Supplementary Environmental Information Llandinam Windfarm
Supplementary Environmental Information
Llandinam Windfarm Repowering and Extension
CELTPOWER LTD
LLANDINAM WINDFARM REPOWERING AND EXTENSION SUPPLEMENTARY ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION
Volume I – Supplementary Environmental Information: Main Report
December 2011 Llandinam Windfarm Repowering and Extension Supplementary Environmental Information [This page has been intentionally left blank]
Table of Contents
Section ...... Page No.
1. INTRODUCTION ...... Page 1 of Chapter 1 6. LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL...... Page 1 of Chapter 6 1.1 Overview...... 1 6.1 Introduction ...... 1 1.2 Supplementary Environmental Information Structure...... 1 6.2 Conclusions of the Original ES Chapter ...... 2 1.3 Project Team...... 2 6.3 Review of Changes to Planning Policy Context...... 2 1.4 References ...... 2 6.4 Assessment Methodology and Significance Criteria...... 2 6.5 Review of Baseline Conditions ...... 2 2. ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY AND 6.6 Assessment of Design Change Effects and Mitigation Measures ...... 3 SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA ...... Page 1 of Chapter 2 6.7 Residual Effects and Conclusions of Design Changes...... 7 6.8 Cumulative Effects...... 7 2.1 Introduction...... 1 6.9 Statement of Effects...... 14 2.2 Scoping and Consultation...... 1 6.10 References...... 15 2.3 Structure of Technical Chapters ...... 3 2.4 Significance Criteria...... 3 7. ORNITHOLOGY ...... Page 1 of Chapter 7 2.5 Cumulative Effects...... 4 7.1 Introduction ...... 1 3. SITE SELECTION AND DESIGN 7.2 Conclusions of the Original ES Chapter ...... 2 7.3 Review of Changes to Planning Policy Context...... 2 EVOLUTION...... Page 1 of Chapter 3 7.4 Assessment Methodology and Significance Criteria...... 2 3.1 Introduction...... 1 7.5 Review of Baseline Conditions ...... 2 7.6 Assessment of Design Change Effects and Mitigation Measures ...... 4 3.2 Design Strategy and Design Evolution ...... 1 7.7 Residual Effects and Conclusions of Design Changes...... 8 4. PROJECT DESCRIPTION ...... Page 1 of Chapter 4 7.8 Cumulative Effects...... 8 7.9 Statement of Effects...... 8 4.1 Introduction...... 1 7.10 References...... 8 4.2 Overview of the Operational Development...... 1 4.3 Site Access...... 1 8. ECOLOGY ...... Page 1 of Chapter 8 4.4 Site Preperation and Construction...... 2 4.5 New On-Site Structures...... 2 8.1 Introduction ...... 1 4.6 References ...... 2 8.2 Conclusions of the Original ES Chapter ...... 2 8.3 Review of Changes to Planning Policy Context...... 2 5. PLANNING POLICY CONTEXT ...... Page 1 of Chapter 5 8.4 Assessment Methodology and Significance Criteria...... 2 8.5 Review of Baseline Conditions ...... 4 5.1 Introduction...... 1 8.6 Assessment of Design Change Effects and Mitigation Measures ...... 7 5.2 National Policy Statement for Energy (July 2011)...... 1 8.7 Residual Effects and Conclusions of Design Changes...... 11 5.3 The Powys Unitary Development Plan (March 2010)...... 2 8.8 Cumulative Effects...... 11 5.4 National Guidance...... 3 8.9 Statement of Effects...... 11 5.5 The Powys Interim Development Control Guidance (IDCG) ...... 4 8.10 References...... 11 5.6 Conclusions ...... 4 5.7 References ...... 4
December 2011 Llandinam Windfarm Repowering and Extension Supplementary Environmental Information Table of Contents
Table of Contents
9. TRAFFIC, ACCESS AND TRANSPORT ...... Page 1 of Chapter 9 12. GEOLOGY, HYDROLOGY AND 9.1 Introduction...... 1 HYDROGEOLOGY ...... Page 1 of Chapter 12 9.2 Conclusions of the Original ES Chapter ...... 2 12.1 Introduction ...... 1 9.3 Review of Changes to Planning Policy Context ...... 2 12.2 Conclusions of the Original ES Chapter ...... 1 9.4 Assessment Methodology and Significance Criteria ...... 2 12.3 Review of Changes to Planning Policy Context...... 1 9.5 Review of Baseline Conditions ...... 2 12.4 Assessment Methodology and Significance Criteria...... 1 9.6 Assessment of Design Change Effects and Mitigation Measures...... 3 12.5 Review of Baseline Conditions ...... 2 9.7 Residual Effects and Conclusions of Design Changes ...... 5 12.6 Assessment of Design Change Effects and Mitigation Measures ...... 2 9.8 Cumulative Effects...... 5 12.7 Residual Effects and Conclusions of Design Changes...... 3 9.9 Statement of Effects ...... 6 12.8 Cumulative Effects...... 3 9.10 References ...... 6 12.9 Statement of Effects...... 3 12.10 References...... 4 10. CULTURAL HERITAGE AND ARCHAEOLOGY ...... Page 1 of Chapter 10 13. LAND USE, RECREATION AND SOCIO- 10.1 Introduction...... 1 ECONOMICS ...... Page 1 of Chapter 13 10.2 Conclusions of the Original ES Chapter ...... 2 13.1 Introduction ...... 1 10.3 Review of Changes to Planning Policy Context ...... 2 13.2 Conclusions of the Original ES Chapter ...... 1 10.4 Assessment Methodology and Significance Criteria ...... 2 13.3 Review of Changes to Planning Policy Context...... 1 10.5 Review of Baseline Conditions ...... 2 13.4 Assessment Methodology and Significance Criteria...... 2 10.6 Assessment of Design Change Effects and Mitigation Measures...... 3 13.5 Review of Baseline Conditions ...... 2 10.7 Residual Effects and Conclusions of Design Changes ...... 8 13.6 Assessment of Design Change Effects and Mitigation Measures ...... 2 10.8 Cumulative Effects...... 9 13.7 Residual Effects and Conclusions of Design Changes...... 4 10.9 Statement of Effects ...... 9 13.8 Cumulative Effects...... 4 10.10 References ...... 9 13.9 Statement of Effects...... 4 13.10 References...... 5 11. NOISE AND VIBRATION ...... Page 1 of Chapter 11 11.1 Introduction...... 1 14. OTHER ISSUES ...... Page 1 of Chapter 14 11.2 Conclusions of the Original ES Chapter ...... 1 14.1 Introduction ...... 1 11.3 Review of Changes to Planning Policy Context ...... 1 14.2 Conclusions of the Original ES Chapter ...... 1 11.4 Assessment Methodology and Significance Criteria ...... 1 14.3 Assessment of Design Change Effects and Mitigation Measures ...... 1 11.5 Review of Baseline Conditions ...... 2 14.4 References...... 3 11.6 Assessment of Design Change Effects and Mitigation Measures...... 2 11.7 Residual Effects and Conclusions of Design Changes ...... 3 15. RESIDUAL IMPACTS AND 11.8 Cumulative Effects...... 3 11.9 Statement of Effects ...... 6 CONCLUSIONS...... Page 1 of Chapter 15 11.10 References ...... 6 15.1 Introduction ...... 1 15.2 Residual Effects...... 1
15.3 Cumulative Effects...... 1 15.4 Summary and Conclusions...... 1
December 2011 Llandinam Windfarm Repowering and Extension Supplementary Environmental Information Table of Contents Chapter 1.0 Introduction
1.0 Introduction 1.2 Supplementary Environmental Information Structure
1.1 Overview 1. This SEI comprises the following documents:
1. In May 2008 CeltPower Limited submitted an application under Section 36 (S36) of the Electricity This SEI report (Volume I).The numbering of the chapters follows the numbering used in the Act 1989 for the dismantling and removal (i.e. decommissioning) and subsequent repowering and ES for ease of reference. Chapters 1-4 of this volume set out the changes made to the extension of the existing Penrhyddlan & Llidiartywaun windfarm (hereafter referred to as Development assessed in the ES, a description of the Development now that these changes “Llandinam Windfarm”, as it is better known locally) (“the Development” as is hereafter known in have been made, and the consultation undertaken which has informed the changes. Chapter this document) . 5 updates the planning policy context. Chapters 6-14 are the technical assessment chapters which have been updated to assess the changes. Chapter 15 provides a summary of the 2. The applicant remains as CeltPower Limited, a joint partnership between ScottishPower predicted residual environmental effects. Renewables Limited and Eurus Energy UK Limited. Technical Appendices to the SEI (Volume II). This volume contains the following appendices, 3. The effect of the Development on the receiving environment was studied systematically through numbered in accordance with the technical assessment chapters to which the appendix the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process, the results of which were presented within applies: an Environmental Statement (ES) (the “original ES”) (Ref. 1-1) which accompanied the application Appendix 2-A – Consultation Responses; in May 2008. Appendix 7 4. This Supplementary Environmental Information (SEI) presents the findings of additional survey information undertaken since May 2008 and an assessment of the changes made to the plans for o Appendix 7-A – Ornithological Survey Work, Summer 2008; the Development in response to stakeholder comments. These comments have been summarised o Appendix 7-B – Research Paper: Are breeding Eurasian curlew Numenius arquata in Chapter 2: Assessment Methodology and Significance Criteria of this SEI. displaced by wind energy developments o Appendix 7-C – Collision Risk Modelling 5. This SEI should be read in conjunction with the original ES, which contains a brief description of o Appendix 7-D – Breeding Birds Protection Plan the application site and its setting within the local context. Appendix 8 6. The application site that is considered and described within the original ES has not changed, and o Appendix 8-A – National Vegetation Classification (NVC) Survey of the Llandinam the information therefore remains applicable to this SEI. The application site is presented in Figure Windfarm 1-1 of the original ES. o Appendix 8-B – Valley Mire Report 7. A full description of the changes made to the Development presented in the ES is provided within o Appendix 8-C – Bat Survey Summary Report Chapter 3: Site Selection and Design Evolution of this SEI. A full description of the Development is o Appendix 8-D – Great Crested Newt Survey of Ponds at Llandinam Wind Farm provided within Chapter 4: Project Description of this SEI. o Appendix 8-E – Llandinam Windfarm Species Protection Plan (SPP) o Appendix 8-F – Habitat Management Plan Heads of Terms 8. In summary the Development now comprises: o Appendix 8-G – Llandinam Windfarm Pinch Points Along the National Road Network The decommissioning of the existing 103 wind turbines; and Access Track o Appendix 8-H – Information to Inform a Habitat Regulations Assessment (HRA) The erection of 39 turbines on the existing windfarm footprint and extended area, inclusive of Appendix 9-A – Draft Traffic Management Plan (TMP) associated infrastructure, such as crane hardstandings, the construction of access tracks, turning areas, onsite underground cabling, an onsite substation, and two permanent power Appendix 10 performance masts; o Appendix 10-A – Archaeological Assessment Figures o Appendix 10-B – Assessment of Significance of Impact of Development on Historic Upgrading of the access road which links the A483 to the Development site; and Landscape (ASIDOHL2) Temporary infrastructure including, construction and laydown areas, power performance o Appendix 10-C – Montgomeryshire Landmap Assessment masts, and 8 borrow pits. Appendix 11 Appendix 11-A – Response to Powys County Council (PCC) comments on the ES 9. For the purposes of this SEI, a 2.3 megawatt (MW) rated wind turbine has been assumed, giving a o Chapter 11 [Noise] total installed capacity of approximately 89.7 MW; a reduction of 6.9 MW from the original ES. However for the purpose of the S36 application the installed capacity has been revised to 117 MW, o Appendix 11-B – Measured Background noise levels and Noise Predictions which will allow for the use of a 3 MW rated wind turbine should this become a viable technical and Appendix 12-A – Details of Proposed Culverts environmental option, and meet with the limits and parameters set by the original ES and this SEI. Appendix 13-A – Community Benefits – The ScottishPower Renewables Experience
Landscape and Visual figures (Volume III). This volume contains the revised landscape and visual figures which now supersede those contained within the original ES;
December 2011 Llandinam Windfarm Repowering and Extension Environmental Statement – Supplementary Environmental Information Page 1 of Chapter 1 Chapter 1.0 In t roduction
A standalone non-technical summary document (NTS) which replaces the NTS submitted alongside the original ES; and
A standalone Planning Appraisal (forming part of the S36 application) which replaces the Planning Appraisal submitted alongside the original ES.
1.3 Project Team
1. This SEI has been compiled and managed by URS and presents the results of an assessment of environmental effects undertaken by the same project team as outlined in the original ES.
1.4 References
Ref. 1-1 CeltPower Ltd (2008) Llandinam Windfarm Repowering and Extension – Environmental Statement
December 2011 Llandinam Windfarm Repowering and Extension Environmental Statement – Supplementary Environmental Information Page 2 of Chapter 1 Chapter 2.0 Assessment Methodology and Significance Criteria
2.0 Assessment Methodology and Significance Criteria Table 2-1 Summary of Stakeholder Comments to the Original ES Consultee Comment Addressed in 2.1 Introduction chapter(s) There is insufficient information to demonstrate that the proposal will not Chapter 8: Ecology; 1. This chapter of the Supplementary Environmental Information (SEI) report sets out the approach have an adverse impact on the integrity of the River Wye Special Area of Chapter 12: applied. The assessment methodology is the same as that outlined in the original Environmental Conservation. This effect should also be considered in combination Hydrology, Statement (ES), unless specifically stated within this SEI. The approach to this SEI is as follows: effects with other windfarm applications within the same catchment. Hydrogeology and Geology Each technical expert was asked to review the conclusions of the original ES in light of the There is some discrepancy between some of the bird data in the ES and Chapter 7: design changes, consider the consultation responses, confirm whether baseline conditions that included in the ES for the adjacent Llaithddu windfarm. Further Ornithology remain valid since the production of the original technical assessments in May 2008, assess information is requested on the location of breeding waders. the impact of the revised scheme, and provide comments on any changes to the cumulative The ES contains insufficient information to adequately assess the impact Chapter 8: Ecology impact assessment; of the application on bats. Further survey work is needed. Further information is required to assess the significance of the impact Chapter 8: Ecology Where the design changes have required further baseline surveys or detailed technical on mire habitat. A habitat management plan would minimise many of the assessment due to a significant and/or material change to previously identified impacts, or it potential adverse impacts on ecology and ornithology. was decided to undertake further surveys to address comments raised by stakeholders, this Recommend a ‘stand-off’ distance of 600 m during decommissioning, Chapter 7: construction and operational phases, for curlew. Ornithology has been undertaken and reported in the relevant technical chapter; and Requested information on dusk surveys of snipe to inform any Chapter 7: necessary mitigation and monitoring plans. Ornithology If no further assessment was required, the technical expert was asked to provide a narrative Requested information relating to lack of breeding bird survey in 2.5 km2 explaining their approach to the review of the previous work, a review of baseline conditions, Chapter 7: in the northeast part of the study area (within 50 0m of the Development Ornithology and a brief explanation as to why the conclusions of their section of the original ES are still Site) to inform any necessary mitigation and monitoring plans. valid. Requested flight activity surveys during breeding season for northern Chapter 7: section of the Development Site to inform any necessary mitigation and Ornithology monitoring plans. 2.2 Scoping and Consultation Clwyd Powys Impacts are predicted on the setting of the Pewgwn Mawr collection of Chapter 10: Archaeological Trust prehistoric monuments caused by two turbines, which could potentially Archaeology and 1. Table 2-1 presents a summary of the key consultation responses. It does not identify each and (CPAT) be re-located to reduce impacts. Existing tracks should also be further Cultural Heritage every comment received from stakeholders, but it does provide information on the key issues utilised where possible. raised during the consultation process. The consultation responses received following the The visual impact of new turbines on Caersws Basin and Clywedog Chapter 10: submission of the ES are included within Appendix 2-A, Volume II of this SEI, and includes Historic Landscape is detrimental, and CPAT recommends that the most Archaeology and responses from CeltPower Limited where applicable. Each technical chapter of this SEI also prominent turbines on the ridge be removed from the design. Cultural Heritage summarises the specific consultee comments, providing further details and the actions that were Department of Confirmed that a Habitats Regulation Assessment (HRA) will be needed Chapter 8: Ecology; taken in addressing these responses where applicable. Energy and Climate with respect the River Wye Special Area of Conservation (SAC). Chapter 12: Change (DECC) Hydrology, Table 2-1 Summary of Stakeholder Comments to the Original ES Hydrogeology and Geology Consultee Comment Addressed in Additional data required in relation to the proximity of the turbines and Chapter 12: chapter(s) other major construction works to watercourses and characteristics of Hydrology, British Horse Society Concerned by the impact of the Development on rights of way. BHS Chapter 13: Land the tributaries to the River Ithon. Hydrogeology and (BHS) recommend a minimum separation of 200 m between the base of a wind Use, Recreation and Geology turbine and bridleways. Socio Economics Dyfed Powys Police A more strategic solution will be required in determining successful Chapter 9: Traffic, Civil Aviation There might be a need to install aviation obstruction lighting to all / some Chapter 14: Other and Welsh Assembly delivery of loads for the project in combination with other windfarms in Transportation and Authority (CAA) of the proposed wind turbines. Issues Government (WAG) the area. Access All structures over 300 feet high will need to be charted on aviation Environment Agency The presence / absence of water vole activity need to be confirmed, and Chapter 8: Ecology mapping. Wales (EAW) the survey methodology clarified. Cadw Intervisibility of bronze age cairn groups should not be adversely Chapter 10: Clarification is required with regard to culvert design; oversized box Chapter 12: affected by the development. Micrositing of certain turbines should be Archaeology and culverts should be deployed in all cases. Fencing and other measures Hydrology, undertaken with this in mind. Cultural Heritage should be considered to enhance peat stability and prevent risks of Hydrogeology and Countryside Council The nature and precise location of road alterations along the main site Chapter 9: Traffic, erosion during culvert installation and operation. Geology access road from the A483 should be clarified. for Wales (CCW) Transportation and Health and Safety No comments on the application. - Access Executive (HSE) Further information is required about the cumulative landscape and Chapter 6: Herefordshire County Further trial runs will be required to determine all the issues of routing Chapter 9:Traffic, visual impact due to the proposed Waun Garno windfarm. Landscape and Council the abnormal loads through Herefordshire, and in particular, Eardisley. Transportation and Visual Access; The ASIDOHL should be revised to fully identify the impacts on the Chapter 10: Caersws Basin and Clywedog Valley Landscapes of Special Historic Archaeology and Interest. Cultural Heritage
December 2011 Llandinam Windfarm Repowering and Extension Environmental Statement – Supplementary Environmental Information Page 1 of Chapter 2 Chapter 2.0 Assessment Methodology and Significance Criteria
