 605000

SCOTLAND 13 Jane Street Edinburgh EH6 5HE 0131 467 7705 NT40SW8 www.headlandarchaeology.com 604000 Key NT40SW9 Inner Study Area NT30SE14 NT40SW7 > Turbine

z Met Mast

603000 HA1 NT40SW6 HA2 Access Track Site Entrance A NT30SE22 HA5 HA3 Substation

HA6 Substation & Control Room NT30SE24 Construction Compound 602000 HA4 HA8 Construction Compound NT30SE23 HA12 HA9 Borrow Pit HA7 HA13 HA10 Borrow Pit Area of Search

Heritage Asset NT30SE20 HA11 Heritage Asset 601000

NT30SE17 NT30SE9 (! HER Record from Blaue's map HA16 HA14 > HA18 NT30SE19 HA15 NT30SE18 NT30SE25 Sites and Monuments Record information derived from Dumfries and Galloway Council data > > > HA17 dated 07.01.19 © Crown Copyright Dumfries and Galloway Council HA19 600000 NY39NW38 Sites and Monuments Record information NT30SE3 derived from Scottish Borders Council data dated 08.01.19 © Crown Copyright Scottish Borders Council > NY39NW37 > HA20 NY39NE19 NY39NW39

599000 > HA23 HA21 > > HA22 > > HA24 1:35,000 @ A3 HA27 0 1,000m HA25 598000 HA28 > > > HA26 > HA29 > > HA30 HA31 597000 > Figure 9.2 HA32 MDG8069 Heritage Assets Contains OS data © Copyright and database right 2019 (! within the ISA - North 332000 333000 334000 335000 336000 337000 > 338000 339000 340000 341000 342000 > > > SCOTLAND 13 Jane Street > Edinburgh EH6 5HE 0131 467 7705

598000 www.headlandarchaeology.com

> > > > > > Key 597000 MDG8069 > Inner Study Area HA34 > Turbine > HA33 > > MDG10870 z Met Mast MDG10492 > MDG10456 MDG8079 > Access Track 596000 HA37 HA35 Substation HA38 > MDG10822 > HA36 > Construction Compound MDG8077 MDG10457 Borrow Pit

> Borrow Pit Area of Search HA42 HA39 > > Heritage Asset 595000 HA41 HA40 HA43 > MDG10518 Heritage Asset HA45 (! Heritage Asset HA44 MDG10519 > Mott MacDonald 2018 HA46 Walkover Survey Area > 594000 MDG10520 > > HA47 HA48 Sites and Monuments Record information HA50 > derived from Dumfries and Galloway Council data > HA51 dated 07.01.19 © Crown Copyright Dumfries and Galloway Council HA53 > Sites and Monuments Record information HA54 derived from Scottish Borders Council data HA49 dated 08.01.19 © Crown Copyright Scottish Borders Council 593000 > > HA52 HA55 > > HA56 z > > 592000 1:35,000 @ A3 0 1,000m

> > 591000

Figure 9.3 Heritage Assets Contains OS data © Copyright and database right 2019 within the ISA - South 329000 330000 331000 332000 333000 334000 335000 336000 337000 338000 339000 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! SCOTLAND 13 Jane Street ! ! ! ! ! ! Edinburgh EH6 5HE 0

0 ! ! 0 ! 0 ! 0131 467 7705

1 !

6 ! ! ! www.headlandarchaeology.com ! ! ! ! !

! !

! !

! ! ! ! ! SM3435 ! 0 ! 0 0

8 !

0 ! 6

! !

! !

! ! Key

! ! Scheduled monument ! !

! 0 ! 0

0 !( Undesignated heritage asset 6 ! SM1709 0

6 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Turbine ! ! ! > !

! ! ! ! ! !

! ! NT30SE2 ! ! 1km study area ! ! ! ! ! !( ! ! ! !

! ! ! 5km study area ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! 0

0 ! ! 10km study area 0 ! ! !

4 !

0 SM675

6 ! ! ! N! o. turbines visible ! ! NT30SE1 ! ! ! ! !( 1 - 9

! ! ! ! 10 - 18 ! !

! ! !

! 0 ! ! 19 - 27

0 !

0 SM675 2 ! 0 ! ! 6 ! 28 - 36 ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! 37 - 45 ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! 1

!

! ! ! > ! Sites and Monuments Record information !

2 3 ! derived from Dumfries and Galloway Council data ! 0 4 !

! SM7603 ! 0 !

0 dated 07.01.19 © Crown Copyright Dumfries and Galloway Council

0 > > ! 0 ! >

6 !