Table 2-1 Summary of Stakeholder Comments to the Original ES Table 2-1 Summary of Stakeholder Comments to the Original ES Consultee Comment Addressed in Consultee Comment Addressed in chapter(s) chapter(s) The social and political impact of the abnormal loads on Herefordshire Chapter 9:Traffic, The Ramblers The cumulative effects of the development on rights of way along with Chapter 13: Land communities has not been fully assessed. Transportation and Association the Lliathddu windfarm have not been fully assessed. Use, Recreation and Access; Chapter 13: Socio Economics Land Use, RSPB The ES does not adequately address the loss and fragmentation of Chapter 8: Ecology Recreation and important ecological receptors. The ES also needs to better demonstrate Socio Economics how the proposals are going to enhance biodiversity. Mid Wales Trunk Large deliveries might compromise the maintenance of highway safety Chapter 9: Traffic, Over 8 hectares (ha) of valley mire and flushes will be directly affected Chapter 8: Ecology Road Agency and conditions along the entire length of the proposed route. Transportation and by the development. They will also be subjected to 18,000m2 of new Montgomery Town Access track being constructed across them, along with two turbines. Council Appropriate mitigation measures need to be agreed with CCW. RSPB would like to see a redesign of the turbine / track layout taking this Chapter 4: Project Ministry of Defence No objection to the Development - into account to reduce the amount of new track on Biodiversity Action Description; Chapter Plan (BAP) habitat. MLL Telecom The re-consultation raised concerns about potential interference with an Chapter 14: Other 8: Ecology existing microwave link operated by MLL Telecom. Issues A minimum buffer zone of 30 m should be maintained around badger Chapter 8: Ecology setts, in which no works are permitted. National Grid There is the possibility that the proposed windfarm could interfere with Chapter 14: Other Wireless Llandinam / Llangurig / Llanidlise rebroadcasting links. Issues Emphasised the need for a Habitat and Species Management Plan Chapter 7: (HSMP) for breeding waders. Ornithology; Chapter NATS The Development does not conflict with NATS safeguarding criteria. - 8: Ecology Powys County Further breeding bird survey work should be undertaken prior to any Chapter 7: Snowdonia National No comment on the application given the distance between the site and - Council (PCC) decision. Need to consider further mitigation for breeding birds. Ornithology Park Authority the park boundary It is considered that 50% of the bat survey work was undertaken during Chapter 8: Ecology A licence from the Environment Divisions office will be required in order unfavourable weather conditions. Welsh Assembly Chapter 8: Ecology Government (WAG) to work around the resting or breeding areas of otters. The methodology produced by Oldham et al, (2001) should be used to Chapter 8: Ecology Fieldwork will be required during the on-site works where buffer zones assess potential for great crested newts in all standing waterbodies Chapter 10: around scheduled ancient monuments (SAMs) or historic environment within 500 m of proposed work areas. They have been recorded in Archaeology and record (HER) sites may be impacted. ponds in Radnorshire at over 400 m. With appropriate mitigation Cultural Heritage The indivisibility of bronze age cairn groups should not be adversely measures, there are unlikely to be any significant impacts however. affected. Micro-positioning of certain turbines should be undertaken to Some invertebrate survey work was undertaken during the autumn and Chapter 8: Ecology avoid indivisibility of cairn groups. CCW has requested that a limited invertebrate survey should be carried Abbeycwmhir Community Council out earlier in the year, i.e. Spring/Summer. Community Council’s As discussed in the Concerned about the inefficiency of wind energy production in relation to The ES does not mention any mitigation or precautionary measures to Planning Appraisal Chapter 8: Ecology their impact on visual amenity. avoid killing or injuring common lizards. A mitigation strategy for reptiles Kerry Community Council should be prepared and agreed with PCC. Chapter 6: Concerned about the cumulative impact of a number of schemes being Landscape and There has been no consideration given to white-clawed crayfish. Chapter 8: Ecology proposed in Powys. Visual; Planning The likelihood of the proposed development affecting any nearby Chapter 8: Ecology Concerned about the landscape and visual and health impacts of Appraisal designated sites (or species within these sites) needs to be clarified. potential overhead pylons associated with the Development The ES does not fully identify and discuss potential impacts such as Chapter 8: Ecology Concerned about the impact of abnormal load traffic through Newtown compaction of peat and changes in hydrology, particularly those which Forden with Leighton and Trelystan Community Council Chapter 9:Traffic, may result from construction of new access tracks. Concerned about the proposed route which turbine components and Transportation and The ES states that only a Stage 1 assessment of peat stability has been Chapter 8: Ecology building materials will be transported to and from the site. Access; undertaken and a Stage 2 assessment is still required. Members of the Concern with regard the placing of turbines 22-24, and the prominence Chapter 6: Further data is required on windfarm noise data against background Chapter 11: Noise Public (summary of of their positioning Landscape and levels and on potential cumulative impacts (with respect to Llaithddu and Vibration key comments) Visual; scheme). Cumulative impact of several other windfarm schemes in the local area Chapter 9:Traffic, T20 does not meet the TAN 8: Renewable Energy recommended Chapter 13: Land and the long term disruption of the local road networks over the multi- separation distance (121.2 m in this case) from a bridleway, and 11 Use, Recreation and Transportation and year and overlapping project construction phases Access; turbines do not meet the British Horse Society recommendation of 200 Socio Economics m The routing of the abnormal loads (and construction vehicles) through Chapter 9:Traffic, A carbon assessment should be undertaken. Chapter 14: Other Montgomery is of concern to residents Transportation and Issues Access; A habitat management plan (HMP) will be required, and developed Chapter 8: Ecology The village of Llaithddu is subject to 4 nearby proposed windfarm - through consultation with CCW, PCC, Montgomeryshire Wildlife Trust schemes (of which Llandinam is one). There is concern from the and other relevant organisations. residents about the possibility that all schemes could be approved. PCC appointed Capita Symonds to prepare an appraisal of the Chapter 6: The turbines in the north of the development area are very close to Chapter 13: Land Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment contained within the original Landscape and public bridleways, and there is concern among local users that the Use, Recreation and ES. Visual development will compromise this amenity. Socio Economics
December 2011 Llandinam Windfarm Repowering and Extension Environmental Statement – Supplementary Environmental Information Page 2 of Chapter 2 Chapter 2.0 Assessment Methodology and Significance Criteria
Table 2-1 Summary of Stakeholder Comments to the Original ES Table 2-2 Changes in Baseline Conditions considered within this SEI Consultee Comment Addressed in Chapter Changes in Baseline Condition chapter(s) No material changes to this baseline have occurred, apart from the cumulative Clarification is sought on the payment of an annual community fund per Chapter 13: Land assessment as discussed in section 2.5 of this Chapter. megawatt of installed capacity in accordance with TAN 8. Chapter 6: Use, Recreation and There is also a notable addition in terms of landscape characterisation through the Landscape and Socio Economics publication of the Powys Landscape Character Assessment. Visual Concerned about the environmental impacts of the project on the River Chapter 12: The chapter now considers the effect of accommodation works along the transport Ithon and River Wye Tributaries Hydrology, route to enable abnormal loads deliveries to reach the application site. Hydrogeology and Additional surveys were conducted in 2008, including: Geology Red Kite The benefits associated with the CO2 savings are queried in light of the Chapter 14: Other Chapter 7 : Peregrines backup power generation that will be needed as well as the CO2 Issues Ornithology Curlew and Snipe emissions associated with the construction phase (e.g. peat Kestrels disturbance, cement production, HGV movements etc.) The effect of accommodation works along the transport route is considered. Noise from the existing turbines is noticeable at nearby properties and Chapter 11: Noise A number of additional studies and reports have been completed to supplement the there is concern that larger models will be worse (despite and Vibration modernisation). understanding of baseline conditions presented in the original ES. Additional surveys include: The proposed windfarm (larger turbines over a larger area) may have a Chapter 13: Land Further National Vegetation Classification (NVC) Survey; detrimental impact to tourism and visitors to the Radnorshire Hills, Use, Recreation and Caersws Basin and Severn Valley. Socio Economics Chapter 8: Valley Mire Survey; Ecology Bat Surveys; Great Crested Newt Survey; The access track and abnormal loads delivery route have been surveyed; 2.3 Structure of Technical Chapters Designated sites around the windfarm footprint have been further considered; Further information on White-clawed Crayfish surveys. 1. For ease of reading, a standard approach has been taken to the structure of each technical New traffic count surveys were commissioned in November 2010 in order to provide a chapter in this SEI report, which is also consistent with the original ES. Chapter 6: Landscape and more accurate assessment of baseline conditions. Visual however, is structured in a slightly different manner so as to consider the cumulative effects Chapter 9: Traffic, It is now preferred that the abnormal loads will arrive to the Site via Newport Docks within the main body of text. The typical structure is as follows: Access and (from the south) rather than Ellesmere Port Harbour (from the north) as discussed in Transport the original ES. Abnormal route studies undertaken have been undertaken on the Conclusions of the Original ES Chapter; revised route, including consideration of noise, vibration and social-economic effects of the construction traffic. Review of Planning Policy Context; The Historical Landscape aspect for LANDMAP has been completed for the Montgomeryshire region since the submission of the ES. Assessment Methodology and Significance Criteria; Other changes to baseline conditions include: Chapter 10: Eight additional archaeological sites identified along the proposed main site Cultural Heritage Review of Baseline Conditions; access route, which links the site to the A483; The Giants Grave Short Dyke has been considered for statutory protection as part Assessment of Design Change Effects and Mitigation Measures; of the Cadw funded Short Dykes project undertaken by CPAT. Further information became available on the Llaithddu windfarm development scheme, Residual Effects and Conclusions of Design Changes; which provided a better understanding of the potential cumulative impacts at nearby Chapter 11: Noise properties. Cumulative Effects; and The revised assessment also considers more up to date data (provided by the manufacturer) for the candidate turbine (Siemens 2.3MW VS82m). Statement of Effects. Additional peat probing was carried out at key areas across the site to further confirm peat depths, and to inform any revisions to turbine locations, and internal track routes, 2.4 Summary of Changes to Baseline Conditions and Additional Work in response to comments from CCW. Chapter 12: The revised peat depth plan has provided a more refined picture of the peat depth 1. Table 2-2 presents a summary of the changes to baseline conditions and supplementary Geology, variance across the site. information that has been gathered as part of this SEI since the submission of the original ES in Hydrology and Further, the River Severn River Basin Management Plan (RBMP) has been published May 2008. Hydrogeology since the time of submission of the original ES. The RBMP presents up-to-date assessments of water quality, and assesses them in the context of the Water Framework Directive, and this information has been captured in the baseline conditions assessment. Chapter 13: Land The baseline conditions assessments have also been supplemented by reference to Use, Recreation new studies and information relating to the economic and social benefits of renewable and Socio energy. Economics
December 2011 Llandinam Windfarm Repowering and Extension Environmental Statement – Supplementary Environmental Information Page 3 of Chapter 2 Chapter 2.0 Assessment Methodology and Significance Criteria
Table 2-2 Changes in Baseline Conditions considered within this SEI Table 2-3 – Updated Cumulative Windfarms Number of Chapter Changes in Baseline Condition Windfarm Description Location turbines Reconsultation has taken place with the key radar, aviation and telecommunications in ES) providers (as appropriate). Chapter 14: Other Application The carbon balance assessment has been updated in line with new guidance from Waun Garno 12 km to northwest 11 Issues (not previously included in ES) Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) that has emerged since the submission of the original ES. 2. The proposed Waun Garno Windfarm comprises of 11 turbines to be erected on a site 0.6 km 2. Chapter 3: Site Selection and Design Evolution of this SEI details the modifications to the design southeast of the existing Carno windfarm, approximately 11.5 km northwest of the Development. layout of the Development which have been made since the submission of the original ES. The The location of the Waun Garno windfarm and other cumulative schemes is shown in Figure S2-1 technical assessments presented in Chapters 6 – 14 of this SEI discuss the potential of this report. This figure replaces Figure 2-1 of the original ES. environmental impacts in light of the modifications to the design. 3. Further information available within the Llaithddu Windfarm ES, which became available after the 2.5 Cumulative Effects submission of the original ES, has also been considered as part the technical assessments within this SEI. 1. Table 2-3 presents the cumulative sites considered as part of this SEI, and replaces Table 2-3 of the original ES. It includes for a new site Warn Garno windfarm which was not previously assessed at the request of CCW and because it was lodged as a planning application prior to our own in April 2008. The table also updates the status of a number of these sites, such as Tirgwynt which has now obtained planning permission, and Pentre Tump which has been refused planning permission, and it is thought the developers plan to submit a new planning application.
Table 2-3 – Updated Cumulative Windfarms Number of Windfarm Description Location turbines Llandinam Operational Existing Site 103 Operational and Consented Windfarms Braich Ddu Operational 57 km to north 3 Bryn Titli Operational 8 km to southwest 22 Carno A + B Operational 13 km to northwest 56 Cefn Croes Operational 17 km to west southwest 39 Cemmaes Operational 25 km to northwest 18 Llangwyryfon Repower Operational 39 km to west southwest 11 Mynydd Clogau Operational 12 km to north 17 Mynydd Gorddu Operational 34 km to west 19 Rheidol Operational 28 km to west 8 Operational ( Carno Extension previously included 13 km to northwest 12 as Consented in ES) Consented Tirgwynt (previously included as 17km to north northwest 22 Application in ES) Windfarms (Planning Applications Submitted) Cemmaes 3 Application 29 km to northwest 12 Llanbadarn Fynydd Application 6km to east 17 Mynydd Clogau Extension Application 12 km to north 19 Mynydd Waun Fawr Application 21 km to north 16 Refused Pentre Tump (previously included as 27 km to southeast 3 Application in ES) Application Garreg Lwyd Hill (previously included as Scoping 10 km to east southeast 23 in ES) Application Llaithddu 3 km to southeast 29 (previously included as Scoping
December 2011 Llandinam Windfarm Repowering and Extension Environmental Statement – Supplementary Environmental Information Page 4 of Chapter 2 Braich Ddu
60km
50km Key Existing Llandinam Windfarm
Operational Windfarm 40km Operational Windfarm (previously included as a Consented scheme in the original ES)
30km Consented Windfarm (previously Cemmaes 3 included as Application Submitted in Mynydd Waun Fawr the original ES) Cemmaes Application Submitted Tirgwynt 20km Application Submitted Mynydd Clogau Extension Mynydd Clogau (previously included as Scoping Carno Extension stage in the original ES)
Waun Garno 10km Carno A and B Application Submitted (not previously included in ES) 5km Application Refused (previously Mynydd Gorddu Existing Llandinam Windfarm included as Application Submitted in the original ES) Llanbadarn Fynydd Distance Buffers from the Rheidol Application Site Lliathddu Windfarm Garreg Lwyd Hill Cefn Croes England / Wales Border
Bryn Titli
Llangwyrfon Repower
Pentre Tump Hill 0 5 10 15 20 25
Kilometres
CUMULATIVE WINDFARM DEVELOPMENTS
FIGURE S2-1
LLANDINAM WINDFARM REPOWERING & EXTENSION SUPPLEMENTARY ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION REPORT Contains Ordnance Survey Data © Crown Copyright and Database Right 2011 [This page has been intentionally left blank] Chapter 3.0 Site Selection and Design Evolution
3.0 Site Selection and Design Evolution in the original ES). T41 and T36 were moved southwards into a position adjacent to existing access track as a result of the comments made by CPAT/Cadw in relation to 3.1 Introduction the Pewgwyn Mawr Collection of scheduled prehistoric monuments. This movement also has benefits from an ecological perspective; 1. This Chapter of the Supplementary Environmental Information (SEI) describes the rational for amending the design layout of the proposed Llandinam Windfarm (“the Development”) since the There has been a slight relocation of turbines T3, T4, T7 and T8 due to re- submission of the application and accompanying Environmental Statement (ES) in May 2008 (the consultation with MLL Telecom, whose communication links would have been original ES). These design changes respond to stakeholder consultation following submission of potentially adversely affected by the original wind turbine layout (this was not raised the S36 application. as an issue by MLL Telecom during consultations prior to the submission of the original application). 3.2 Design Strategy and Design Evolution Amendment to the location of the electrical substation by moving it approximately 35 m north of 1. The original ES contained a design layout for the Development which had evolved during the its position in the original ES, bringing it closer to the existing control building and to locate it at Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process in response to a number of environmental the field boundary, and downsizing of the substation as discussed in Chapter 4: Project constraints at the site and technical factors such as the location of the layout of the existing access Description of this SEI; tracks. Relocation of the two permanent meteorological masts to take account of the proposed 2. The principal areas of modification to the design are as follows: changes to the wind turbines mentioned above;
Removal of three wind turbines (T22-T24) in the northwest of the site. Although this represents The access track layout has been revised taking into account the further peat depth survey a reduction in the energy generating capacity of the Development, it is a direct response to information. Construction of new track has reduced from 19km to 11.6km. This minimises comments from Powys County Council (PCC), Clwyd-Powys Archaeological Trust (CPAT) and impacts on ecological and hydrological receptors such as deep peat and valley mire habitat. members of the public to reduce the level of visual impact on receptors to the north of the site. The modifications have also significantly reduced the direct impact on the buffer zones of In particular PCC’s landscape and visual consultants (Capita Symonds) noted that the layout in several archaeological receptors. Key changes include the following: the original ES causes an unacceptable impact on the rim of low hills and ridges, including the Waun Ddubarthog ridge to the north of the Site. Capita Symonds requested that the most The original section of track between T10 and T11 has been removed and these turbines prominent wind turbines in the north of the Site to be omitted or relocated further south to are now accessed by a track from the west, which now skirts along the edge of a block of reduce their visual impact. Their removal is also in response to comments from CPAT, who marshy grassland/valley mire next to semi improved grassland; also recommended the removal of the most prominent turbines in the north of the Site due to the predicted impact these turbines had on the Caersws Basin Historical Landscape. The The original track between T31 and T32 formerly cut through valley mire and blanket bog removal of these three turbines has significantly reduced the indirect effect on all high value habitats. This section now avoids peatland and instead passes through improved and sites found between the 3 kilometre (km) to 10 km band, especially those located in the marshy grasslands; and northern regions. The removal of these same turbines has also significantly decreased the indirect impacts on the conservation areas of the towns of Llandinam and Llanidloes, to a level The original track between T33 and T34 has been replaced with a track from the west from where the visibility of turbines would be minor, or virtually negligible given screening from T36 to T34. This also reduces the impact on peatland and marshy habitat. treecover and the urban environment; 3. Locations for turning areas for the abnormal loads, and crane pads are now included. The crane pads are situated adjacent to each proposed wind turbine and are approximately 52 m by 40 m in Relocation of twelve turbines (T3, T4, T7, T8, T13, T14, T18, T25, T30, T36, 40, and 41) 2 compared to the original ES layout, as follows: size (a total of approximately 2,080 m ). The original ES did not include specific locations for turning areas and crane pads; these are now fully considered as part of this SEI. The final layout As a result of the further peat surveys undertaken, T13 has been moved slightly west assessed as part of this SEI (iteration 5 presented in Figure S3-1) represents the outcome of to maximise its position from a gully, and to avoid an area of slightly deeper peat and balancing environmental and technical considerations in response to post application consultee valley mire (the gully is also thought to be in potential use by foraging bats). T14 and comments. Figure S3-2 has also been provided to better illustrate the changes since Iteration 4, T18 were also moved in order to reduce impacts on valley mire habitat. T18 has been which was the layout considered as part of the ES, and clearly demonstrates the better utilisation repositioned in order to utilise an area of existing road. T31 and T32 have not been of existing tracks. moved and remain in a localised area of species-poor valley mire; although the potential for relocation of these turbines was investigated they are constrained by 4. Table 3-1 presents a summary of the key design iterations (1-5) for the layout of the local topographic conditions and technical requirements to achieve particular spacing Development’s turbines and associated infrastructure. Design iterations 1-4 were presented in the between turbines; original ES in Figures 3-1, 3-2, 3-3, and 3-4 respectively. Figure S3-1 of this SEI illustrates iteration 5.
T25 has been moved south, and T18 has been moved north, to maximise the use of 5. A detailed description of the Development is presented in Chapter 4: Project Description of this existing access track in both instances; SEI.
T30 and T40 have been moved so that they are now 43m and 58m respectively from the line of intervisibility referred to within the CPAT/Cadw response (and T38 remains 50m from the line of intervisibility as the location has not changed from that presented
December 2011 Llandinam Windfarm Repowering and Extension Environmental Statement - Supplementary Environmental Information Page 1 of Chapter 3 Chapter 3.0 Site Selection and Design Evolution
Table 3-1 Summary of Iterations to Layout Figure S3-1 Iteration 5, the final proposed layout of turbines and site infrastructure following amendments to the design after stakeholder consultation comments on the original ES. Iteration Number Purpose of Change in Layout Stage of Process Development of Stages Turbines Iteration 1 – 50 A provisional area was defined for the - Scoping Development and presented in the Scoping Report (ES Report Figure 3-1) Iteration 2 – 50 50 turbines positioned within the Scoping Report Optimising wind yield Wind Yield study area based solely on maximising wind yield within the site area Assessment (ES Figure 3- 2) Iteration 3 – 37 Site boundary amended due to land Constraints map applied Constraints unavailability, and the sensitivities surrounding to turbines, tracks, borrow assessment the MoD low fly zone. Incorporation of pits, substation, and (ES Figure 3- environmental constraints, including Ecological, compounds 2) Visual, Ornithological, and Noise constraints, Hydrological, Geological, Ecological, Aviation, and Telecommunications. Iteration 4 – 42 Layout optimisation following field surveys and Field walking to verify Final Iteration incorporation of new site tracks. Tracks revised to constraints and final presented in take into account Ecological and Hydrological modifications. the original constraints, and borrow pits relocated due to ES (ES visual constraints. Substation and contractor Figure 3-3) compound areas added.
Iteration 5 – 39 Layout was revised following stakeholder Further modifications in Post consultation process on the original ES. Key response to stakeholder application changes are described in this Chapter of the SEI, comments and to modifications but in summary, comprise: minimise potential (Figure S3-1) 3 turbines being removed environmental impacts. 12 turbines and both meteorological masts being relocated Adjustment to the location and a reduction in the overall footprint of the proposed substation Adjustments to the access track to further utilise existing tracks (and provision of abnormal load turning areas).
December 2011 Llandinam Windfarm Repowering and Extension Environmental Statement - Supplementary Environmental Information Page 2 of Chapter 3 T22
T21
T23 T15 Key T20 T14 Application Site Boundary T24 T7 Proposed Turbine Location (Revised as per design iteration 5) T19 Proposed Turbine Location (as presented T13 in the Original ES) T6 Removed Turbines
T25 Meteorological Mast Location (as presented in T18 the original ES) T12 T5 Revised Meteorological Mast Location Revised Track Layout as Presented in SEI T26 T11 Original ES / Planning Application Track Layout T17 T4 Proposed Substation (Revised as per design iteration 5) Proposed Substation (as presented in T16 the original ES) T10 T3 Borrow Pit Location (unchanged from locations T1 presented in the original ES)
T27 T9 T2
T8 T28 T29
T30 T37
T31
T38 0 250 500 1,000 1,500
T39 T32 Metres Approximate Scale1:25,000 at A3 T40
T35 MODIFICATIONS TO PROPOSED ACCESS TRACKS, TURBINE LOCATIONS AND MET MAST LOCATIONS AFTER T33 T41 POST APPLICATION CONSULTATION PROCESS Figure S3-2 T36
T34 T42 LLANDINAM WINDFARM REPOWERING & EXTENSION SUPPLEMENTARY ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION REPORT Based upon an Ordnance Survey map with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office. Crown Copyright reserved License No. AL 100017812 [This page has been intentionally left blank] Chapter 4.0 Project Description
4.0 Project Description 4.3 Site Access
4.1 Introduction 4.3.1 Construction Access to the Site
1. This Chapter of the Supplementary Environmental Information (SEI) provides an amended 1. A further route for the transportation of wind turbine components has been identified and considered as description of the Llandinam Windfarm Development (“the Development) which supersedes part of this SEI. The details of which are discussed in Chapter 9: Traffic, Access and Transport of this Section 4.2 of Chapter 4: Project Description of the original Llandinam Windfarm SEI and illustrated in Appendix 9-A which contains a draft Traffic Management Plan (TMP) for this route. Environmental Statement (ES) (Ref. 4-1). The remaining sections of this Chapter should be This route assumes that turbine components will be delivered to Newport Harbour and from there read in conjunction with Chapter 4 of the ES. transported by road along the following route (the Southern Transport Route):
4.2 Overview of the Development Leave Newport Docks on the A4042 west-bound, join the A48 and then M4 motorway at Junction 28;
1. The main changes to the Development are set out in Chapter 3: Site Selection and Design Exit the M4 motorway and join the A470 north-bound past Pontypridd and Merthyr Tydfil to the Evolution of this SEI. Figure S4-1 shows the final design layout of the Development which outskirts of Brecon; supersedes Figure 4-1 of the original ES, and contains the revised turbine grid coordinates as well as the revised grid coordinates for the permanent meteorological masts and Where the A470 meets the A40 outside of Brecon, take the A40 Brecon Bypass east-bound and then substation location. rejoin the A470 towards Bronllys;
2. The project comprises the following main components: Where the A470 meets the A483, follow the latter past Bronllys, Three Cocks, Glasbury and Clyro to Willersly; Dismantling (decommissioning) of the existing site Take the A411 north-bound through Eardisly to Kington; - Dismantling of the existing 103 wind turbines and associated infrastructure; - Upgrading of a number of the existing hardstandings and the existing tracks to allow On the outskirts of Kington, where the A411 meets the A44, take the latter west-bound to for crane access during dismantling; Crossgates; Repowering and Extension At Crossgates, where the A44 meets the A483, take the A483 north-bound towards Newtown and - Erection of 39 wind turbines; follow for approximately 15.5 miles; and - Crane hardstandings; - Upgrading and construction of on-site access tracks, turning areas, and associated Exit the A483 to the left on the unclassified road and then on to a private access road that leads to watercourse crossings; the site. - Upgrading of the site access from the A483 road; - An on-site substation; 4.3.2 Land Take along the Route for Delivery of the Wind Turbine Components - Two Permanent Power Performance Assessment (PPA) masts; and - On-site underground cabling. 1. Comments on the ES made by the Countryside Council for Wales (CCW) highlighted the requirement to consider the nature and potential impact of any modifications that may be required along the route
considered for the delivery of the wind turbine components, as well as the modifications required to the 3. In addition to the above infrastructure components, construction will involve: site access road between the A483 and the Development Site. This SEI therefore considers the potential
land take along this route. The potential impacts of this land take are discussed in the applicable Three temporary construction compound and laydown areas; technical assessment chapters, in particular Chapter 6: Landscape and Visual, Chapter 7: Ornithology and Chapter 8: Ecology of this SEI as well as Appendices 8-G and 9-A, Volume II of this SEI. Temporary Power Performance Assessment (PPA) masts; and 2. Figure S4-2 also presents an indicative plan showing the potential area of land take along the route from Eight Borrow Pits. the A483 to the Site that will be required in order to deliver the wind turbine components to the Development Site (the candidate turbine). The total amount of land take required is approximately 1.0 ha 4. As per Section 4.6.1 of the original ES, the proposed turbines have an over all height to along the 4.6 km access road. blade tip of 121.2m, except turbines T21, T25, T26, T29, T30 and T42 which will have a
reduced height to blade tip of 111.2 m in order to minimise visual impacts, as stated in the 3. Figure S4-3 shows the indicative swept path area and required land take around the junction between original ES, the A483 and the site access road.
5. The total land-take for the Development infrastructure remains at approximately 30.0 hectares (ha), which is 2.3% of the total site area of approximately 1,307 ha, as described in 4.3.3 Site Tracks for the Repowering and Extension
the original ES. 1. The layout of the internal access tracks have been altered from the design presented in the original ES,
in response to consultee comments, and the modifications are discussed in Chapter 3: Site Selection
and Design Evolution of this SEI.
December 2011 Llandinam Windfarm Repowering and Extension Environmental Statement – Supplementary Environmental Information Page 1 of Chapter 4 Chapter 4.0 Project Description
2. The turning areas will allow the abnormal load delivery vehicles (both loaded and unloaded) with places 2. The revised layout comprises approximately 24.3 km of tracks to provide access to all to park and turn the direction of vehicle travel in order to minimise total abnormal load vehicle aspects of the Development during construction and operation of the windfarm, of which: movements around the site during the construction phase.
12.7 km is provided by upgrading the existing tracks onsite (previously only 4 km of 3. Each of the proposed wind turbines will require an area of hardstanding in order that cranes and existing tracks were being reused); and associated machinery will be able to construct and erect the wind turbines (also referred to in this SEI as “crane pads”). They will also serve as a platform for maintenance that may required, from routine 11.6 km will be new tracks (including a total of approximately 1.4 km associated with the servicing to any replacement of the wind turbine components. turning areas). This is a noticeable reduction on the 19 km of new tracks proposed for the design layout in the original ES. 4. The hardstanding will be approximately 52 m by 40 m and situated adjacent to each of the proposed wind turbines as illustrated in Figure S4-1. 3. Figure S3-2 of this SEI provides a comparison of the original and amended track layout.
4. Figure S12-1 of this SEI (which replaces Figure 4-4 of the ES) presents a revised peat depth 4.6 References plan encompassing additional peat depth sampling undertaken across the Development Site (as discussed in Chapter 12: Hydrology, Geology and Hydrogeology of this SEI). Ref. 4-1 CeltPower (2008) Llandinam Windfarm Repowering and Extension Environmental Statement
5. Further information on water crossings is also provided within Chapter 12: Hydrology, Geology and Hydrogeology of this SEI and specifically Appendix 12-A, Volume II of this SEI. A draft Environmental Management and Pollution Prevention Plan (EMPPP) is also provided within Appendix 8-H, Volume II of this SEI.
4.4 Site Preparation and Construction
1. The description provided for site preparation and construction in the original ES remains valid, although it is now assumed for the purposes of this assessment that the Development will begin operation in the summer of 2014 as opposed to 2012, as stated in the original ES.
2. The Development has already secured a connection to the local distribution network and therefore can be delivered in advance of the other developments in the region, which are dependant on major infrastructure upgrades to the grid network before they can supply electricity.
4.5 New On-Site Structures
4.5.1 Substation
1. The Development will continue to use the existing Main Office and Control Building, as well as an additional Office Building. A new electrical substation will also be required, located as shown on Figure S4-1, approximately 35 m north of its position shown in the original ES. The new position is closer to the existing office and buildings.
2. The substation also has a revised footprint of approximately 84 m by 56 m, compared with 35 m by 120 m in the original ES.
3. Indicative plans of the substation compound are presented in Figure S4-4 which supplements the information presented in Figure 4-7 of the original ES.
4.5.2 Crane Hardstandings and Turning Areas
1. Further to the layout presented in Figure 4-1 of the ES, indicative turning areas needed for the delivery of the wind turbine components and indicative areas for crane hardstandings have now been included within Figure S4-1 of this SEI, and are now considered throughout the technical assessments within this SEI. Figure S4-1 replaces Figure 4-1 of the ES.
December 2011 Llandinam Windfarm Repowering and Extension Environmental Statement – Supplementary Environmental Information Page 2 of Chapter 4 T21
T15
T20 T14 Met Mast 1 Key T7 Proposed Turbine Location
T19 Proposed Meteorological Mast T13 T6 New Track Required Existing Track to be Utilised T25 T18 Turning Area T12 T5 Borrow Pits
T26 Contractor Compound T11 BP-C T17 Laydown Area T4 Substation BP-D Crane Hardstanding Areas T16 T10 T3 Application Site Boundary
T1 Existing Overhead Power Lines (Approximate) Turbine Centre Coordinates Turbine ID Easting Northing 1 304785 283794 T27 T9 BP-B BP-A 2 304481 283439 T2 3 304498 283929 4 304548 284326 5 304423 284763 6 304386 285159 HV Line 7 304698 285542 8 304385 283015 T8 9 304133 283523 T28 10 304087 283964 T29 11 304018 284481 12 304025 284798 13 304015 285209 14 304274 285670 15 304632 285925 T30 16 303664 284023 17 303631 284397 T37 18 303675 284904 19 303746 285339 T31 20 303895 285761 21 304186 286213 T38 25 303206 284948 26 303067 284540 27 303755 283548 T39 28 302723 282965 0 250 500 1,000 1,500 T32 29 302389 282877 30 302354 282512 Metres T40 31 302929 282252 32 303053 281850 Approximate Scale1:25,000 at A3 T35 33 302929 281277 34 302644 280879 35 302696 281512 36 302491 281086 BP-G T33 37 302671 282408 PROPOSED TURBINE LOCATIONS, MET MAST T41 38 302272 282124 LOCATIONS, BORROW PITS, COMPOUND AREAS ,CRANE BP-H T36 39 302706 281882 HARD STANDING AREAS AND ACCESS TRACKS 40 302282 281665 Figure S4-1 Met Mast 2 41 302182 281210 T34 42 302132 280837 T42 Meteorological Masts LLANDINAM WINDFARM REPOWERING & ID Easting Northing 1 303477 285466 EXTENSION SUPPLEMENTARY ENVIRONMENTAL Based upon an Ordnance Survey map with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office. Crown 2 301957 280950 INFORMATION REPORT 2 Area = 92m Area = 2m2
Area = 286m2 2 Area = 491m Area = 668m2
Area = 75m2 Area = 262m2 Area = 137m2
2 Area = 6m2 Area = 123m
Area = 72m2 Area = 4m2 Area = 39m2
2 Area = 164m2 Area = 280m
Area = 51m2 Inset 1 2 2 Area = 6m Area = 2m 2 Area = 93m 2 Area = 239m
Area = 69m2
2 Inset 2 Area = 67m Area = 120m2 2 Area = 182m2 Area = 186m Area = 3m2 Area = 312m2
Area = 2313m2 Area = 100m2 Area = 556m2
Area = 26m2 Area = 106m2 Key Area = 82m2 Inset 1 Application Site Boundary
Areas of Potential Landtake
Area = 119m2
Area = 210m2
Area = 100m2 Area = 270m2 Area = 90m2
2 Area = 76m2 Area = 44m
Area = 391m2
050 100 200 300 400 Area = 579m2 Metres
Area = 738m2 INDICATIVE AREAS OF LAND TAKE ALONG THE ACCESS TRACK
Area = 210m2 FIGURE S4-2
Area = 6m2 LLANDINAM WINDFARM REPOWERING & EXTENSION SUPPLEMENTARY ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION REPORT Inset 2 A483 to Newtown
Area = 5.9 m2
Key
Vehicle Load Oversail 2 Area = 284.5m Outline of Wheel Tracks Indicative areas of Potential Landtake Area = 186.3 m2
0 5 10 15 20 25
Metres
Vesta V90 44m Blade Overhang INDICATIVE SWEPT PATHS AND AREA OF LAND TAKE AT THE JUNCTION BETWEEN THE ACCESS TRACK AND THE A483
FIGURE S4-3
LLANDINAM WINDFARM REPOWERING & EXTENSION SUPPLEMENTARY ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION REPORT CeltPower Limited.
NOT TO SCALE 18500
INDICATIVE SUB-STATION & CONTROL BUILDING COMPOUND LAYOUT
FIGURE S4-4 TYPICAL SECTION THROUGH BUILDING
6000 SHOWS MAXIMUM HEIGHT AND WIDTH PARAMETERS LLANDINAM WINDFARM REPOWERING & EXTENSION SUPPLEME NTARY ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION REPORT Chapter 5.0 Planning Policy Context
5.0 Planning Policy Context 5.2 National Policy Statement for Energy (July 2011)
5.1 Introduction 1. The Planning Act 2008 required the preparation of the National Policy Statements (NPSs) for Energy to speed up the process of determining proposals for energy infrastructure, including 1. This chapter of the Supplementary Environmental Information (SEI) provides an assessment of the proposals for electricity generation larger than 50 MW (onshore). This has been drafted and planning policy framework within which the decommissioning of the existing Llandinam windfarm consulted on for some time but was eventually approved by Parliament in its final form on 19th and proposed repowering and extension scheme (the “Development”) will be considered. In July 2011. This is stated as being the principal point of reference for determining applications for particular it outlines changes to the relevant planning policy framework since the submission of the energy infrastructure proposals made to the Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC) (or its original Environmental Statement (ES) and implications of the amended proposals (if any) from a successor). Whilst the application for consent for the Development was made under Section 36 of planning perspective. This following changes are considered: the Electricity Act, the Development will be determined by the Energy Minister within the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) who will have regard to the NPSs. As such, The adoption and consolidation of the Powys Unitary Development Plan adopted in March these documents are still an important material consideration for this Development. 2010; The publication of Edition 4 of Planning Policy Wales in March 2011; and 2. With respect to the Development, NPS EN-1 (the Overarching Statement) (Ref. 5-4) and NPS EN- 3 (Renewable Energy Infrastructure) (Ref. 5-5) are relevant. Whilst reference is continually made The final National Policy Statement for Energy published in July 2011. to the IPC in these documents as being the determining authority, this is not the case for the Development (which will be determined by DECC). Nonetheless, it is considered that the 2. This chapter has been prepared by Albro Planning & Environmental. principles set out in EN-1 and EN-2 (and responsibilities of the IPC) would still be followed by DECC in the case of the Development. 5.1.1 Development Plan Framework 3. EN-1 sets out the overarching energy statement and commences by stating that applications for 1. The application for the Development will be determined under Section 36 of the Electricity Act energy infrastructure must be decided in accordance with the relevant NPSs unless to do so 1989 because the generating capacity exceeds 50 megawatts (MW). In this respect, deemed would, among other things, be in breach of UK international obligations, unlawful or result in planning permission will be granted under Section 90(2) of the Town and Country Planning Act adverse impacts outweighing the benefits. The NPS reflects the Coalition Programme for 1990. Government and the Annual Energy Statement published in July 2010 which outlines the Government commitment to cutting greenhouse gas emissions by at least 80% by 2050, delivering 2. Despite the fact that the application is being made under Section 36 of the Electricity Act, the secure energy on the way to a low carbon future and driving ambitious action on climate change. provisions of the development plan must be taken into consideration in determining such an application. 4. Part 3 of EN-1 considers the need for nationally significant energy projects and commences by setting out the principles on which decisions for applications for consent will be made. This states 3. The Powys Unitary Development Plan (UDP) was adopted in March 2010, thereby superseding all that the UK needs all types of energy infrastructure in order to achieve energy security and former development plan policies. This review draws on the following policy documentation dramatically reduce greenhouse gas emissions. This form of development should be assessed on relevant to the application: the basis that the Government has demonstrated a need and that the scale and urgency as described in Part 3. Moreover, substantial weight should be given to the contribution which Planning Policy Wales Edition 4 (March 2011) (Ref. 5-1); projects would make towards satisfying this need. With regard to renewable energy it is stated that this needs to be increased dramatically in order to diversify and decarbonise electricity Technical Advice Note 8 (TAN 8) – Planning for Renewable Energy (July 2005); generation. In the short to medium term, much of this will come from onshore and offshore wind with the aim of installing about 33 gigawatt (GW) of new renewable energy capacity in order to Powys Unitary Development Plan Written Statement (March 2010) (Ref. 5-2); meet European Union commitments on renewable energy with further ambitions to move to 30% (of total energy demand) renewable capacity and 40% renewable electricity by 2030. In order to Interim Development Control Guidance - Onshore Windfarm Developments – Consultation achieve this and to largely decarbonise the power sector by 2030, the need to bring forward nd Draft (Approved for development control 22 April 2008) (Ref. 5-3); renewable electricity generation projects is stated as being urgent.
4. Those documents released or amended since May 2008 are discussed later in this chapter. 5. Part 4 of EN-1 lays out the assessment principles that will be adopted. Given the urgency for energy infrastructure including renewable energy, the decision maker will start with the 5. Emerging plans, in the form of Draft Local Development Plans are also important material presumption in favour of granting consent for such applications. In weighing adverse impacts considerations. Paragraph 3.5.1 of Planning Policy Wales advises that the weight to be attached to against benefits, account will be taken of the benefits of meeting the need for energy infrastructure, development plans which are going through the process towards adoption depends on the stage of job creation, any long-term or wider benefits, the potential adverse impacts, including any long- preparation and that it will increase as successive stages are reached. Moreover, if there are no term cumulative impacts as well as any measures to avoid such impacts. The decision maker may objections to draft policies, then considerable weight can be attached to those policies because of also take into consideration the relevant development plan documents, but where there is any the strong possibility that they will be adopted. conflict between the NPSs and the development plan, the NPSs will prevail. It is in this particular area that the main differences between the Planning Act and Electricity Act decision making 6. In the case of Powys, the Council recently prepared a Local Development Plan (LDP) which was processes arise; for Section 36 applications there is a duty on the decision maker to have regard nd agreed by the Welsh Assembly Government on 2 November 2010. However, this is in the very to the development plan. Despite this, in order to maintain consistency of decision making, and in early stages of preparation with the Powys County Council website view of the urgency to implement renewable energy infrastructure outlined in the NPSs, the st (www.powys.gov.uk/index.php?id=1820&L=0) indicating that this only commenced on 1 January Secretary of State is likely to give substantial weight to the NPSs. In this context it is worth 2011. Therefore, no weight can be attributed to any documentation relating to this process. emphasising that the NPSs have taken into consideration national planning guidance in England
December 2011 Llandinam Windfarm Repowering and Extension Environmental Statement – Supplementary Environmental Information Page 1 of Chapter 5 Chapter 5.0 Planning Policy Context
and Wales, including TAN 8, and that any requirements (the NPS equivalent to planning 15. In the light of the importance of the NPSs, the Planning Appraisal (which is a separate document conditions) imposed should take into account the guidance in Circulars on the use of conditions in submitted in support of the Section 36 application) provides an assessment of how the planning permissions. Part 4 ends with consideration of whether or not an Environmental Impact Development measures up to the policies and criteria set out in EN-1 and EN-3 and also considers Assessment (EIA) is necessary and what alternatives need to be taken into account. Both these the final balancing exercise in the light of this national policy. issues are dealt with in the original ES submitted with the application in May 2008 and in this SEI.
6. Part 5 of EN-1 sets out the generic elements of the different issues to be considered in determining 5.3 The Powys Unitary Development Plan (March 2010) any application. These include air quality, biodiversity, civil and military aviation interests, the historic environment, landscape and visual, land use, noise, socio-economic impacts, traffic and 1. The UDP as noted above was adopted in March 2010. The policies released since the original ES transport and water quality and resources. These individual topics will not be reviewed here but relevant to each topic area are presented in Table 5-1. The IDCG has not been included in this list will be considered in detail in the revised Planning Appraisal. since it does not provide any criteria against which to test an application, instead providing a list of matters to be considered by developers and in the EIA process. 7. Turning to EN-3 which relates to renewable energy specifically, this initially repeats the purposes of the NPSs and sets out the relationship to EN-1 and the planning system as a whole. The Table 5-1 Summary of Policies Published since the Submission of the Original ES policies in EN-3 are additional to those set out in EN-1 and further explain that regard will be had to the national policies contained in Planning Policy Wales and the TANs. Applicants will need to Policies Powys Unitary Development Plan (March 2010) show how their proposals fit with this guidance but whether or not an application conforms to the Topic guidance will not be a reason for approving or rejecting the application. Policy SP12 – proposals for energy generation from renewable resources will normally be permitted providing that they meet the landscape requirements set out in the Plan. 8. Onshore wind is considered in Section 2.7 of EN-3 and it initially refers to aspects that are generic Policy SP3 – safeguard the landscape and environment of Powys. to windfarms, including the effect of the time-limited nature of most wind farm developments on the environmental impacts and the need for flexibility in the design of proposals both in terms of Policy E3 – criterion 1 – proposals do not unacceptably adversely affect the landscape turbine choice and precise location of the windfarm elements. With respect to repowering, it is quality of Powys, either individually or cumulatively. stated that the replacement scheme will be considered on its own merits. Policy E3 – criterion 6 – any new or improved roads and accesses should not have 9. Section 2.7 then sets out the same range of issues identified in Part 5 of EN-1, but with the specific unacceptable environmental impacts. elements that are relevant to onshore wind. Some of those that are pertinent to the Development Landscape Policy E3 – criterion 8 – ancillary structures and buildings should be sited and designed to described in the following sections. adequately blend into their setting.
10. With regard to biodiversity and hydrology, the decision maker should be satisfied that the windfarm Policy E4 – Removal of Redundant Wind Turbines – a condition will be imposed to ensure layout and construction methods have been designed to minimise soil disturbance thereby that turbines that cease operation for a period of more than 6 months and their associated ensuring that the development will result in minimal disruption in terms of ecology, the hydrological infrastructure will be removed regime, and the carbon dioxide (CO2) balance. Similarly, the design should minimise disturbance to peat and take account of geotechnical considerations. Policy ENV2 – proposals should take into account the high quality of the landscape in Powys and be appropriate and sensitive to the character of the surrounding area, ensuring satisfactory integration into the landscape. 11. For the Historic environment, the time-limited nature of onshore windfarm consents will be a matter that will be taken into account when considering any indirect effects on such features, including the Policy SP12 – proposals for energy generation from renewable resources will normally be permitted providing that they meet the nature conservation requirements set out in the effects on the setting of designated historic assets. Plan.