! ! ! 5 ! ! Sites and Monuments Record information

6 !

! SM4370 ! ! SM671 > derived from! Scottish Borders Council data ! >

! !

! dated 08.01.19 © Crown Copyright Scottish Bordersy Council ! ! 7

! 9 ! SM! 12750

! 10 > ! !

! Designed Landscape area information !

> 8 ! ! > derived from Historic Environment Scotland data ! ! SM4514 11 ! ! 0

> ! dated 21! .12.18. © Crown Copyright.

0 !

0 > 8 ! ! All rights reserved. ! !

9 !

5 19 12 18 !

! ! ! ! ! > 17 > > 20 Scheduled monument area information

SM4543 !

13 ! derived from Historic Environment Scotland data dated 21.12.18

! >

! ! ! > SM3834 © Crown Copyright (Historic Environment Scotland)

SM4454 ! > 23 !

! ! ! !

! ! ! > 24 21 Listed Bu! ilding data provided by Historic Environment Scotland

! ! 14 !

!

! !

! > > dated 21.12.18 © Crown Copyright !

0 15 > 25 ! 0

! ! (Historic Environment Scotland) ! 0

! ! 6 ! 26

9 >

5 >

! 22 !

! ! 27 SM2346 !

! > !

!

! ! > >

16 !

!

!

! !

28 ! !

> ! 30

! SM4768 ! !

! > > 29 ! ! !

! !

! !

! !

! > !

!

!

! 31

! !

!

! ! ! 0 ! 33 1:80,000 @ A3

0 >

! !

0 SM4367 ! SM4373 ! 4 ! 35 32 9

> 0 ! 2,000m 5 !

! > 34 !

! > !

SM4367 36 !

> ! ! 39 SM4409

! !

SM28! 52 >

SM651 SM4398 !

> ! ! ! ! 41

! 37 !

42 ! Figure 9.4

40 > !

! !

! > > !

38 > ! Heritage Assets discussed in !

0 Contains OS data © Copyright and database right 2019

! 43 0 ! !

0 !

2

> ! text within the OSA - North

9 ! !

5 > !

!

! !

322000 324000 326000 328000 330000 332000 334000 336000 338000 340000 342000 344000 ! ! !

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

! !

!

! ! !

!

!

!

! !

!

! !

!

!

!

! !

!

!

! ! !

!

!

! !

!

!

!

! ! !

! !

!

! ! !

! !

!

! !

!

! !

! !

! !

! !

!

!

!

!

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

! !

! !

!

!

!

!

!

! ! ! ! Proposed Development (6865m)

Wireline drawing: Proposed Development 100 °

OS reference: 325309 E 597155 N Horizontal field of view: 90 ° (cylindrical projection) Figure: 9.6 Eye level: 222 mAOD Principal distance: 522 mm SM4543: Eskdalemuir Manse, cairn 230m W of Direction of view: 100 ° Paper size: 841 x 297 mm (half A1) Nearest turbine: 6865 m Correct printed image size: 820 x 130 mm Faw Side Windfarm © Crown copyright, All rights reserved (2018). Licence number 0100031673 Proposed Development (1431m)

Wireline drawing: Proposed Development 260 °

Proposed Development (1431m)

Wireline drawing: Proposed Development 350 °

OS reference: 337048 E 593159 N Horizontal field of view: 90 ° (cylindrical projection) Figure: 9.7 Eye level: 171 mAOD Principal distance: 522 mm SM4409: Rigfoot,settlement Direction of view: 260 ° / 350 ° Paper size: 841 x 297 mm (half A1) Nearest turbine: 1431 m Correct printed image size: 820 x 130 mm Faw Side Windfarm © Crown copyright, All rights reserved (2018). Licence number 0100031673 Proposed Development (2014m)

Wireline drawing: Proposed Development 270 °

Proposed Development (2014m)

Wireline drawing: Proposed Development 360 °

OS reference: 336310 E 590660 N Horizontal field of view: 90 ° (cylindrical projection) Figure: 9.8 Eye level: 237 mAOD Principal distance: 522 mm SM4411: Sorbie,settlement 650m NW of Direction of view: 270 ° / 360 ° Paper size: 841 x 297 mm (half A1) Nearest turbine: 2014 m Correct printed image size: 820 x 130 mm Faw Side Windfarm © Crown copyright, All rights reserved (2018). Licence number 0100031673 Proposed Development (5292m)