12. On landscape and visual matters, it is stated that mitigation in form of reduction in number or Policy SP3 – safeguard the natural heritage and environment of Powys. height of turbines may not be feasible without significantly affecting electricity generating output from the windfarm. However, the design should seek to minimise effects on landscape without Policy E3 – criterion 2 – proposals should not unacceptably adversely affect wildlife compromising the technical and operational requirements of the windfarm. With respect to noise, habitats or species of international, national or local importance in accordance with ENV3- it is clearly stated that ETSU-R-97 is the appropriate methodology for assessing windfarms and 7 that where a development can be shown to comply with this guidance, little or no weight will be Policy ENV3 – The biodiversity and nature conservation and amenity value of habitats and given to adverse noise impacts from the operation of the windfarm. Ornithology features of importance for flora and fauna will be protected against adverse development and Ecology and will be maintained within development proposals. 13. Shadow flicker is generally an issue that can be controlled by way of condition. Policy ENV4 – the protection of internationally important nature conservation sites and not 14. Traffic and Transport during the construction period is an important aspect of onshore windfarms, significantly affect the achievement of conservation objectives of the designation in especially where a number of developments could be being constructed at the same time and use isolation or cumulatively. the same access route. However, such potential impacts on the road network and residential Policy ENV5 – a presumption against proposals likely to damage whether directly or amenity can be generally overcome by negotiation with the relevant highway authority and the indirectly the nature conservation interest of nationally designated sites except where the establishment of appropriate agreements to ensure that the potential impacts are spread out and benefits of development clearly outweigh the nature conservation value of the site and timed such that such cumulative impacts are unlikely to arise. satisfactory provision or appropriate compensation can be made to safeguard such features or offset the impacts.
Policy ENV6 – proposals unacceptably adversely affecting the nature conservation
December 2011 Llandinam Windfarm Repowering and Extension Environmental Statement – Supplementary Environmental Information Page 2 of Chapter 5 Chapter 5.0 Planning Policy Context
Table 5-1 Summary of Policies Published since the Submission of the Original ES Table 5-1 Summary of Policies Published since the Submission of the Original ES Policies Powys Unitary Development Plan (March 2010) Policies Powys Unitary Development Plan (March 2010) Topic Topic interests of regional or local nature conservation value will be refused. Acceptable MW1, which also considers issues relating to access, pollution, groundwater and public development will be subject to conditions/agreements to safeguard features of nature rights of way. conservation importance or the – provision of compensatory measures to offset impacts. General Policy GP1 – the amenities enjoyed by occupants of nearby properties should not be Development unacceptably affected by levels of noise, light, dust, odour, hours of operation or any other Policy ENV7 – developments, which contravene the protection afforded to European Control planning matter. protected species will not be permitted except where it is necessary in the interests of public health, safety or other imperative of overriding public interest, including those of a social or economic nature. 5.4 National Guidance Policy E3 – criterion 5 & 6 – proposals should not unacceptably adversely affect the enjoyment and safe use of highways and public rights of way, especially bridleways 1. Since the submission of the detailed planning application for the Development in May 2008, including during construction. The development should also be capable of being served national guidance in Wales has been updated. This takes the form of Planning Policy Wales by an acceptable means of highway access and any new and improved accesses and Traffic and roads should not have unacceptable environmental impacts. (Edition 4) published in February 2011 (PPW4) . This revision incorporates the proposed changes Transport to Section 12.8 and 12.10 that were issued for consultation at the same time as PPW3 was Policy GP4 – development will be permitted provided that there is adequate provision of published in July 2010. The changes to these sections are that they establish markedly different highway access including visibility, turning and passing and that the Council’s parking targets to those established in previous versions of PPW for renewable energy. The revised standards are met. targets accurately reflect those set out in the Energy Policy Statement of March 2010 (EPS) (Ref. Policy SP3 – development should seek to protect and conserve sites and features of 5-6) which itself takes into account the UK Renewable Energy Strategy (2009) (Ref. 5-7) and the historic and built heritage importance EU Renewable Energy Directive (2009) (Ref. 5-8)
Policy E3 – criterion 4 – development should not unacceptably impact on any buildings or 2. Section 12.8 now outlines a broad strategy to achieve a total of 48 terrawatt-hours (TWh) in the features of conservation or archaeological interest 2020/25 timeframe, approximately a 7 fold increase on the previous 2020 target of 7TWh. Policy ENV14 – Listed Buildings – Development unacceptably adversely affecting a Listed Onshore wind is estimated to provide some 5 TWh through 2GW of installed capacity. Building or its setting will be refused. Account will be taken of the desirability of preserving Background studies (Ref. 5-8) to inform the consultation draft show that the 2GW target assumes the building or its setting, in the context of the intrinsic architectural and historic interest, that almost all windfarm developments that are currently proposed within the Strategic Search the effect on features which justified the Listing, the contribution to the local scene Areas (SSAs) identified in TAN 8, or within 5 km of their boundaries, will be developed. The Cultural Development lies within the revised SSA C, which provides a strong presumption in favour of this Policy ENV17 – development that would unacceptably affect the site or setting of a Heritage proposal. Scheduled Ancient Monument or an archaeological site of national importance will not be permitted and other sites of archaeological importance will be safeguarded where possible. 3. Key points that can be drawn from Section 12.8 are as follows:
Policy ENV18 – relates to field evaluation, preservation in-situ where possible and, where The Welsh Government is committed to using the planning system to optimise renewable this is not possible, mitigation should be achieved through site excavation, survey and energy electricity generation; recording of remains. Development of all forms of renewable energy should be facilitated by ensuring that Policy ENV16 – development that unacceptably adversely affects the character and appearance of Historic Parks and Gardens (as identified on the Register) and their setting development control decisions are consistent with national and international climate change will be opposed. obligations, including contributions to renewable energy targets and recognising the Policy E3 – criterion 3 – development should not unacceptably adversely affect the environmental, economic and social opportunities that the use of renewable energy resources can make to wider planning goals; Noise occupants or users of sensitive properties or their amenities by reason of noise or vibration. Within the SSAs, whilst cumulative impact can be a material consideration, it must be balanced DC 9 – Protection of Water Resources – development should not unacceptably impair the against the need to meet the Welsh Government’s targets; quality, quantity or flow of surface or ground waters, shall not lead to pollution or be detrimental to existing water abstractions, fisheries, amenity or nature conservation Geology, Local Planning authorities, particularly those containing SSAs, should take the Welsh Hydrology DC13 – Surface Water Drainage – development should make provision for land drainage Government imperative for renewable energy into account when consulted on applications for and surface water disposal provided it would not adversely affect flood management schemes or give rise to unacceptable flooding. Any mitigation measures should be carried large scale onshore windfarms. out before the commencement of development 4. In summary, the 7 fold increase in the targets for renewable energy expressed in PPW4, derived Shadow Policy E3 – criterion 3 – development should not unacceptably adversely affect the Flicker and occupants or users of sensitive properties by reason of shadow flicker or reflected light. from the targets identified in the Welsh Government’s EPS, provide a very strong incentive to Reflected permit environmentally acceptable development proposals, particularly those within and around Light the SSAs which are considered to be suitable for large scale onshore windfarms. Policy MW6 – development will be permitted where there would be a significant environmental advantage in terms of traffic generation as compared to importing material Borrow Pits from authorised quarries. It sets out a number of criteria which relate to noise from borrow pit operations and, importantly, to restoration and aftercare. Reference is made to Policy
December 2011 Llandinam Windfarm Repowering and Extension Environmental Statement – Supplementary Environmental Information Page 3 of Chapter 5 Chapter 5. 0 Planning Policy Context
5.5 The Powys Interim Development Control Guidance (IDCG) Nonetheless, it is also important to bear in mind that even if there are some residual effects which are considered by the technical expert concerned to be adverse, this does not immediately mean 1. The IDCG provides Powys’ refinement of Area C and allows for the extension of Area C to the that the Development per se is unacceptable as there is still a balancing exercise to be undertaken west, to include almost the entire application site. This was originally issued for consultation in in the context of the benefits of the Development versus the adverse impacts. This exercise is February 2006, but subsequent work by the Council’s consultants has resulted in a revised Interim carried out in the accompanying Planning Appraisal. Guidance being approved for development control purposes on 22nd April 2008. This document was issued for public consultation on the 21st May 2008 with the consultation period extending up to 18th July 2008. This brief review considers the updated document which now supersedes that of 5.7 References February 2006. Ref. 5-1 Welsh Assembly Government. 2011. Planning Policy Wales Edition 4 2. The status of the IDCG is uncertain as although it has been adopted by the Council for development control purposes, it does not appear to derive out of, or be consistent with the Powys Ref. 5-2 Powys County Council, 2010 “Powys Unitary Development Plan, 2001 – 2016 Written UDP. Nonetheless, the IDCG is a material consideration in determining this application. Statement” March 2010
3. Generally, the purpose of this form of guidance is to provide advice on matters at a level that Ref. 5-3 Powys County Council, 2008 “Interim Development Control Guidance – Onshore Windfarm would be too detailed to be appropriate in the development plan. Such topics typically include Developments” shop front design and parking standards, both of which would support specific policies in the development plan. It is worth noting here that, even though the UDP has now been formally Ref. 5-4 Department of Energy and Climate Change, June 2011, Overarching National Policy adopted, there is no mention in that document of the implications of TAN 8 in terms restricting Statement for Energy (EN-1) large-scale wind energy development to within the SSAs or the locally derived Windfarm Zones. Ref. 5-5 Department of Energy and Climate Change, June 2011, National Policy Statement for 4. The major part of the IDCG sets out the rationale for Powys and reiterates the national guidance in Renewable Energy Infrastructure (EN-3) the MIPPS and TAN 8. However, Section 11 provides more detailed guidance and, despite the implicit acceptance in TAN 8 of some significant landscape impacts, paragraph 11.3 states that Ref. 5-6 Welsh Assembly Government, 2010 “Energy Policy Statement” visual and landscape effects will be given special consideration, particularly impacts on skyline, http://wales.gov.uk/docs/desh/policy/100331energystatementen.pdf views and panoramas in relation to the wider landscape and local communities and residents. Paragraph 11.4 advises that the assessment of these impacts will focus on the magnitude of effect Ref. 5-7 Department of Energy and Climate Change, 2009 “UK Renewable Energy Strategy (UKRES)” and the sensitivity of the receiver, as is standard practice in the EIA process. However, paragraph 11.5 goes on to say that proposals should in all cases seek to minimise impacts on local Ref. 5-8 European Union, 2009/28/EC Renewables Directive communities to avoid creating the impression of being hemmed in by large scale windfarms. In this http://eur-lex.europa.eu/JOHtml.do?uri=OJ:L:2009:140:SOM:EN:HTML context, the Council expects wind turbines to be moved back from plateau edges and skylines. Appendices 1 and 2 of the IDCG provide more detailed advice as to the extent of information to be Ref. 5-9 Welsh Assembly Government Research Report by Ove Arup & Partners, July 2010, “Strategic submitted with any application and this advice is almost identical to the 2006 version which has Search Area (SSA) Reassessment and Validation” been considered in formulating the original ES. However, since they do not give any information on
how the applications will be determined, they are not considered any further within this chapter.
5.6 Conclusions
1. It is important that the technical assessments bear in mind the policy objectives of the development plan and any emerging plans and have special regard to the recently published NPS’s on Energy for proposals to generate in excess of 50 MW onshore. Indeed, although the application for consent for the Development is made under Section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989, it is considered that the NPSs will be the principle reference point for determining this application in order to maintain consistency in decision making.
2. With respect to the Development Plan, Powys County Council formally adopted the UDP in March 2010 and this has superseded the provision of the former Powys Structure Plan. Therefore, the Development will be judged against the UDP with national guidance, especially PPW4 and TAN 8, forming an important material consideration. The IDCG on Onshore Windfarm Developments issued in May 2008 is also material to the determination of the proposed Development. However, it should be noted that there is some concern that the IDCG is not derived out of or consistent with the adopted UDP nor does it provide policy tests against which to judge the Development.
3. A key phrase within the UDP is “unacceptably adverse effects”, indicating that it is important for the EIA to give some thought to the thresholds of acceptability. Whilst this is common in landscape assessments, it is not frequently considered in relation to other issues, such as archaeology.
December 2011 Llandinam Windfarm Repowering and Extension Environmental Statement – Supplementary Environmental Information Page 4 of Chapter 5 Chapter 6.0 Landscape and Visual
6.0 Landscape and Visual This response reiterates the points made Amendments to the design are by Cadw (above) and relates principally to discussed in Chapter 3: Site archaeological features. Refer to Chapter 6.1 Introduction Selection and Design Evolution of Welsh Government 10: Cultural Heritage of this SEI for further this SEI. st detail. 1. This chapter of the Supplementary Environmental Information (SEI) report has been prepared to (31 July 2008) Section 10.6 of Chapter 10: Cultural identify the changes in the effects on landscape and visual amenity from those identified in the Heritage discusses the original Environmental Statement (ES), submitted in May 2008, caused by the amended layout of archaeological impacts of the design the proposed Llandinam Windfarm repowering and extension (“the Development”). changes
2. The amendments to the windfarm layout have been made following consultation and related Following these consultation responses a series of design iterations were made; these are described in more detail in Chapter 3: Site Selection and Design Evolution of this SEI review as described in Chapter 3: Site Selection and Design Evolution of this SEI. This chapter
therefore updates the originally assessed baseline conditions and identifies the changes to the With regards landscape and visual impact Section 6.8 Cumulative Effects of previously submitted Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) in Chapter 6 of the original CCW refer to the “undetermined this chapter addresses the Waun ES that would occur as a result of the amended layout. application to build a wind farm at Waun Garno application. Garno which was submitted to Powys 3. The design changes and update to the baseline context are reflected in a revised set of supporting County Council prior to this proposal being Countryside Council Section 6.6.1 of this chapter submitted to the Department for Business, figures in Volume III of this SEI. for Wales (CCW) summarises the design changes to th Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (29 August 2008) the Development in response to 4. For ease of cross referencing purposes, the figures which illustrate this chapter of the SEI follow (BERR)”. This response also requests consultee comments. Amendments the numbering sequence of the ES LVIA figures, but with the addition of prefix ‘S’. Figures which further information “as to how significant to the design discussed in more remain unchanged from the ES LVIA have not been reproduced but remain relevant and are changes in the landscape character and detail in Chapter 3: Site Selection visual amenity within and outside the SSA and Design Evolution of this SEI. referenced where appropriate. The figures which have not changed comprise: could be minimised and mitigated”.
Much of this letter relates to potential direct Amendments to the design are Figure 6-1 Study Area Landform; impacts on archaeological sites and the discussed in Chapter 3: Site setting of the collection of scheduled pre- Figure 6-2 Topography; Clwyd-Powys Selection and Design Evolution of historic monuments at Pegwn Mawr. The Archaeological Trust this SEI. th CPAT response also refers to the impact Figure 6-3 Landscape Character; (CPAT) (12 January Section 10.6 of Chapter 10: Cultural on the Clywedog and Caersws historic 2009) Heritage discusses the Figure 6-4 Landscape Character 10km; landscapes, in particular the Caersws archaeological impacts of the design Basin. Refer to Chapter 10: Cultural Figure 6-5 Landscape Designations; changes Heritage of this SEI for further detail. Figures 6-17 – 6-23 Route Analyses; and Capita Symonds on Figures 6-73 – 6-75 Grid Connection. behalf of Powys Refer to summary below Refer to summary below County Council (PCC) (July 2009) 5. This chapter has been prepared by SLR Consulting.
6.1.1 Consultations 2. A review of the LVIA presented in the original ES was carried out in July 2009 by Capita Symonds on behalf of Powys County Council (PCC). The objectives of this appraisal were to: 1. Following submission of the application and original ES for the Development, consultation responses have been reviewed. These are summarised in Table 6-1 below and full responses are Review the assessment in respects of its technical competence, assessment techniques, presented in Appendix 2-A, Volume II of this SEI: completeness and compliance with best practice;
Review the magnitude and significance of the potential landscape and visual effects as Table 6-1 Key Details of Consultation Response assessed within the LVIA; Consultee Key Details Comments/Action Taken Consider the appropriateness of the Development; and; The response principally relates to features Amendments to the design are Cadw of historic importance within the application discussed in Chapter 3: Site Make recommendations for further study or information required from the developer to form (The historic site. The letter also mentions the Selection and Design Evolution of part of the application. environment office of surrounding landscape and the potential this SEI. for distant views of the proposed 3. The Capita Symonds Review concludes that the LVIA for the Developments “has been prepared to the Welsh Section 10.6 of Chapter 10: Cultural th Development from the Caersws and good standard and is generally accurate and consistent in terms of the various evaluations”. Government) (15 Heritage discusses the th Clywedog Historic Landscapes (HL55 and July 2008 and 25 archaeological impacts of the design 56). Refer to Chapter 10: Cultural Heritage November 2008) changes 4. The Review recommended some additional matters to be addressed comprising: of the SEI for further detail.
Further information regarding consultation and reporting on the public consultation process;
December 2011 Llandinam Windfarm Repowering and Extension Environmental Statement – Supplementary Environmental Information Page 1 of Chapter 6 Chapter 6.0 Landscape and Visual
Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) diagrams to illustrate the iteration process. Instead, a To the southeast of the application site, in the vicinity of the proposed windfarm development at comparison of layout drawings are presented in Chapter 3: Site Selection and Design Evolution Llanbadarn Fynydd as well as scoping stage Garreg Lwyd Hill (now application stage) and of this SEI; Llaithddu windfarms, the cumulative contribution of the Development would be less; and, Further assessment of effects on landscape character in relation to the Caersws River Bowl. The predicted significant impacts on landscape and visual amenity would largely be confined to This is provided in paragraphs 6.6.1.5 and 6.7.4 of this chapter; within 9 km of the proposed turbines, which is not unreasonable for the size and spread of the Inclusion of an additional viewpoint in the grounds of Plas Dinam. This is provided in Figures Development. S6-80 and S6-81a-d ,Volume III of this SEI; Consideration of effects to the north of Llandbadarn Fynydd. This is provided in paragraphs 6.3 Review of Changes to Planning Policy Context 6.8.3.9 1 and 6.8.3.9.2 of this chapter; 1. The original LVIA set out the Planning Policy Context for the Development, which included relevant Consideration of relationship between the Development and the adjacent application stage detail from TAN 8: Planning for Renewable Energy (July 2005), Powys County Structure Plan Llaithddu windfarm. This is addressed through the viewpoint assessment presented in this (Replacement – Adopted February 1996) and Powys UDP (Deposit Draft October 2004). chapter); and Assessment of the cumulative effects for local footpaths and bridleways extending through the 2. A review of changes which have occurred to the planning policy context since the submission of Development site. This is provided in section 6.8.3 of this chapter. the original LVIA is set out in Chapter 5: Planning Policy Context of this SEI.
5. As a consequence of the above noted consultation responses, as well as a response from MLL 3. Since production of the original ES, PCC has also produced a ‘Landscape Character Assessment’ Telecom which identified that some of the proposed turbines presented difficulties for one of their (LCA 2007) based on LANDMAP data (Ref. 6-1). The area covered by the Powys LCA covers all links, the previously submitted layout has been changed by the omission of three turbines and three shire areas which make up the County: Brecknockshire; Radnorshire; and Montgomeryshire. relocation of twelve turbines (see Chapter 2: Assessment Methodology and Significance Criteria for a summary of the MLL Telecom comments and Chapter 3: Site Selection and Design Evolution 4. The LANDMAP methodology for landscape characterisation (dated 10th June 2002) has been used for a discussion of the changes to the layout in response to this). Where possible, the matters to produce the Powys LCA. This involves the overlaying of mapped Aspect data in the following raised in the consultation responses are addressed in this SEI. sequence; ‘Visual and Sensory Aspect’, ‘Geological Landscapes’, ‘Landscape Habitats’ and ‘Historic and Cultural Landscapes’. This process identified 67 Landscape Character Areas in the 6. Additionally, this SEI provides an assessment of the potential landscape and visual effects county of Powys. associated with the works required to accommodate construction vehicles on the off site access route to the Development. 5. This approach is similar to that used to define the Landscape Character Types identified in the original ES, as it also utilised the LANDMAP data. The Powys LCA has used LANDMAP data to 6.2 Conclusions of the Original ES Chapter identify and in some cases group certain characteristics to define landscape character areas. This has led to simplification of the boundaries to some of the landscape character areas shown in the 1. The conclusions drawn by the LVIA as presented in the original ES are broadly as follows Powys LCA which vary from the LANDMAP boundaries referred to in the original ES. This is The Development would replace an existing windfarm of 103 turbines of 45 m height with 33 illustrated by Figure S6-76 which shows both the LANDMAP and Powys LCA boundaries. turbines of 121.2 m height and 9 turbines of 111.2 m; 6. Given that the same base data has been used for both the original ES and the Powys LCA, it is not Careful consideration was given throughout the design iteration period to the landform of the considered that the publication of the Powys LCA alters the baseline landscape characterisation site on the Waun Ddubarthog ridge; and conclusions set out in the original ES.
The design iteration process took account of effects on more sensitive, smaller scale 6.4 Assessment Methodology and Significance Criteria landscapes (to the north and west) both by limiting turbine locations in close proximity to these landscapes and by proposing that 9 turbines would have a reduced hub height of 70m lowering 1. The same assessment methodology and significance criteria used for the LVIA in the original ES overall height to blade tip to 111.2 m; have been used to carry out the assessment in this SEI.
The existing Llandinam turbines are visible over a comparable area to the Development; 6.5 Review of Baseline Conditions
Taking into account other existing windfarms at Cemmaes, Carno, Mynydd Clogau and Bryn 1. The Baseline Conditions as presented in the original ES, describes the landscape of the study Titli, there are few parts of the 30 km study areas which have no existing views of turbines; area in respect of ‘Topography’; ‘Landcover and Landuse’; ‘Cultural Aspects’; and describes both ‘Landscape Character Types’ and Landscape Character Areas’, as well as identifying key However, the increased size of the turbines would cause a substantial magnitude of change to receptors including Transport Routes’, ‘Settlement’ and ‘Landscape Designations’. No material areas close to the Development; changes to this baseline have occurred, apart from the cumulative windfarm context which is addressed subsequently. The only notable addition in terms of landscape characterisation is the The LVIA predicts significant effects on 2 of the 22 Landscape Character Types within the publication of the Powys LCA which has already been discussed in this chapter. study area and 5 of the 46 Landscape Character Areas with localised significant effects occurring within a further 13 of these 46 Landscape Character Areas; 2. The principal change to the baseline conditions is with respect to ‘Other Wind Farms in the Study Area’ referred to in the original ES (see Table 6-2 of the original ES). The status of some of the Significant effects on visual amenity are predicted for 16 of the 26 viewpoints;
December 2011 Llandinam Windfarm Repowering and Extension Environmental Statement – Supplementary Environmental Information Page 2 of Chapter 6 Chapter 6.0 Landscape and Visual
windfarms considered has changed since production of the original ES. Table 6-2 below has Table 6-2 – Updated Cumulative Windfarms therefore been updated as follows (with changes highlighted in bold text): Overall Number of Hub ht (h) blade tip Windfarm Description Location Table 6-2 – Updated Cumulative Windfarms turbines Rotor dia. (r) height Overall Number of Hub ht (h) blade tip Scoping in ES) Windfarm Description Location Application turbines Rotor dia. (r) height 12 km to (h) 80 m Waun Garno ( 11 115m not previously northwest (r) 70m (h)31m included in ES) Llandinam Operational Existing Site 103 45.5m (r)29m Operational and Consented Windfarms 3. Most of these developments were considered in the original ES. In their consultation response, Countryside Council for Wales (CCW) identified the new application stage Waun Garno windfarm. (h)60m/ Braich Ddu Operational 57 km to north 3 90m (r)60m Accordingly the additional application stage windfarm at Waun Garno and the changed status of (h)30m other windfarm developments are identified in Table 6-2 with changes from the ES highlighted in Bryn Titli Operational 8 km to southwest 22 48.5m (r) 37m bold font. The cumulative magnitude of change and related impacts on landscape character and 13 km to (h) 31.5m visual amenity which would arise as a consequence of this changed status are considered later in Carno A + B Operational 56 53.5m northwest (r) 44m this chapter. 17 km to west (h) 54.5 & 64.5m Cefn Croes Operational 39 90 & 100m southwest (r) 71m 6.6 Assessment of Design Change Effects and Mitigation Measures 25 km to (h) 48m Cemmaes Operational 18 74m northwest (r) 52m Llangwyryfon 39 km to west (h) 40m 6.6.1 Key Design Changes Operational 11 66m Repower southwest (r) 52m 1. Chapter 3: Site Selection and Design Evolution discusses the changes which have taken place (h) 40, 44, 49m (r) 66, 70 & Mynydd Clogau Operational 12 km to north 17 52m 75m following comments from stakeholders. (h) 35 m Mynydd Gorddu Operational 34 km to west 19 56m (r) 42m 2. The revised layout for the Development is shown on Figure 3-1 (Chapter 3: Site Selection and (h) 31 m Design Evolution of this SEI) which indicates the location of the turbines and other proposed Rheidol Operational 28 km to west 8 46m (r) 30m structures in their revised position, the alignment of access tracks and extent borrow pits, as well Operational explaining the reasons for these changes. Carno ( 13 km to (h) 49m previously 12 80m Extension included as northwest (r) 62m 3. The revised layout, changed status of Tirgwynt, resulting in a move from Application Stage to Consented in ES) consented, and inclusion of Waun Garno in terms of potential cumulative effects have been Consented incorporated into an updated set off of figures including amended ZTVs and viewpoint ( previously 17km to north (h) 76m visualizations, as presented in Appendix III of this SEI. Tirgwynt 22 116m included as northwest (r) 80m Application in 4. The key changes made which relate to potential landscape impacts, are as follows: ES) Windfarms (Planning Applications Submitted) Removal of 3 turbines (T22, T23 and T24); 29 km to (h) 80m Cemmaes 3 Application 12 115m Relocation of twelve turbines (T3, T4, T7, T8, T13, T14, T18, T25, T30, T36, 40, and 41) northwest (r) 70m Llanbadarn (h) 80 m compared to the original ES layout; Application 6km to east 17 126.5m Fynydd (r) 93m Mynydd Clogau (h) 44, 49, 55m 66, 70 & Amendment to the location of the substation by approximately 35 m north of its position in the Application 12 km to north 19 original ES, closer to the existing control building and to locate it adjacent to the field boundary; Extension (r) 52m 75m and, Mynydd Waun (h) 70 m Application 21 km to north 16 110m Fawr (r) 80m Refused A revised access track layout based on further peat depth survey information (presented and ( discussed in Chapter 12: Geology, Hydrology and Hydrogeology of this SEI) also reduces the previously 27 km to (h) 60m Pentre Tump 3 90m length of new track that needs to be constructed from 19 km to 11.6 km (the overall length included as southeast (r) 62m Application in including upgraded existing tracks being 24.3 km). This minimises additional disturbance to ES) ecological and hydrological receptors, as well as the buried prehistoric landscape and Application minimises the impact on deep peat and valley mire habitat as described below. Garreg Lwyd ( 10 km to east (h) 80 m previously 23 126.5m Hill southeast (r) 93m 5. The revised access track layout takes into account recommendations from the Clwyd-Powys included as th Scoping in ES) Archaeological Trust (CPAT) (12 January 2009) that the existing tracks should be used as far as Application possible in the interests of minimising the impact on the buried prehistoric landscape. The revised (h) 80 m Llaithddu ( 3 km to southeast 29 115.5m layout also takes account of CCW’s concerns (29th August 2008) regarding the impacts on peat previously (r) 71m included as and mire habitats, particularly valley mire.
December 2011 Llandinam Windfarm Repowering and Extension Environmental Statement – Supplementary Environmental Information Page 3 of Chapter 6 Chapter 6.0 Landscape and Visual
6.6.3 Visual Effects of Design Changes and Mitigation Measures 6. The key design changes and mitigation measures which relate to landscape and visual impacts are as follows: 1. Overview: As described above, the main changes to the layout which relate to landscape and visual amenity were made to minimise potential effects to the north and northwest of the Removal of 3 turbines (T22-T24) in the northwest of the site in direct response to comments Development including the Caersws River Bowl. This comprised the removal of three turbines from PCC to reduce the level of visual impact on receptors to the north of the site. In particular (T22-T24) that were originally proposed to the northwestern corner of the Development. These the Council’s consultants (Capita Symonds) expressed concern about landscape and visual changes would minimise the landscape and visual effects of the Development on locations which impacts on the rim of low hills and ridges, including the Waun Ddubarthog ridge, to the north of have views in this direction, most notably demonstrated in respect of Viewpoints 1 and 26 which the site. Capita Symonds requested that the most prominent turbines to the north be omitted or are illustrated on Figures S6-25 and S6-71 respectively. relocated further south to reduce their visual impact; and
2. Viewpoint selection in the original ES: The process for selection of final viewpoints is described CPAT commented that the turbines in the north west of the site (in the original layout) had a in Section 6.31 of the original ES. This describes how ZTVs, Ordnance Survey Map data, potential detrimental impact on the Caersws Basin Historical Landscape. This is further discussed in visual receptors identified in the scoping opinion and examination of Historic Landscape, Parks Chapter 10: Cultural Heritage of this SEI. and Gardens were used, followed by field work to determine the viewpoint locations. It is 7. Other changes made which relate to visual impacts within the site include the slight relocation of considered that the chosen viewpoints provide a comprehensive and representative basis on turbines T30, T36, T40, T41 to reduce the effect on the Pegwn Mawr collection of scheduled which the assessment of effects on landscape character and visual amenity can be made. The prehistoric monuments, Crugyn Llywd cairn and Domen Ddu barrow, as requested by the CPAT viewpoint locations were agreed with PCC and CCW. and Cadw. These changes again principally relate to effects on archaeological features and are discussed further in Chapter 10: Cultural Heritage of this SEI. 3. Viewpoints assessed in this SEI: Following the changes to the design described above, revised ZTVs were produced (as shown in Figures S6-6a to S6-8d) to represent the difference between 8. Additionally T13, T14 and T25 have been slightly moved to increase separation from a potential the existing windfarm, the January 2008 design layout and the design layout as presented in this bat corridor; T13, T14 and T18 were moved slightly to minimise impact on wet grassland areas of SEI. These ZTVs illustrate that there will be very limited change to the overall potential visibility of potential valley mire habitat; and T3, T4, T7 and T8 have been moved to avoid interference with the Development resulting from the design changes although as intended there would be a the MLL Telecom link which crosses the application site. variation in the number of turbines / blades tips visible from some locations due to the removal of turbines T22-24. This was analysed by comparing the visualisations produced for the original ES 6.6.2 Landscape Effects of Design Changes and Mitigation Measures with the updated versions produced for this SEI. This work highlighted that the most prominent changes resulting from the revised design would be apparent from Viewpoints 1, 5, 13, 17 and 20, 1. The removal of turbines T22-24 will reduce the direct effects on landscape fabric on the northern (the visualisations being shown on Figures S6-24, S6-32, S6-48, S6-56, and S6-60, with a visible part of the site, although the total land-take for the Development would remain at approximately but less perceptible change for Viewpoints 2, 3, 4, 15, 16, 22, 24, 25 and 26 (with respective 30.0 hectares (ha), which is 2.3% of the total site area of approximately 1,307 ha. visualisations being shown on Figures S6-26, S6-28, S6-30, S6-52, S6-54, S6-63, S6-67, S6-69 and S6-71). 2. The relocation of turbines T3, T4, T7, T8, T13, T14, T18, T25, T30, T36, T40 and T41 has been undertaken following consultation responses as described in Chapter 3: Site Selection and Design 4. An additional Viewpoint has been included in the SEI at Plas Dinam (Viewpoint 27), which is Evolution of this SEI. While these changes relate principally to ecological, hydrological and located to the north of the application site. This Viewpoint has been included following the review archaeological considerations, their movement would also reduce the levels of direct landscape of the LVIA that was carried out in July 2009 by Capita Symonds on behalf of PCC. This impacts specifically to more sensitive landscape features. This is described in more detail in document suggests that further information is provided to illustrate and allow a judgment to be Chapter 8: Ecology, Chapter 12: Geology, Hydrology and Hydrogeology and Chapter 10: Cultural made on the appearance of turbines from this location along the skyline and to assess anticipated Heritage of this SEI. effects from this location. The viewpoint description, analysis and visualisations can be found on Figures S6-80 and S6--81a-d. 3. The revised access track layout considerably reduces the amount of new track that needs to be constructed from 19 km to 11.6 km. This would be achieved by upgrading 12.7 km of existing 6.6.4 Landscape and Visual Effects of Accommodation Works on Offsite Access Route, tracks, as opposed to 4 km in the layout shown in the original ES. The overall length of access Laybys / Pinch Points on Trunk Road Network and Mitigation Measures track including upgraded existing tracks would be 24.3 km. 1. The works required to accommodate larger vehicles accessing the Development during the 4. The revised access track layout avoids ecologically sensitive areas and minimises the number of construction phase, would comprise removal of some roadside vegetation at a limited number of water crossings required. Turbines are also located at suitable distances from the footpaths and locations along the access route on the minor roads between the A483 and the site; three laybys bridleways crossing the site (discussed in further detail later in this chapter, and in Chapter 13: on the A438 between Glasbury and Llandrindod Wells are also proposed. The locations where Land Use, Recreation and Socio-Economics of this SEI.) accommodation works would be required are identified in the swept path analysis (as discussed in Chapter 4: The Proposed Development of this SEI) and were subsequently surveyed and 5. Detailed consideration was also given to site gradients and ground conditions, which influenced described in the report prepared by ADAS, presented in Appendix 8-G, Volume II of this SEI. The the design as well as the location of tracks and crane hardstandings to ensure the technical supporting figures show the locations of both the pinch points and laybys, while the report includes feasibility of turbine delivery and installation. notes of potential vegetation removal and Habitat Loss. The ADAS report has been examined together with aerial imagery of the route, as well as reference to the baseline landscape and visual 6. Other considerations such as use of an existing site access from the A483 and relocation of the data for the study area, to assess the potential effects of the works on the landscape fabric. For substation taking it closer to the existing control building adjacent to an existing field boundary clarity the pinch point numbering system used in the ADAS report has been followed in this would also help to minimise potential landscape and visual impacts on the site. assessment.
December 2011 Llandinam Windfarm Repowering and Extension Environmental Statement – Supplementary Environmental Information Page 4 of Chapter 6 Chapter 6.0 Landscape and Visual
2. The total land take required for the accommodation works along the access road would be 1.0 ha, the amended Development layout are not considered to alter the previously predicted magnitudes of which 53% would comprise improved or semi-improved grassland. At a small number of of change and related effects on landscape character and visual amenity from the Development on locations, shrubs and some trees would be removed. Most of this vegetation consists of gorse its own considered in relation to the existing Llandinam windfarm. The sections which follow shrubs, sections of gappy and poorly maintained hedgerow and some non indigenous species. describe, the qualitative change in the appearance of the wind turbine layout of the revised However three locations have been identified where replacement planting is required as follows. Development for the viewpoints at which it is considered the changes would be noticeable and discernible. 3. At pinch point 8 on the access road, it is anticipated that approximately 10 trees would be removed, comprising mature sycamore, beech and hawthorn. Where possible, replacement tree 3. In terms of the changes to the cumulative context since submission of the original ES, as set out in planting will be carried out using similar tree species to mitigate the local loss of this vegetation. Table 6-2 and described in section 6.5.3 the main differences are:
The inclusion of the application stage Waun Garno windfarm located 12 km to the north west of 4. At pinch points 29 and 32 on the access road, some discrete sections of hawthorn hedgerow the Development; would need to be either cut back or removed. An application for hedgerow removal would be made under the Hedgerow Regulations (1997) if required, and where possible the removed section of The change in status of the Tirgwynt windfarm located 17 km to the north west of the hedgerow would be replaced using similar plant species as in the existing hedge. Development, from an application to consented. This changes this windfarm from assessment
in the context of the less certain context of the Development with existing, consented and 5. Elsewhere along the access road, removal of vegetation would be limited. Overall, the application stage windfarms to the more certain cumulative scenario, of the Development with accommodation works would not give rise to any significant effects on landscape fabric and would existing and consented windfarms; have limited effects on the wider landscape character and related visual amenity of the study area due to the localised and small scale of the vegetation removal. Replacement planting at pinch The change in status of Garreg Lwyd Hill and Llaithddu from scoping stage to application stage points 8, 29 and 32 would further minimise any potential localised effects on landscape fabric. and Pentre Tump, which has been refused, although it is understood the Applicant has plans to
submit a new planning application. 6. With regards to construction of the laybys, loss of significant vegetation would also be limited, as in the most part this would involve removal of the existing roadside verge ground cover. 4. These changes are reflected in the detailed analysis set out opposite the amended visualisations in Volume III of this SEI. 7. ‘Layby A’ would potentially involve the loss of a small section of hedgerow towards the eastern end, as described in the ADAS report. Again the loss of hedgerow would be replaced where 5. Viewpoint 1 is located approximately 4.25 km to the north-northwest of the application site at the appropriate and possible. ‘Layby B’ would involve the loss of a young Oak tree; freestanding trees junction of the A470 and A489. A photomontage visualisation of the proposed view from this (particularly Oak) are common in the surrounding landscape so it would not represent the loss of a location along with the existing view is shown on Figure S6-24. The removal of T22 – T24 would rare landscape feature. Replacement planting within the adjacent hedgerow using standard trees result in fewer turbines being seen from this point, resulting in the upper towers and hubs of three may be considered if appropriate. ‘Layby C’ would potentially involve the loss of some young trees turbines being visible to the left side of the array and two hubs and rotors being visible on the right (predominantly Silver Birch); while these do not hold great value in terms of the wider landscape side of the array with only blade tips being visible across the centre of the group. they do provide a level of screening to the existing layby which is setback from the road. Replacement screen planting would therefore be considered in relation to the construction of 6. The cumulative magnitude of change was recorded as substantial in respect of the previously Layby C where appropriate. submitted layout from this location. This is primarily because the Development would introduce a new windfarm to views in this direction, as the existing Llandinam windfarm is almost completely 8. The ADAS report also identifies 11 ‘pinch points’ on the main trunk road. Some road widening at obscured due to intervening landform. While the revised design would reduce the number of these pinch points would be required, which would involve the trimming of sections of hedgerow turbines visible from this location, the Development would appear as two separate groups of and the removal of some overhanging branches. This is very unlikely to impact upon the landscape turbines. However, the overall magnitude of change is considered to remain the same, and fabric of the area and is likely to be perceived as the type of works carried out under standard consequently the effects on landscape character and visual amenity which are both described as highways maintenance. being major/moderate in the original ES, would also remain the same.
6.6.5 Assessment of Changes in Effects on Landscape Character and Visual Amenity 7. Viewpoints 2, 3 and 4 are positioned to the northeast / east of the application site at Newtown, from those identified in the Original ES Dolforwyn Castle and Dolfor respectively. Wireline visualisations shown on Figures S6-26 and S6- 28 illustrate the Development from Viewpoints 2 and 3; and Figure S6-30 shows a photomontage 1. The potential modifications arising from the amended turbine layout to the predicted effects on from Viewpoint 4. From this direction the three turbines which have been removed from the layout, landscape character and visual amenity identified in the original ES are described in the following previously appeared towards the northern edge of the Development. Their removal would slightly sections. Detailed analysis of the predicted view, magnitude of change, sensitivity of landscape reduce the apparent horizontal extent of turbines on the horizon. However, whilst reducing the and visual receptors and predicted effects including cumulative effects, are set out opposite the number of turbines visible and slightly reducing the horizontal extent of the Development, the amended visualisations for the revised layout on Figures S6-24 to S6-72d. revised layout is not considered to alter the assessed magnitude of change and related effects on landscape character and visual amenity from those identified in the ES. This is primarily because 2. The most noticeable and beneficial, changes would occur at Viewpoint 1 the A470/A489 junction; the majority of the Development would still be visible, appearing larger in scale than the existing Viewpoint 5 Kerry Ridgeway; Viewpoint 17 Llidiartywaun Community Hall; and Viewpoint 20 at the windfarm at Llandinam. A470 Riverside Café. Less noticeable, but nevertheless discernible differences would occur at Viewpoint 2 Newton; Viewpoint 3 Dolforwyn Castle; Viewpoint 4 Dolfor; Viewpoint 15 on the 8. Viewpoint 5 is located to the east of the application site with an elevated view towards the Waun footpath on the north side of Garreg Lwyd; Viewpoint 16 Glyndwr’s Way near Moelfre; Viewpoint Ddubarthog Ridge. The amended layout would occupy the same portion of the available view as 22 Bryn y Fedw; Viewpoint 24 Garreg Hir; Viewpoint 25 on the A470/Railway corridor in the Afon the previously submitted layout but would have a slightly more balanced layout with fewer Carne Valley and Viewpoint 26 Caersws. However, the changes that would occur as a result of
December 2011 Llandinam Windfarm Repowering and Extension Environmental Statement – Supplementary Environmental Information Page 5 of Chapter 6 Chapter 6.0 Landscape and Visual
overlapping turbines. However, the predicted magnitude of change and related effects on existing/consented and application stage windfarms would be as identified for the Development landscape character and visual amenity would remain as assessed in the original ES. with existing/consented, application and scoping stage windfarms in the original ES.
9. At Viewpoint 13, Grach, the slight movement to T41 results in one additional blade tip being visible 17. Viewpoint 25 is 5.7 km to the north-north west of the application site, for which a wireline from this footpath on Glyndwr’s Way. This would result in a slight increase to the horizontal angle visualisation for this location is shown on Figure S6-69. The revised design would improve the subtended by the turbines with blade tip movement apparent above the nearby horizon resulting in appearance of the Development by removing three of the more prominent turbines and by a moderate magnitude of change and major/moderate effect for high sensitivity walkers on this reducing the apparent density of turbines in the centre of the array in comparison to the previous footpath, representing a change to the effect assessed in the ES. The effect would be less layout. However, the overall magnitude of change is likely to remain the same, as would the apparent on the lower part of the hill, increasing with ascent up the path. effects on landscape character and visual amenity. This is because the Development would appear larger in scale than the existing windfarm at Llandinam, with limited cumulative effects from 10. From Viewpoint 15 on a footpath at the summit of Garreg Lwyd, the amended turbine layout other existing or proposed windfarm developments. would result in a layout which is slightly more balanced at the south (right hand) end of the array, but slightly more overlapping turbines at the north (left hand) end of the array. The amended 18. Viewpoint 26 represents a similar view to that described for Viewpoint 25 but is slightly closer layout would occupy a slightly reduced horizontal angle. Here again however, the overall being approximately 4.6 km to the north of the application site at Caersws. A wireline visualisation magnitude of change from the Development considered in relation to the existing Llandinam for this location is shown on Figure S6-71. From here turbines (T22-T24) would have been visible windfarm and with the other existing/consented windfarms would be unchanged from that on the horizon. The revised layout would remove three of the most prominent turbines in the array assessed in the original ES. as well as reducing the apparent density of turbines on the horizon. The assessed magnitude of change and related effects on landscape character and visual amenity are however not considered 11. The removal of turbines T22-T24 would also have a limited effect on views from the southwest. to change, largely as a consequence of the proximity of the Development. Thus there would be a Viewpoints 16 and 17 are positioned to the west of the application site and to the southwest of substantial magnitude of change at this location, as the Development would introduce a smaller turbines T22-T24. A wireline visualisation for the Development is shown on Figure S6-54 for number of larger turbines to views which currently only have limited views of the existing windfarm Viewpoint 16 and a photomontage for Viewpoint 17 on Figure S6-56. at Llandinam. While the revised layout would improve the appearance of the Development relative to the previous scheme, the overall magnitude of change is likely to remain the same, as would the 12. The proximity and therefore scale of the nearest turbines has the largest effect on views from this effects on landscape character and visual amenity which are described as being major/moderate location; Viewpoint 16 and Viewpoint 17 being positioned approximately 1.3 km and 2.1 km and moderate respectively in the original ES. respectively from the nearest proposed turbine. The removal of turbines T22-24 would remove 3 turbines previously predicted to be visible in the northern part of the array, in views looking up the 19. The Grade II Listed property at Plas Dinam identified in the original ES is also situated to the north Severn Valley towards Caersws. However, while the removal of these turbines is an improvement of the Development, being approximately 3.15 km from the nearest turbine. The potential effects to the appearance of the revised design in comparison to the original, it would not be significant on Plas Dinam are briefly discussed in the original ES which recorded a worst case visual effect of enough to alter the overall levels of effect assessed in the original ES. major/moderate.