Wireline drawing: Proposed Development 70 °

OS reference: 327320 E 591492 N Horizontal field of view: 90 ° (cylindrical projection) Figure: 9.9 Eye level: 254 mAOD Principal distance: 522 mm SM4691: Lyneholm,settlement 500m WSW and homestead 250m SW of Direction of view: 70 ° Paper size: 841 x 297 mm (half A1) Nearest turbine: 5292 m Correct printed image size: 820 x 130 mm Faw Side Windfarm © Crown copyright, All rights reserved (2018). Licence number 0100031673 Proposed Development (3511m)

Wireline drawing: Proposed Development 62 °

OS reference: 329257 E 591246 N Horizontal field of view: 90 ° (cylindrical projection) Figure: 9.10 Eye level: 138 mAOD Principal distance: 522 mm SM646: Bogle Walls, fort Direction of view: 62 ° Paper size: 841 x 297 mm (half A1) Nearest turbine: 3511 m Correct printed image size: 820 x 130 mm Faw Side Windfarm © Crown copyright, All rights reserved (2018). Licence number 0100031673 Proposed Development (1862m)

Wireline drawing: Proposed Development 270 °

Proposed Development (1862m)

Wireline drawing: Proposed Development 360 °

OS reference: 336946 E 591639 N Horizontal field of view: 90 ° (cylindrical projection) Figure: 9.11 Eye level: 237 mAOD Principal distance: 522 mm SM4393: Brieryshaw Hill, fort and settlement Direction of view: 270 ° / 360 ° Paper size: 841 x 297 mm (half A1) Nearest turbine: 1862 m Correct printed image size: 820 x 130 mm Faw Side Windfarm © Crown copyright, All rights reserved (2018). Licence number 0100031673 Proposed Development (3429m)

Wireline drawing: Proposed Development 323 °

OS reference: 337589 E 589960 N Horizontal field of view: 90 ° (cylindrical projection) Figure: 9.12 Eye level: 258 mAOD Principal distance: 522 mm SM4401: Loch Hill, fort 745m NNE of Hoghill Direction of view: 323 ° Paper size: 841 x 297 mm (half A1) Nearest turbine: 3429 m Correct printed image size: 820 x 130 mm Faw Side Windfarm © Crown copyright, All rights reserved (2018). Licence number 0100031673 Proposed Development (3285m)

Wireline drawing: Proposed Development 323 °

OS reference: 333849 E 587843 N Horizontal field of view: 90 ° (cylindrical projection) Figure: 9.13 Eye level: 252 mAOD Principal distance: 522 mm SM12740: Craig, two forts 650m SSW of Direction of view: 4 ° Paper size: 841 x 297 mm (half A1) Nearest turbine: 3285 m Correct printed image size: 820 x 130 mm Faw Side Windfarm © Crown copyright, All rights reserved (2018). Licence number 0100031673 Proposed Development (766m)

Wireline drawing: Proposed Development 180 °

Proposed Development (766m)

Wireline drawing: Proposed Development 270 °

OS reference: 337251 E 598609 N Horizontal field of view: 90 ° (cylindrical projection) Figure: 9.14 Eye level: 346 mAOD Principal distance: 522 mm SM12750: Eweslees, watch tower 1980m NW of Direction of view: 180 ° / 270 ° / 360 ° Paper size: 841 x 297 mm (half A1) Nearest turbine: 766 m Correct printed image size: 820 x 130 mm Faw Side Windfarm © Crown copyright, All rights reserved (2018). Licence number 0100031673 Proposed Development (766m)

Langhope Rig (21.6km)

Barrel Law (19.0km)

Wireline drawing: Proposed Development 360 °

OS reference: 337251 E 598609 N Horizontal field of view: 90 ° (cylindrical projection) Figure: 9.14a Eye level: 346 mAOD Principal distance: 522 mm SM12750: Eweslees, watch tower 1980m NW of Direction of view: 180 ° / 270 ° / 360 ° Paper size: 841 x 297 mm (half A1) Nearest turbine: 766 m Correct printed image size: 820 x 130 mm Faw Side Windfarm © Crown copyright, All rights reserved (2018). Licence number 0100031673 Proposed Development (2904m)

Craig (7.9km)

Loganhead (8.2km)

Wireline drawing: Proposed Development 260 °

Proposed Development (2904m)

Wireline drawing: Proposed Development 350 °

OS reference: 338010 E 591463 N Horizontal field of view: 90 ° (cylindrical projection) Figure: 9.15 Eye level: 140 mAOD Principal distance: 522 mm LB9727: Arkleton House Direction of view: 260 ° / 350 ° Paper size: 841 x 297 mm (half A1) Nearest turbine: 2904 m Correct printed image size: 820 x 130 mm Faw Side Windfarm © Crown copyright, All rights reserved (2018). Licence number 0100031673