13. Viewpoint 20 is the closest to turbines T22-T24 of the previously submitted layout. It is 20. Views from Plas Dinam have been a key consideration in the design changes which have taken approximately 3.45 km to the west of the nearest turbine and is located on the A470 at Riverside place, with the addition of Viewpoint 27 to the viewpoint assessment. The potential effects on this Café; wireline visualisations of the Development are shown on Figure S6-60. viewpoint are assessed and illustrated on Figures S6-80 and S6-81a to d. From this location all of the turbines were potentially visible based on the layout in the original ES with 5 hubs above the 14. In respect of the previously submitted layout, a substantial magnitude of change was predicted at horizon. In the revised design 4 turbines with 2 hubs above the horizon would be visible. The this location having regard to the size and proximity of the proposed turbines. This resulted in revised layout would occupy the same horizontal angle of view (21.9 degrees) as the removed major/moderate effects on landscape character and visual amenity. Changes to the scheme would turbines would have been at the centre of the Development. mean that three of the more prominent turbines from the original layout would be removed from the view, with views of some of the retained turbines likely to be restricted by intervening vegetation. 21. The magnitude of change arising from the Development is considered to be substantial, largely The horizontal angle subtended by the turbines would be reduced from that identified in the original due to the proximity of the turbines. The high sensitivity of both landscape character and visual ES. However, given the proximity of the proposed turbines, the magnitude of change is still receptors would result in major effects. The reason these effects are slightly higher than those considered to be substantial and the effects on the medium sensitivity landscape character and briefly described for Plas Dinam in the original ES is principally due to a more comprehensive visual receptors to be major/moderate. understanding of views from this location following viewpoint photography. However, the revised scheme represents an improvement to the original design with fewer turbines visible. 15. At Viewpoint 22 there would be a slight change in the configuration of the turbines, but no change to the horizontal angle subtended and minimal change to the distance to the nearest proposed 22. The design changes would involve the relocation of a number of turbines, so the changes would turbine and accordingly, the magnitude of change and related effects on landscape character and theoretically be visible from most of the viewpoints including those not discussed above i.e. visual amenity would be the same as those identified in the original ES. Viewpoints 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 18, 19, 21 and 23. However, the visible change between the original and revised design is unlikely to be noticeable from these locations given that the 16. At Viewpoint 24, similarly the horizontal angle subtended would be unchanged with a minor movements are relatively minor and in some cases the Development would be seen at difference to the distance to the nearest turbines. However, at this location, due to the proximity of considerable distance. Accordingly, the assessment provided in the original ES for these consented Tirgwynt windfarm, the magnitude of change from the Development with viewpoints would not alter. existing/consented windfarms would be reduced from moderate to slight. This would reduce the predicted effect on landscape character to moderate/minor with the effect on visual amenity 23. With regards to changes that relate to visual impacts on the Pewgwyn Mawr collection of reducing from major/moderate to moderate. The effects of the Development with scheduled prehistoric monuments, Crugyn Llywd cairn and Domen Ddu barrow, these were made
December 2011 Llandinam Windfarm Repowering and Extension Environmental Statement – Supplementary Environmental Information Page 6 of Chapter 6 Chapter 6.0 Landscape and Visual
principally to reduce the effects of the Development on these archaeological features. Therefore, these changes are described in Chapter 10: Cultural Heritage of this SEI. 3. Cumulative ZTVs which illustrate the extent of theoretical visibility for both the Development and Waun Garno are shown on Figure S6-78 and in more detail on Figures S6-78a-d. 24. The visual change to the surrounding landscape would be minimal and would not cause any significant changes to the overall visibility or appearance to the Development, and consequently no 4. The proposed windfarm at Waun Garno comprises 11 turbines with a hub height of 80 m and rotor change to the effects identified in the original ES. diameter of 70 m i.e. an overall blade tip height of 115 m compared to the larger turbines of the Development which have a 121.2 m overall blade tip height. 6.7 Residual Effects and Conclusions of Design Changes 5. The visual envelopes of Waun Garno and the Development predominantly overlap in the northern 1. The revised design in relation to the siting of the turbines would cause limited changes to the direct portion of the study area (i.e. to the north of Llanidloes and Newtown) and on more isolated high effects on landscape fabric, these changes principally relate to the mitigation of impacts on points directly to the south of the Waun Garno site, as shown on the ZTV on Figures S6-78 and ecological and archaeological features. S6-78a to d. The potential views from these areas are assessed in respect of Viewpoints 1, 3, 4, 5, 8, 12, 13, 15, 16, 22, 24, and 26. 2. However, the revised access track layout does represent a positive design change, by reducing the overall level of disturbance within the application area through utilisation of more of the existing 6. However, there are some locations within these parts of the study area from where views of Waun routes. This reduces the length of new access track required from 19 km to 11.6 km. Garno would be not be visible at all; as demonstrated at Viewpoints 2, 18, 19, 20, 21, 23 and 25 which would not experience any additional effects from the Development to those described in the 3. In terms of the assessment of effects on landscape character identified in the submitted ES, the original ES. overall number of significant effects on landscape character arising from the revised Development layout would remain the same at all locations apart from Viewpoint 13, Grach, where a significant 7. Views of Waun Garno are concentrated within the area shown on the Comparative ZTV (see effect for walkers is predicted as a result of an additional blade tip being visible and the Figure S6-78) due to the screening effect of the Waun Dubarthog ridge which would restrict views consequent increase in horizontal angle subtended by the turbines. , At most other locations, the of Waun Garno from the southeast of the study area. This is demonstrated by Viewpoints 6, 7, 9, revised design would result in noticeable improvement for several of the views identified above. 10, 11, 14 and 17 which would not experience any additional effects to those described in the original ES. Viewpoint 8 would represent one of the few potential views of Waun Garno from this 4. The removal of the 3 turbines from the northwest part of the site increases the distance between direction due to its elevated, albeit distant, location. the Caersws Basin and the Development and means that in most views from the Basin, the turbines would be seen behind the northern edge of the Waun Ddubarthog ridge, rather than on 8. Additional effects of the Development on the viewpoints to those described in the original ES the top of the ridge closest to this area. resulting from Waun Garno being included in the cumulative assessment are described in the following sections. 6.8 Cumulative Effects 6.8.2.1 Viewpoint 1 – A470/A489 Junction: 6.8.1 Changes arising from amended windfarm status 1. Visibility: The cumulative view from this location showing the proposed windfarm at Waun Garno is 1. In terms of the assessment of effects on visual amenity identified in the submitted ES, re- depicted by the wireline in Figure S6-25b. This shows that the proposed turbines at Waun Garno evaluation of predicted effects at Viewpoint 13, Grach results in the predicted magnitude of change would be visible in a west-north-westerly direction just to the south of the existing Carno windfarm. at this location from the Development in relation to the baseline of the existing Llandinam Of the11 proposed turbines at Waun Garno all of the blade tips would potentially be visible from windfarm, cumulatively with both existing/consented and the application stage windfarms to be this location, while only 10 of the hubs would be seen above the horizon. moderate, rather than the previously assessed slight resulting in a major/moderate and significant effect on visual amenity at this location. 2. Cumulative Magnitude of Change: The cumulative magnitude of change identified in the ES is substantial, and would remain the same in respect of the revised Development layout with the 1. As a result of the change in status of the application stage windfarm at Tirgwynt to consented the existing Carno windfarms, proposed Mynydd Clogau extension and in conjunction with the cumulative magnitude of change and related effects have altered slightly for some locations from proposed Waun Garno windfarm which would be seen in the same direction as Carno. those set out in the original ES. These changes are described in the detailed assessments for each viewpoint set out opposite the visualisations for the revised Development presented in 3. Potential Effect on Landscape Character at the Viewpoint: The cumulative effect on landscape Appendix III of this SEI. character from the Development with other existing windfarms and the proposed windfarms at Mynydd Clogau and Waun Garno would be major/moderate, and thus the same as that assessed 6.8.2 Additional Cumulative Effects arising from Waun Garno Application in the submitted ES.
1. The original ES describes predicted cumulative effects on landscape and visual amenity. This 4. Potential Effect on Visual Amenity: Given the small proportion of the view effected by the chapter of the SEI identifies the proposed cumulative context described in the original ES and proposed Waun Garno windfarm and the fact that it would not be seen in the same view as either includes the updated list of cumulative windfarms in Table 6-2. the Development or Mynydd Clogau, the cumulative effect from the Development on visual amenity would remain major for local residents and major/moderate for road and rail users. It 2. The application stage Tirgwynt windfarm has been consented since submission of the original ES. should also be noted that intervening vegetation would partially restrict views towards Waun Garno However, this windfarm is already included in the cumulative assessment presented in the original from this location. ES. Any potential changes to the cumulative effects arising from the Development with other windfarms including Waun Garno are assessed in the following section.
December 2011 Llandinam Windfarm Repowering and Extension Environmental Statement – Supplementary Environmental Information Page 7 of Chapter 6 Chapter 6.0 Landscape and Visual
6.8.2.2 Viewpoint 3 – Dolforwyn Castle: 2. Cumulative Magnitude of Change: The cumulative magnitude of change from the Development 1. Visibility: The cumulative view from this location showing the proposed windfarm at Waun Garno is with existing/consented and application stage windfarms including Waun Garno would be depicted by the wireline in Figure S6-29b, which demonstrates that the proposed turbines at Waun moderate having regard to the proximity of the other application stage windfarms at Llaithddu, Garno would be visible in a westerly direction, again just to the south of the existing Carno Llanbadarn Fynydd and Garreg Lwyd Hill. The Waun Garno turbines would be distantly visible and windfarm. All of the 11 proposed turbines at Waun Garno including hubs would potentially be would appear as an extension to the existing Carno windfarm, with the Development at much visible from this location. However, as seen by comparison with the photography of the existing closer proximity and occupying a large part of the mid ground view. view, the Waun Garno turbines would be partially screened by intervening vegetation. 3. Potential Effect on Landscape Character at the Viewpoint: The cumulative effect on the medium 2. Cumulative Magnitude of Change: The moderate cumulative magnitude of change identified in the sensitivity landscape character at this location would be moderate from the Development with ES would remain the same for the revised Development with the existing/consented windfarms existing/consented and application stage windfarms including Waun Garno, which would occupy a and the application stage windfarms including Waun Garno. The cumulative effect of the small part of the distant horizon. Development with Waun Garno is unlikely to affect this as it would contribute very little to views from this location, only occupying a 3.69 degree horizontal angle in comparison to the 4. Potential Effect on Visual Amenity: The cumulative effect of the Development with Development which would occupy 11.10 degrees, viewed in a different direction. existing/consented and application stage windfarms including Waun Garno on high sensitivity walkers on the Kerry Ridgeway, would remain as major/moderate as identified in the ES. 3. Potential Effect on Landscape Character at the Viewpoint: The moderate effect on landscape character assessed for this viewpoint in the original ES would remain the same, even with the 6.8.2.5 Viewpoint 8 – Great Rhos: inclusion of the Waun Garno windfarm in the cumulative assessment. 1. Visibility: The cumulative view from this location showing the proposed windfarm at Waun Garno is 4. Potential Effect on Visual Amenity: Given the small proportion of the view affected by Waun Garno depicted by the wireline in Figure S6-39. This shows that the proposed Waun Garno turbines and that it would be partly screened by existing mature trees, the cumulative effect on visual would potentially be visible in a north-easterly direction, seen within a group of existing and amenity from the Development with existing/consented and application windfarms including Waun consented windfarms comprising Carno, its extension and Cemmaes, all of which would be seen Garno would remain moderate. behind the Development. Of the 11 proposed turbines at Waun Garno only 7 of the blade tips would be visible from this location above the horizon, although they would be difficult to distinguish 6.8.2.3 Viewpoint 4 – Dolfor: from the turbines of the adjacent windfarms. The application stage Cemmaes 3 would form part of this extended group of turbines, with the application stage Llaithddu turbines closer to the 1. Visibility: The cumulative view from this location showing the proposed windfarm at Waun Garno is viewpoint and seen adjacent to and in front of the Development. depicted by the wireline in Figure S6-31a. This shows that the Waun Garno turbines would be visible in a westerly direction just to the south of the existing Carno windfarm being on the distant 2. Cumulative Magnitude of Change: The cumulative magnitude of change from the Development horizon to the north of the Development. Of the 11 proposed turbines at Waun Garno all of the with the existing/consented and application stage windfarms including Waun Garno would reduce blade tips would be would be visible from this location, while only 6 of the hubs would be seen from slight as identified in the original ES to negligible. This is due to the change of status for above the horizon, all at a distance of over 17.27 km. Garreg Lwyd Hill and Llaithddu from scoping stage to application stage. The limited visibility of Waun Garno and the fact it would be behind intervening windfarms means that it would have a 2. Cumulative Magnitude of Change: The cumulative magnitude of change from the revised limited effect on the cumulative magnitude of change. Development with the existing and consented windfarms, as well as the application stage windfarms including Waun Garno would remain substantial, as identified in the original ES. This 3. Potential Effect on Landscape Character at the Viewpoint: The cumulative effect on landscape reflects the proximity (5.91 km) and proportion of view (31.46 degrees) occupied by the character from the Development with existing/consented and application stage windfarms including Development and the fact that the proposed Waun Garno windfarm would be distantly visible on Waun Garno would remain negligible when application sites are included. the horizon seen close to the existing Carno windfarm. 4. Potential Effect on Visual Amenity: The cumulative effect of the Development, with existing and 3. Potential Effect on Landscape Character at the Viewpoint: There would be a major/moderate consented windfarms, on the medium sensitivity visual receptors would remain as moderate/minor cumulative effect on the medium sensitivity landscape character from the Development with the reducing to minor with the inclusion of the windfarms at the planning application stage including existing/consented and application stage windfarms including Waun Garno, which is the same as Waun Garno. that assessed in the original ES. 6.8.2.6 Viewpoint 12 – Cnapiau’r Ferlan: 4. Potential Effect on Visual Amenity: The cumulative effect from the Development with the inclusion of Waun Garno in the application stage windfarms would remain as major for high sensitivity local 1. Visibility: The cumulative view from this location showing the proposed windfarm at Waun Garno is residents and major/moderate for medium sensitivity road users at this viewpoint location. depicted by the wireline in Figure S6-47. This shows that the proposed Waun Garno turbines would be distantly visible in a northerly direction in front of (but at a lower level than) the existing 6.8.2.4 Viewpoint 5 – Kerry Ridgeway: Carno windfarm. Of the 11 proposed turbines at Waun Garno all of the blade tips are predicted to be visible from this location, with only 3 of the hubs potentially seen above the horizon. 1. Visibility; The cumulative view from this location showing the proposed windfarm at Waun Garno is depicted by the wireline in Figure S6-33c. This shows that the Waun Garno turbines would be 2. Cumulative Magnitude of Change: The cumulative magnitude of change caused by the visible in a west-north-westerly direction just to the south of the existing Carno windfarm. All of the Development with existing and consented windfarms would be slight reducing to negligible with 11 proposed turbines at Waun Garno would potentially be visible from this location at a distance of inclusion of the application stage windfarms. The limited visibility of Waun Garno (as described over 19.32 km. above) means it has a minor contribution to the cumulative magnitude of change for this viewpoint.
December 2011 Llandinam Windfarm Repowering and Extension Environmental Statement – Supplementary Environmental Information Page 8 of Chapter 6 Chapter 6.0 Landscape and Visual
3. Potential Effect on Landscape Character at the Viewpoint: The cumulative effect on the medium 4. Potential Effect on Visual Amenity: For the reasons described above, the cumulative effect on sensitivity landscape character at this location from the Development with existing and consented visual amenity from the Development with the inclusion of Waun Garno in the application windfarms and would be moderate/minor, reducing to minor with the inclusion of the application windfarms would remain as moderate for high sensitivity walkers at this location, as identified in stage windfarms including Waun Garno. the ES.
4. Potential Effect on Visual Amenity: For high sensitivity walkers on this bridleway, the cumulative 6.8.2.9 Viewpoint 16 – Glyndwr’s Way near Moelfre: effect on visual amenity would result in a moderate effect, reducing to moderate/minor with the inclusion of the application stage windfarms. Waun Garno only having a very minor overall 1. Visibility: The cumulative view from this location showing the proposed windfarm at Waun Garno is contribution. depicted by the wireline in Figure S6-55a. This shows that the proposed turbines at Waun Garno would be visible in a north-westerly direction seen mostly in front of the existing Carno windfarm. 6.8.2.7 Viewpoint 13 –Grach: Of 11 proposed turbines at Waun Garno, 9 of the blade tips would be would be visible from this location, while only 8 of the hubs would be seen above the horizon at a distance of over 13.1 km. 1. Visibility: The cumulative view from this location showing the proposed windfarm at Waun Garno is depicted by the wireline in Figure S6-49b. This shows that the proposed turbines at Waun Garno 2. Cumulative Magnitude of Change: The cumulative magnitude of change from the Development would be visible in a north-westerly direction seen in front of the existing Carno windfarm. All 11 of with existing/consented and application stage windfarms including Waun Garno would remain the proposed turbines at Waun Garno (blade tips and hubs) would potentially be visible from this substantial, as identified in the original ES. This is largely due to the proximity (1.25km) and location. They would appear as part of the Carno windfarm and extending its horizontal angle proportion of view (97.61 degrees) occupied by the Development with the other windfarms seen subtended, albeit with the turbines slightly closer to the viewpoint. more distantly.
2. Cumulative Magnitude of Change: The cumulative magnitude of change from the Development 3. Potential Effect on Landscape Character at the Viewpoint: The substantial magnitude of with existing/consented and application stage windfarms including Waun Garno would be cumulative change from the Development with the existing/consented and application stage moderate, with three blade tips of the Development visible above the skyline and the other windfarms including Waun Garno would result in a major effect on the high sensitivity landscape windfarms seen more distantly. character at this viewpoint.
3. Potential Effect on Landscape Character at the Viewpoint: The cumulative effect on landscape 4. Potential Effect on Visual Amenity: The cumulative effect on visual amenity for high sensitivity character of the Development with the inclusion of the Waun Garno windfarm to the other walkers on Glyndwr’s Way at this location from the Development with the inclusion of the Waun applications would be moderate on this medium sensitivity landscape. The Waun Garno turbines Garno windfarm in the assessment would be major, as identified in the ES. would be likely to be perceived as part of the cluster of windfarm development at Carno and the more distant Cemmaes; and therefore the cumulative effect of the Development is not considered 6.8.2.10 Viewpoint 19 – Plynlimon to be altered by its inclusion in the assessment. 1. Visibility: The cumulative view from this elevated summit showing the proposed windfarm at Waun 4. Potential Effect on Visual Amenity: For the reasons described above, the moderate cumulative Garno is depicted by the wireline in Figure S6-59a, which shows the application stage Waun magnitude of change from the Development would result in a major/moderate and significant Garno turbines occurring to the right of a large group of windfarms comprising Carno, Tirgwynt, cumulative effect with existing/consented and application windfarms including Waun Garno, for Mynydd Clogau and Mynydd Waun Fawr. high visual sensitivity walkers on Glyndwr’s Way at this location. 2. Cumulative Magnitude of Change: The cumulative magnitude of change from the Development 6.8.2.8 Viewpoint 15 – Footpath Garreg Lwyd: with existing/consented and application stage windfarms including Waun Garno would be negligible, largely due to the limited portion of the view that the Development would occupy seen in 1. Visibility: The cumulative view from this location showing the proposed windfarm at Waun Garno is conjunction and appearing part of the Llaithddu, Llanbadarn Fynydd and Garreg Lwyd Hill depicted by the wireline in Figure S6-53a. This shows that the proposed Waun Garno turbines developments. would be visible in a northerly direction in front and to the east of the existing Carno windfarm. All 11 of the proposed turbines at Waun Garno (blade tips and hubs) would potentially be visible from 3. Potential Effect on Landscape Character at the Viewpoint: The negligible magnitude of cumulative this location although due to their arrangement, most of the turbines would be seen as a tight change from the Development with the existing/consented and application stage windfarms would central cluster with two pairs of turbines at the outer edges of the array. result in a minor effect on the medium sensitivity landscape character at this location.
2. Cumulative Magnitude of Change: The cumulative magnitude of change from the Development 4. Potential Effect on Visual Amenity at the Viewpoint: The cumulative effect on visual amenity of the with existing/consented and application windfarms including Waun Garno, is assessed as being Development with existing/consented and application stage windfarms including Waun Garno for moderate, as identified in the original ES. This is principally due to the isolated skyline position of high sensitivity walkers on the summit of Plynlimon would be moderate/minor. the Development and prominence of Bryn Titli in the foreground. 6.8.2.11 Viewpoint 22 – Bryn Y Fedwen 3. Potential Effect on Landscape Character at the Viewpoint: The cumulative effect on the medium sensitivity landscape at this location from the Development with existing/consented and application 1. Visibility: The cumulative view from this location showing the proposed windfarm at Waun Garno is stage windfarms including Waun Garno would remain moderate as identified in the ES. The depicted by the wireline in Figure S6-64a. This shows that the proposed turbines at Waun Garno proposed windfarm at Waun Garno although appearing as a somewhat fragmented extension to would be visible in an easterly direction between the existing windfarm at Carno and the the existing Carno windfarm, would be considerably more distant than the adjacent Bryn Titli Development. All 11 of the proposed turbines at Waun Garno (blade tips, hubs and towers) would turbines as well as the Development. potentially be visible from this location at a distance of over 7.6 km.
December 2011 Llandinam Windfarm Repowering and Extension Environmental Statement – Supplementary Environmental Information Page 9 of Chapter 6 Chapter 6.0 Landscape and Visual
their specific reference number and divided into sections as shown on Figure S6-77. Each route is 2. Cumulative Magnitude of Change: The cumulative magnitude of change from the Development described sequentially below using junctions and points where the paths cross the application site with existing/consented and application stage windfarms was identified as slight in the original ES. boundary as reference points. The turbines at the Development would be quite distant at over 21 km although occupying over 14 degrees of the horizontal view in comparison to the turbines at Waun Garno that would be much 6.8.3.1 Public Footpath 43: Entering the application site from north past sheep pens at Waen- closer and seen as a separate and prominent grouping. The cumulative magnitude of change from llwydion the Development with the existing, consented and application stage windfarms, including Waun Garno, would remain slight. 6.8.3.1.1 43A - Approaching application site boundary:
3. Potential Effect on Landscape Character at the Viewpoint: The cumulative effect on landscape 1. Approaching the application site from the north on the public footpath which passes through the character from the Development with existing/consented and application stage windfarms would farm at Waen-llwydion (and associated sheep pens) the existing Llandinam turbines are hidden by remain moderate/minor as identified the original ES. the intervening landform, however the Development would become visible, with T21 and 20 being seen as the path climbs the lower slopes of Yr Allt Gethin. On crossing the application site 4. Potential Effect on Visual Amenity: As identified in the ES the cumulative effect on visual amenity boundary more blade tips of the northern most group of turbines at the Development would for high sensitivity walkers using the Glyndwr’s Way and cyclists on the National Route would be become visible although the existing turbines are hidden from this location. Looking in the moderate. For road users on the minor road network, there would be a moderate/minor effect. opposite direction (north), the existing and proposed windfarms at Carno and the proposed windfarm at Waun Garno potentially would be visible; as well as the existing turbines at Mynydd 6.8.2.12 Viewpoint 24 – Garreg Hir Clogau and its proposed extension which would be more distantly visible along with Cemmaes, Mynydd Waun Fawr and Tirgwynt. 1. Visibility: The cumulative view from this location showing the proposed windfarm at Waun Garno is depicted by the wireline in Figure S6-68b. This shows that the proposed turbines at Waun Garno 6.8.3.1.2 43B - Moving towards junction of pathway at Giant’s Grave: would be visible in a south-westerly direction to the south of the windfarm at Carno. All 11 of the proposed turbines at Waun Garno (blade tips, hubs and towers) would potentially be visible from 1. As the public footpath climbs the north facing slopes of Yr Allt Gethin onto the Waun Ddubarthog this location at a distance of 7.3 km. The turbines would appear separated from the Carno ridge, the existing turbines at Llandinam become visible seen as a cluster which extends along the windfarm being closer and larger, as the nearest existing Carno turbine is 19.2 km away and is crest of the ridge. The Development would be in closer proximity and much larger scale. From the smaller in size. junction of the pathway adjacent to Giant’s Grave the elevation would potentially increase the visibility of the aforementioned existing and proposed windfarms present to the north which include 2. Cumulative Magnitude of Change: The cumulative magnitude of change from the Development Carno and the proposed windfarm at Waun Garno, the existing turbines at Mynydd Clogau along with existing/consented and application stage windfarms including Waun Garno would be with its proposed extension and the more distant grouping of Cemmaes, Mynydd Waun Fawr and negligible. This viewpoint location is adjacent to the consented Tirgwynt windfarm (previously Tirgwynt. Once on the ridge itself, to the south of the Giant’s Grave, the existing windfarm at Cefn application stage) which would be the most prominent development in the view. The Development Croes is potentially visible in the distance just below the horizon looking in a west-southwesterly would introduce a group of turbines seen in conjunction with the application stage Garreg Lwyd direction, as well as the existing windfarm Bryn Titli. Hill, Llanbadarn Fynydd and Llaithddu windfarms to the south of the viewpoint, with Waun Garno and Carno visible to the southwest and Mynydd Clogau visible to the northeast. 2. The removal of turbines T22, 23 and 24 from the revised layout means that views in a westerly direction from this section of the Waun Ddubarthog ridge would not be interrupted by turbines. 3. Potential Effect on Landscape Character at the Viewpoint: The cumulative effect on the medium sensitivity landscape character at this location from the Development with the inclusion of the 6.8.3.1.3 43C - Crest of the Waun Ddubarthog ridge adjacent to Cairn and northernmost existing turbines at application stage Waun Garno windfarm would result in a minor effect. Llandinam:
4. Potential Effect on Visual Amenity: The cumulative effect on visual amenity for high sensitivity 1. At this point the footpath passes next to the northernmost existing turbines at Llandinam, with walkers from the Development with existing/consented and application stage windfarms including views to the east, southeast and south being strongly influenced by them. The Development Waun Garno would be moderate/minor. would appear less dense but with larger scale turbines than the existing windfarm, and would be seen in a wider proportion of the view. 6.8.2.13 Viewpoint 26 – Caersws 2. With regards to other windfarms visible from this section of the footpath, in addition to the 1. Visibility: The cumulative view from this location showing the proposed windfarm at Waun Garno is aforementioned existing and proposed windfarms to the north of the application site, the proposed depicted by the wireline in Figure S6-72c. This shows that the proposed turbines at Waun Garno windfarm at Llanbadarn Fynydd and Garreg Lwyd Hill would also potentially be visible looking would not be visible from this location due to intervening vegetation. Hence the cumulative effects through the turbines at Llandinam in an east-southeasterly direction. in relation to the Development would be limited. From nearby locations it may be possible that the Waun Garno turbines would be seen in a westerly direction where gaps in hedgerow vegetation 3. In the originally submitted layout, views in a westerly and north-westerly direction from this location would allow. would see proposed turbines in the foreground, most notably T24. However the design revision (with turbines T22, T23 and T24 removed) means that views in this direction would be largely 6.8.3 Sequential Cumulative Assessment for Public Footpaths Crossing the Application unaffected by the Development. Site 6.8.3.1.4 43D - Crest of the Waun Ddubarthog ridge to the south of the northern grouping of turbines 1. In order to assess the potential cumulative sequential effects of the Development on the public adjacent to borrow pit: footpaths which cross the application site, the footpaths and bridleways have been identified by
December 2011 Llandinam Windfarm Repowering and Extension Environmental Statement – Supplementary Environmental Information Page 10 of Chapter 6 Chapter 6.0 Landscape and Visual
1. Moving south from the previous location those using this footpath will pass through the northern 2. On crossing the application boundary an array of existing turbines become visible stretching out grouping of existing turbines at Llandinam. These turbines would mostly be seen in views to the into the distance along the crest of the Waun Ddubarthog ridge. The Development would appear east with only a limited number of turbines on the steep west facing slopes of the Waun less dense but larger scale than the existing windfarm and would accommodate a wider horizontal Ddubarthog ridge which drops down to Craig y Paun and Esgair Lwyd. With regards to westward angle of view with turbines T1, T2, T3, T4, T5, T6, T7, T9, T13, T14 and T15 being further to the views, the proposed turbine T25 would replace 3 existing turbines, and turbine T26 would be east of the existing windfarm. positioned further to the west of the existing turbine and pylon. 6.8.3.2.2 16B – Pathway junction adjacent to Giant’s Grave: 2. Further to the south the footpath passes one of the existing borrow pits. It is proposed that this borrow pit would be extended as part of the Development. From this location views of the existing 1. Moving into the application site in a south-westerly direction, the footpath passes a cairn (on the southern grouping of turbines become possible over the intervening valley feature. The existing left) and meets footpath 54 which enters the application site from the north eastern boundary. turbines appear as a fairly dense arrangement covering the area of ridge which extends out in a From this location (at approximately 500 m AOD) views open up in an easterly direction over the westerly direction. The Development would see a marked decrease in density of turbines although intervening valley feature at Mochdre Brook allowing views towards the application stage of larger size. With regard to other existing and proposed windfarms, views are mostly restricted by windfarms at Llanbadarn Fynydd and Garreg Lwyd Hill. These windfarms would become more intervening landform, however the northernmost turbines of the existing windfarm at Bryn Titli are visible on climbing up the slope on the footpath with leaves the application site on the north visible to the southwest and distant views of the existing development Cefn Croes may be possible eastern boundary. in a west southwesterly direction. With regards application stage windfarms the nearby proposed turbines at Llaithddu would become visible to the immediate south southeast of this location. 2. A short distance from this existing pathway junction it is intended that a new footpath is formalised Looking east from the ridge the proposed turbines at Llanbadarn Fynydd would be seen in front of linking this section of the pathway to footpath 43 which enters the application site to the north, past the application at Garreg Lwyd Hill. Waen-llwydion (and associated sheep pens). This new path would provide an alternative route passing the Development at a greater distance than the existing route. This additional section of 6.8.3.1.5 43E – Junction with public footpath 107 and 108: path would allow movement in an east to west direction to the south of T21. Views from this location would be comparable to those described above for ‘43B’; the section of path adjacent to 1. Moving south the footpath drops in elevation, with the existing turbines along the crest of the Waun Giant’s Grave. Other windfarms visible from this location include existing and proposed windfarms Ddubarthog ridge being visible on the horizon in views to the west. As described above, the at Carno and Waun Garno to the northwest, and to the north the existing turbines at Mynydd Development would be less dense but larger in scale than the existing turbines. Looking back up Clogau along with its proposed extension and the more distant grouping of Cemmaes, Mynydd the footpath in a northerly direction the existing turbines remain visible on the horizon in the Waun Fawr and Tirgwynt. Once on the ridge itself, to the south of the Giant’s Grave, the existing existing view. The Development would accommodate a wider horizontal angle of view with windfarm at Cefn Croes is potentially visible in the distance just below the horizon looking in a west proposed turbines T1, T2, T3 and T9 being further east than the footprint of the existing windfarm. south westerly direction, as well as the existing windfarm Bryn Titli. Shortly before reaching the application site boundary footpath 43 meets with footpath 108 which traverses down the west facing slope of the Waun Ddubarthog ridge in a north northwesterly 3. Continuing on the existing path in a south-westerly direction, users would pass close by to T20 (on direction. On crossing the application site boundary footpath 43 joins with footpath 107. the right) with views in a westerly direction being partly restricted by the intervening landform as it rises to the crest of the Waun Ddubarthog ridge. Views to the east through to the south are open 6.8.3.1.6 43F – Towards junction with public footpaths 105 and 106 (outside application site boundary): with existing turbines being concentrated in views to the south. The Development would increase the spread of turbines (as described above for ‘16A’) with turbines being introduced along the 1. After leaving the application site and passing the junction with footpath 107 those using footpath entire length of this section of path. 43 would move south into a small valley feature at the head of Blue Lins Brook. This section of footpath occurs to the east of the application site boundary. While the elevation of the path 4. This path meets the crest of the ridge at the junction described above for ‘43C’ where the footpath decreases the valley feature allows views towards the existing turbines at Llandinam in a westerly passes next to the northernmost existing turbines at Llandinam. direction. From this location the southernmost turbines of existing windfarm appear as a tight evenly spaced grouping. By contrast the Development would appear as a more widely spaced 6.8.3.3 Public Footpath 108: Travelling north northwest from the junction with public footpath at arrangement with turbines T31, T32 and T39 being closer to this location than any turbines forming 43E towards 108A part of the existing development. 6.8.3.3.1 108A – Travelling from the junction with public footpath at 43E towards 108A: 6.8.3.2 Public Footpath 16: Entering the application site from north past the quarry at Ty’n-y-celyn and cairn 1. This section of pathway splits from footpath 43 which traverses down the west facing slope of the Waun Ddubarthog ridge in a north northwesterly direction. The orientation of the footpath means 6.8.3.2.1 16A - Approaching application site boundary: that expansive views from the ridge are possible with existing windfarms at Carno and Cemmaes being visible in a northwesterly direction. With regards proposed windfarms those at Carno, Waun 1. Approaching the application site from the north public footpath number 16 passes the small Garno and Cemmaes would all potentially be visible. disused quarry at Ty’n-y-celyn, with blade tips of the existing Llandinam turbines becoming visible when travelling south up the slopes towards the cairn. With regards to the Development, turbines 2. The existing northern grouping of turbines at Llandinam appear in views to the north through to a T19-21 would be the first to become visible on the horizon. Looking back in the opposite direction southeasterly direction. The proportion of view occupied by the Development would however be (i.e. northwest to northeast) the existing and proposed windfarms at Carno and the proposed greater, with proposed turbine T26 positioned on a promontory of the ridge currently unoccupied windfarm at Waun Garno would be visible, as well as the existing turbines at Mynydd Clogau along by existing turbines. with its proposed extension and distant albeit restricted views of Cemmaes, Mynydd Waun Fawr and Tirgwynt. 3. Travelling along the footpath towards point 108A shown on Figure S6-77 the intervening landform restricts views in an easterly direction towards the northern grouping of turbines. With the
December 2011 Llandinam Windfarm Repowering and Extension Environmental Statement – Supplementary Environmental Information Page 11 of Chapter 6 Chapter 6.0 Landscape and Visual
exception of proposed turbines T25 and T26, the other proposed turbines are set further back from 4. While views of the existing southern grouping of turbines at Llandinam are quite restricted for those the edge of the ridge meaning that fewer (albeit larger) turbines would be seen from this section of travelling up the footpath from the western boundary some of the northern grouping are visible. path. Looking back along the line of the path the proposed development at Llaithddu would The same is true in relation to the Development with a direct line of sight from the lower section of potentially remain visible. Looking in a southerly direction from this section of path the existing the path which heads in a northeasterly direction. On climbing the slope from the western southern grouping of turbines is visible. The existing turbines occupy a comparable proportion of application site boundary the most prominent turbines in the Development would be T25 and T26 the view to the Development; however the proposed turbines extend more to the east but less to with T18, T19, T20 and T21 being visible behind. While these are larger in scale than the turbines the west, because the existing turbines are closer to the edge of the ridge. With regards to other seen in existing views they would appear to be less dense and less cluttered than the existing windfarms Cefn Croes is visible in distant views to the west from this section of footpath. The turbine arrangement. section of public footpath defined as number 108 terminates at the former farm dwelling, at which point the existing development at Bryn Titli would become visible in views to the southwest. 6.8.3.5 Public Footpath 105: Entering the application site from the east facing boundary mid-way up the southern grouping of turbines. 6.8.3.4 Public Footpath 107; Junction with public footpath 43 to the north of the southern grouping of turbines. 6.8.3.5.1 105A – Entering the application site from the east:
6.8.3.4.1 107A – Travelling west from the junction with public footpath 43: 1. This section of pathway splits from the footpath which leaves the south facing boundary (described for ‘43E’ above) after passing the junction with the pathway described above from ‘107A’ and then 1. This section of pathway splits from footpath 43 which descends into a small valley feature after extending around the eastern slopes of the Waun Ddubarthog ridge above the forestry at Garn leaving the northern grouping of existing turbines (as described above for ‘43E’) heading in a Fach. south-westerly direction towards the southern grouping of existing turbines. This section of path traverses the northern slope of the valley feature before climbing up to the plateau on the crest of 2. This section of footpath enters the application site midway in the existing southern grouping of the ridge where the existing turbines are located. turbines and would be between proposed turbines T31 and T32 of the Development. As described previously for the footpath at ‘43A,’ the existing turbines would be significantly reduced in number 2. This section of footpath passes to the north of the existing turbines. The number and density of and density by the Development. For example, the existing row of eight turbines to the north of turbines in the Development would be reduced albeit deploying larger sized turbines. The overall this section of path would be replaced by turbine T38. To the immediate south of the path, the effect of this reduction in density and number combined with the arrangement of proposed turbines existing staggered row of 11 turbines would in effect be replaced by turbines T32, T39 and T40. would allow wider vistas between turbines and a less cluttered appearance. The overall effect of this reduction in density and number of proposed turbines would mean views over the ridge adjacent to the path would be more open. 3. Descending westward down the footpath views are directed out from the ridge with the landform restricting views of the existing windfarm and the southern array of the Development which are set 6.8.3.5.2 105B – Exiting the application site from the west: back from the path. Looking back in a north / north-westerly direction the existing turbines accommodate a large proportion of the view, as would the Development which, while less dense, 1. Moving further to the west those using the footpath would arrive at the western application site would accommodate a wider proportion of the view. boundary to the edge of the ridge at the top of the west facing slope. From this location there are panoramic views in a westerly through to northerly direction over the Severn Valley. With regards 6.8.3.4.2 107B – Exiting the application site boundary from to the west: to other windfarm development, the existing windfarms at Cefn Croes and Bryn Titli are visible in a westerly direction; to the northwest the existing and proposed windfarm developments at Carno 1. As mentioned above views from this location would generally be directed out from the Waun and the proposed development at Waun Garno would be visible. In addition, to the north, the Ddubarthog ridge in a westerly direction. On passing proposed turbine T28 in the Development, existing and proposed turbines at Mynydd Clogau, as well as the developments at Tirgwynt and the footpath reaches the edge of the ridge. From this location, panoramic views are possible, with Mynydd Waun Fawr would potentially be seen in the distance. the existing and proposed windfarm developments at Carno and Waun Garno being visible to the northwest and existing and proposed development at Mynydd Clogau in addition to the consented 2. As described above, the Development would result in the removal of turbines from the edge and Tirgwynt and proposed Mynydd Waun Fawr developments potentially being seen in the distance to upper slope of the Waun Ddubarthog ridge. Where this section of footpath crosses the western the north. application site boundary, views in a northerly direction are dominated by the existing rows of turbines. The Development would result in the removal of the westernmost turbines, with 2. On descending the steep slope from the crest of the ridge towards the western application site proposed turbines T29, 30 and 38 being set back from the edge of the ridge. This would allow boundary, the nature of the landform means that views onto the plateau at the top of the ridge are unobstructed views over the intervening landscape in a northerly direction up the Severn Valley. limited. With regards to the existing windfarm, only the most westerly turbines are visible from the The same is also true for views to the south, although from this location the existing turbines are footpath with views of the Development being even more restricted given that they are set back set back further from the crest of the ridge so the change to views out to the surrounding further from the edge. landscape would be less apparent.
3. When descending this section of footpath on the steeper slope, views are mostly in a westerly 6.8.3.5.3 105C – Following the western application site boundary: through to northerly direction over the Severn valley. In a westerly direction the existing windfarm at Cefn Croes would become visible. As described previously, the existing and proposed windfarm 1. The footpath then traverses the slope following the western application site boundary, passing over developments at Carno and the proposed development at Waun Garno would be visible to the a series of fords. From this section of footpath the westernmost existing turbines are visible, with northwest; with the existing and proposed development at Mynydd Clogau and Tirgwynt in addition blade tips and hubs being seen across the horizon from north to south, particularly in views to the to the proposed windfarm at Mynydd Waun Fawr potentially being seen in the distance to the south where a large proportion of the towers are also visible. The Development would reduce the north. number of turbines seen in the view, albeit of larger size.
December 2011 Llandinam Windfarm Repowering and Extension Environmental Statement – Supplementary Environmental Information Page 12 of Chapter 6 Chapter 6.0 Landscape and Visual
2. Views from this section of footpath would be in north-westerly direction with the elevated position there would be fewer turbines, resulting in a less dense distribution, albeit consisting of larger allowing views out over the Severn Valley. With regards other windfarm development, the existing turbines. Removal of turbines T22, T23 and T24, would mean that the northern section of the development at Cefn Croes and Bryn Titli would be visible in a north-westerly direction. To the Route identified as 43B and 43C on Figure S6-77 would retain open and uninterrupted views to the northwest the existing and proposed windfarm developments at Carno and the proposed west and northwest. development at Waun Garno would also be visible. 6.8.3.8 Summary of effects on Shropshire Hills AONB 6.8.3.5.4 105D – Exiting the application site to the south west: 1. The review of the LVIA presented in the original ES (carried out in July 2009 by Capita Symonds 1. This section of pathway leaves the application site on the lower slopes of the Waun Ddubarthog on behalf of PCC) suggests that additional consultation with the Shropshire Hills AONB would be ridge traversing the slopes towards the location described at point ‘105B and C’ above. desirable in order to ensure their interests are addressed by the assessment. However, Viewpoint 6 (see Figures 6-34(i-ii) and 6-35(a-b)) was included in the original ES to assess views from both 2. The existing rows of turbines are visible from this location when looking back in a northeast / the Black Mountains and the Shropshire Hills AONB, representing ‘worst case’ views from this easterly direction up the slope, with the alignment of the path. The existing turbines are seen on direction. the edge of the ridge and then at regular intervals behind. The Development would consist of fewer turbines albeit of larger size. 2. The landscape at this location is considered to have a medium sensitivity to the type of development proposed due to the extent of available views and taking account of its occurrence in 6.8.3.6 Public Footpath 106: From junction with public footpaths 43 and 105; Exiting the the AONB. In terms of the cumulative magnitude of change when the Development was application site and heading south towards Hirddywel considered against existing and consented windfarms a moderate magnitude of change was recorded in the original ES. Given that the proposed windfarms at Llaithddu and Garreg Lwyd Hill 6.8.3.6.1 106A – Junction with footpaths 43 and 105; Exiting the application site: are now at application stage (rather than scoping as shown in the original ES) the contribution of the Development to the cumulative magnitude of change would reduce to negligible for this 1. After the junction with footpaths 43 and 105, footpath 106 leaves the application site in south / scenario. This would result in a minor cumulative effect on landscape character and visual southwesterly direction passing to the east of the existing southern grouping of turbines at amenity for existing, consented and application stage windfarms at this viewpoint. This reflects the Llandinam. The existing turbines are visible along the crest of the Waun Ddubarthog ridge in potential effects of the windfarm applications at Llanbadarn Fynydd, Llaithddu and Garreg Lwyd views to the west and are arranged in distinct evenly spaced rows. The proposed turbines would Hill which are closer to the viewpoint and would overlap with views of the Development from this be at much wider spacings and larger in scale, they would also be closer, with turbines T32, T33 location. and T34 being nearer to footpath 106 than any of the existing turbines. With regards to views of other existing or proposed windfarms, those situated to the west of this location are screened by 3. This is deemed to be a fair reflection of the potential effects on the AONB from this location, given the intervening landform. However, to the east the application stage windfarm at Llaithddu would that this viewpoint is close to the application site and provides elevated views. As described above be seen in close proximity, with the proposed turbines at Llanbadarn Fynydd and Garreg Lwyd Hill the effects on this area are unlikely to be significant. Viewpoint 6 on the Black Mountains is being seen in the middle distance through the aforementioned turbines at Llaithddu. located on the west side of the Shropshire Hills AONB and therefore in the closest part of the designated area to the Development. Effects further east would be further reduced with distance 2. Heading south towards Hirddywel this section of footpath continues in a south southwesterly from the Development and it is not considered that there would be any significant effects within the direction to the east of the existing turbines at Llandinam. As described above, proposed turbines AONB and no significant effect on the overall integrity of the designated area. T32, T33 and T34 would be nearer to footpath 106 than any of the existing turbines, which would also be larger and more widely spaced. However, in terms of horizontal extent the proposed 6.8.3.9 Summary of effects on Llanbadarn Fynydd and area to the north southern grouping of turbines would occupy a slightly larger proportion of the view. As the footpath nears the southern application site boundary views from the Waun Ddubarthog ridge remain 1. The Capita Symmonds noted that further assessment of potential effects on the settlement of restricted in a westerly direction by intervening landform, with views to the south east opening up Llanbadarn Fynydd and the area to the north should have been carried out. The ES LVIA over areas of felled forestry. viewpoints were agreed through a consultation process and no request for an additional viewpoint in this location was made. The blade tip ZTV on ES Figure S6-7b shows theoretical visibility of 3. Looking back in a northerly direction the northern grouping of existing turbines at Llandinam would between 1 and 6 turbines extending across the A483 immediately to the south east of the be visible on the horizon. The proposed turbines would be larger scale and more widely spaced, settlement of Llanbadarn Fynydd, but not from the centre of the village. The ES LVIA provides a occupying a wider proportion of the view as turbines T1, T2, T3, T4, T8 and T9 are all in a more detailed analysis of potential visibility both of the Development on its own and cumulatively with the easterly position than the existing development at Llandinam. With regards to other proposed other wind farms included in the cumulative assessment from the A483, (see paras 6.5.4.6a – 6c) windfarms, the application stage development at Llaithddu would overlap with the most easterly and notes that no visibility is predicted for the Development to the south of Llanbadarn Fynydd, proposed turbines mentioned above. with more extensive views to the north of the settlement. However, the ES LVIA also notes the presence of tree cover adjacent to the road along the River Ithon valley and the fact that this would 6.8.3.7 Summary for Sequential Footpath Analysis reduce actual visibility of the Development from that shown on the ZTVs.
1. The footpaths/bridleways identified on Figure S6-77 extend through the Development site. They 2. In terms of potential effects in the area to the north of Llandbadarn Fynydd, Viewpoint 7 at Fron pass close to the existing windfarm at Llandinam and views from the paths therefore are currently Top is located approximately 1.7 km to the north east of the settlement and potential effects on affected by the turbines. The Development would result in a reduced number of larger turbines landscape character and visual amenity are fully assessed in the ES LVIA for this location which is being accommodated on the site. The change in the height and distribution of the turbines would 7.78 km from the nearest proposed turbine. Significant effects from the Development considered result in a notable effect on the sections of these paths that pass through the site. The magnitude on its own and cumulatively in respect of existing and consented wind farms are predicted for this of change arising from the increased size of the turbines would be substantial and accordingly location, reducing to moderate/minor and non significant with the inclusion of the application stage there would be a significant effect for high sensitivity visual receptors on these paths. However wind farms. This effect would primarily reduce due to the proximity of the Llanbadarn Ffynydd
December 2011 Llandinam Windfarm Repowering and Extension Environmental Statement – Supplementary Environmental Information Page 13 of Chapter 6 Chapter 6.0 Landscape and Visual
application stage wind farm which would appear in much closer and partially in front of the 6.9.4 Visibility Development. 1. The ZTV analysis in the original ES identified that the Development would be visible from around 6.9 Statement of Effects 942 km2, approximately 29% of the overall study area. This figure would remain similar for the revised layout (Figure 4-1AD). As described in the ES, the extent of the predicted visibility largely 6.9.1 Methodology matches that of the existing turbines at Llandinam.
1. The same methodology utilised in completion of the LVIA in the original ES has been used for this 2. While the overall visibility remains comparable, the aforementioned design changes would have an SEI, i.e. it has been based on current UK guidelines, and has drawn upon conclusions arising from effect on the number of turbines seen from some locations, most notably to the north where the the post consultation responses. removal of turbines T22, T23 and T24 of the previously submitted layout would be most apparent.
2. The effects of the Development on landscape and visual amenity have been considered in 6.9.5 Evaluation of Residual Effects conjunction with the updated baseline of existing/consented windfarms, as well as in conjunction with application stage windfarms including Waun Garno, as set out at Section 6.5. 6.9.5.1 Significant Effects
6.9.2 Baseline 1. Section 6.7.6.1 of the original ES describes the significant effects associated with the Development. As discussed in this chapter of the SEI, although the nature of these effects would 1. The range visual receptors considered in the original ES remains appropriate, as do the viewpoints in some cases change in relation to the revised layout; the number and extent of significant effects selected in consultation with PCC and CCW to represent them. The addition of Viewpoint 27 from is predicted to remain the same as previously identified, with the exception of an additional Plas Dinam followed comments made in the review completed by Capita Symonds on behalf of significant effect on visual amenity being predicted at Grach (Viewpoint 13). Here, as a PCC (July 2009) in order to provide better representation of this part of the study area. consequence of there being 3 turbines visible, compared with 2 turbines in the previously submitted layout, there would be an increased horizontal angle occupied by the proposed turbines 2. Analysis of the Powys LCA (published in March 2008) has also been carried out to identify whether at close proximity to the viewpoint. The effect on visual amenity is considered to be significant. this would result in any changes to the baseline. However as discussed in section 6.3, the Powys LCA is based on the same LANDMAP data which was used to define the baseline landscape 2. Sections 6.7 and 6.8 of this chapter of the SEI highlight the key changes to the residual effects and character as set out in the original ES. It is therefore concluded that publication of the Powys LCA conclusions that arise from the changes to the layout and revised cumulative context. Based on does not alter the baseline landscape assessment. The landscape character areas identified in the the criteria set out in Section 6.7 of original ES, potential changes to the evaluation of effects is as Powys LCA are illustrated on Figure S6-76. follows:
6.9.3 Sources of Potential Impact and Mitigation Measures 6.9.5.2 Transportation Network
1. The sources of potential impact would not differ substantially from those discussed in the original 1. Section 6.7.6.2 of the original ES discusses the effects of the Development upon the local ES. However the removal of three prominent turbines (T22, T23 and T24) would have an effect on transportation network. The effects described in the original ES relate to a number of routes views from the north and to a limited extent from other directions. This is discussed in Section 6.6. including main roads and the Shrewsbury Aberystwyth railway line. In terms of changes to effects Overall the Development would consist of less than half of the number of existing turbines (39 resulting from revised layout and cumulative context, the effects described in the original ES would compared to 103); they would be considerably taller (111.2 m or 121.2 m compared to 45.5 m to remain the same. However, changes to the layout would reduce the visual effect for some views blade tip) and more widely spaced than the existing turbines. Consequently, from most viewpoints, such as those from the Shrewsbury Aberystwyth railway line as it crosses the Caersws Bowl, albeit the horizontal extent of the visible Development turbines would be similar to, or slightly greater not enough to reduce the effect in this area from major/moderate. The effects on the main road than, that occupied by the existing turbines. The potential sources of impact would more often network assessed in the original ES would remain the same. However, the revised layout with than not be cumulative, with the Development seen in conjunction with a number of other existing, turbines T22, T23 and T24 removed would help to minimise the localised significant effects on consented or proposed windfarms. some sections of the A470 southwest of Newtown and east of Llanidloes, and the A483 around Dolfor. 2. Potential impacts associated with site cranes and access tracks used during the commissioning/decommissioning of the windfarm would be relatively short in duration with the 6.9.5.3 Recreation and Tourism majority of temporary structures and disturbance removed upon completion of the works. The potential impacts of these operations would be unchanged from those described in the original ES. 1. The assessment in the original ES identifies the potential effects on recreation and tourism receptors in Section 6.6.2.4. Significant effects are identified for some locations on Glyndwr’s Way, 3. As described in the original ES, the Development would, by its nature, be visible from a and would occur over sections of the long distance route as it approaches the Development from widespread area, largely synonymous with the area from where the existing Llandinam windfarm is the west. These views are illustrated by Viewpoint 16 (see Figures S6-54a(i)-b(ii) and S6-55a to e), visible. In addition to the mitigation measures considered as part of the original layout, the revised where a substantial magnitude of change is identified for a short section of this route in conjunction design for the Development has taken account of consultation responses to the original ES, in with other cumulative windfarms. From this location the removal of turbines T22-24 would take out order to minimise potential impacts arising from all stages. This is described in detail in Section 3 turbines previously predicted to be visible above the horizon in distant views looking up the 6.6 which assesses the design change effects and mitigation measures with respect to the Severn Valley towards Caersws. However, while the removal of these turbines represents an landscape fabric and visual effects in relation to specific viewpoints. improvement to the appearance of the Development in comparison to the original design, it would not be significant enough to alter the overall levels assessed in the original ES. The substantial change assessed for views from Glyndwr’s Way to the south close to Bwlch-y-sarnau (see Viewpoint 10, Figure S6-43) would remain unaffected by the design revisions. Elsewhere, the
December 2011 Llandinam Windfarm Repowering and Extension Environmental Statement – Supplementary Environmental Information Page 14 of Chapter 6 Chapter 6.0 Landscape and Visual
effect of the Development for walkers on this long distance route would not be significant and the turbines would be seen in conjunction with other existing windfarms which are located within the study area. Views from other trails and National Cycle Routes have been assessed in Section 6.6.2.4 of the original ES and would also not be significant.
6.9.5.4 Settlements
1. The assessment of effects on settlements is set out in Section 6.6.2.5 of the original ES which identifies potentially significant effects to villages and towns within approximately 9 km of the Development. The overall effects described in this section would remain unchanged by the updated cumulative context and revisions to the layout. However, the revised design would help to reduce the limited and localised significant effects that would occur in parts of Llandinam and Caersws.
6.9.5.5 Designated Landscapes
1. The potential effects on designated landscapes are examined in Section 6.6.2.5 of the original ES with no significant effects identified for Snowdonia National Park or generally in the Shropshire Hills AONB. The majority of the access areas within the study area would not experience any significant effects from the Development. However, the potential exists for major/moderate (and thus significant) effects to occur in the Access area that crosses the application site, due to proximity of the proposed turbines as well as cumulative changes. The sequential analysis of the public rights of way that cross this area is found in Section 6.8.2 of this chapter of the SEI, which compares the visibility of the existing development at Llandinam against the original and revised layout, and where applicable the cumulative effect of the Development with existing, consented and proposed windfarms in the surrounding landscape. As described in the summary (see Section 6.8.3) the change in the height and distribution of the turbines would result in a significant effect on the sections of these paths that pass through the site. However these areas are already affected by proximity of the existing windfarm at Llandinam. There would be fewer turbines, resulting in a less dense distribution, albeit consisting of larger turbines in the Development. Removal of turbines T22, T23 and T24, would mean that the northern section of the Routes identified as 43B and 43C on Figure S6-77 would have open and uninterrupted views to the west and northwest.
6.9.5.6 Landscape Fabric
1. The revised layout in relation to the siting of the turbines would cause limited changes to the direct effects on landscape fabric, these changes principally relating to the mitigation of impacts on ecological and archaeological features. The revised access track layout does represent a positive design change, by reducing the overall level of disturbance within the application area via utilising more of the existing tracks. This reduces the length of new access track from 19 km to 11.6 km.
2. No significant effects on landscape fabric would occur as a result of the off-site accommodation works along the access route.
6.9.5.7 Landscape Character and Visual Amenity
1. In terms of the assessment of effects on landscape character and visual amenity identified in the submitted ES, the overall number and location of significant effects identified remains the same, (with the exception of Viewpoint 13 Grach) even though the revised design is a noticeable and positive improvement for several of the views as described in the preceding sections. The revised layout would consist of a reduced number of turbines, with greater separation from the more settled, lower lying and smaller scale landscape to the north.
6.10 References
Ref. 6-1 Powys County Council (2007) Powys Landscape Character Assessment (LCA)
December 2011 Llandinam Windfarm Repowering and Extension Environmental Statement – Supplementary Environmental Information Page 15 of Chapter 6 [This page has been intentionally left blank] Chapter 7.0 Ornithology
7.0 Ornithology Council for Wales (CCW: letter 29 August 2008), and the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB: letter 8 August 2008). The issues raised and means by which they are addressed are 7.1 Introduction summarised in Table 7-1.
1. This chapter of the Supplementary Environmental Information (SEI) report presents an Table 7-1 Summary of Consultee responses to formal application and original assessment assessment of the ornithological impacts of the Llandinam Windfarm repowering and extension Consultee Summary Comment / Action taken project (“the Development) in light of changes to the design layout presented in the original Noted that some areas within 500 m of the Environmental Statement (ES), as discussed in Chapter 4: Project Description of this SEI. Acknowledged in original ES chapter. Surveys have Development had not been surveyed, and been undertaken and are considered in this SEI therefore conclusions should await their chapter. 2. The assessment has been undertaken by Natural Research Projects Limited (NRP), and is completion. supported by information presented in Technical Appendix 7-A, Volume II of this SEI. Consideration should be given to avoid 3. The original ES described the methods used to establish the bird interest within the site and its construction and decommissioning activities This is excessive and inappropriate for skylark. hinterland, together with the process used to determine the Nature Conservation Importance of the within 500 m of curlew and skylark breeding Displacement of curlews is addressed in this SEI locations, which may involve timing such chapter. resident bird populations present. Description of these methods will not be repeated here, except activities outside the breeding season. when they are beyond the scope of the original assessment or are relevant to the collection of the supplementary information Technical Appendix 7-A, Volume II of this SEI. Where the Assessment of the suitability of habitat for Thorough additional surveys were undertaken in 2008 supplementary information may produce differences to the original assessment in predicted curlew should be undertaken to inform a on curlew distribution which thereby informs the outline Habitat Management Plan (HMP). HMP. impacts on birds, the ways in which birds might be impacted by the Development are explained, PCC the magnitude of the probable effects of the scheme considered, and the significance of any likely Any nocturnal activity is liable to affect collision risk effects is assessed. Suggested nocturnal survey work for golden (through flight activity rates) of existing and repowered plover to investigate further potential collision schemes similarly, and so unlikely to affect ES risk. conclusions materially. No further work on this was 4. Ornithological interests have the potential to be affected by the following key elements of the therefore undertaken. Development: Post-construction monitoring should be Decommissioning of the existing windfarm; undertaken, involving repetition of baseline Stated in original ES chapter. surveys and collision mortality surveys. Construction activities, including borrow pit operations and track establishment; Stated in original ES chapter. Further survey in 2008, HMP should be developed for breeding described in this chapter, helped to inform the outline Operational activities, including turbine function and the presence of tracks and overhead birds. HMP. power lines; and Requested further information on breeding Decommissioning of the Development after a 25-year operating lifetime. waders on the site. Noted an apparent discrepancy between the ESs for Llandinam Repeat surveys of curlew were undertaken in 2008. and Llaithddu proposals (Llaithddu 5. The types of potential effect that the Development might have on birds that have been evaluated neighbours Llandinam) in curlew distribution. within this chapter, include: Recommended a ‘stand-off’ distance of 600 As in PCC comment, but PCC did not include operation m during decommissioning, construction and and had a smaller ‘stand-off’ distance. Displacement of The effects of habitat modification due to change in land management and hydrology; operational phases, for curlew. curlew is addressed in this SEI chapter. Requested information on dusk surveys of The effects of direct habitat loss due to land take by wind turbine bases, access tracks and Acknowledged in ES chapter. Surveys have been snipe to inform any necessary mitigation and ancillary structures; undertaken and are considered in this SEI chapter. CCW monitoring plans. The effects of indirect habitat loss due to the displacement of birds as a result of Requested information relating to lack of As in PCC comment. Acknowledged in original ES decommissioning, construction, and maintenance activities, or due to the presence of wind breeding bird survey in 2.5 km2 in NE within chapter. Surveys have been undertaken and are turbines operating close to nesting or feeding sites, or habitual flight routes; 500 m of site to inform any necessary considered in this SEI chapter. mitigation and monitoring plans. The effects of bird collision with rotating turbine blades, overhead wires, guy lines and fencing Requested flight activity surveys during (i.e. killing or injury of birds); and As in PCC comment. Acknowledged in original ES breeding season for northern section to chapter. Surveys have been undertaken and are The beneficial contribution made by the development towards countering anthropogenic inform any necessary mitigation and considered in this SEI chapter. climate change. Uncertainties regarding climate change predictions mean that it is not possible monitoring plans. at present to carry out a quantitative assessment of these effects on birds. However, climate Welcomed proposal for HMP. Acknowledged in ES chapter. change is widely perceived to be the single most important long-term threat to the global Emphasised the need for a HMP for environment, particularly to biodiversity and to birds. RSPB Acknowledged in ES chapter. breeding waders.
6. This SEI chapter addresses information gaps acknowledged in the original ES chapter and issues raised within formal consultation responses from the key stakeholders on the original assessment. These responses involved Powys County Council (PCC: email 6 November 2008), Countryside
December 2011 Llandinam Windfarm Repowering and Extension Environmental Statement – Supplementary Environmental Information Page 1 of Chapter 7 Chapter 7.0 Ornithology
7.2 Conclusions of the Original ES Chapter searches to identify curlew breeding territories, and surveys for snipe. Apart from the curlew and snipe surveys the methods were consistent with the original ES. 7.2.1 Residual Impacts 2. An assessment of the number of curlew territories occupied during 2008 was made using observations of their territorial behaviour. These observations were made in a variety of different 1. The original ES chapter assessed: decommissioning the existing turbines, land take, construction ways and then using experience and informed judgement they were compiled into a map of operation, decommissioning the proposed turbines, grid connection and cumulative impacts. breeding territories (see Appendix 7-A, Figure 7-6, Volume II of this SEI for further details).
2. The original ES concluded non-significant effects for all potential receptor species during all 3. In late spring, dusk surveys to listen for calling snipe were carried out, and a summary map was phases of the Development. complied of the observations for as much of the Development area as possible (see Appendix 7-A, Figure 7-7, Volume II of this ES for further details). 7.2.2 Mitigation and Enhancement 7.4.3 Transport Route Survey 3. Surveys for nesting red kite and peregrine along with other birds listed in Schedule 1 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act (WCA) were planned to be undertaken prior to decommissioning and 1. Trial runs of the abnormal loads delivery route for the windfarm components were carried out in construction work occurring in spring/summer and suitable action would be taken to avoid May 2010. Further transport works in late 2011 identified the need for three additional laybys along disturbance of these species if found to be nesting. the trunk road network. These laybys are primarily needed to allow the abnormal loads delivering windfarm components to pull over and allow traffic to pass. The laybys are being designed to 4. Potential opportunities to manage habitat for breeding waders beyond the immediate vicinity of the allow several abnormal loads to pull off the highway at the same time. Details of the transport route proposed turbines (i.e. greater than 500 m) were to be explored with CCW. assessments are presented in Chapter 9: Traffic and Transportation of this SEI.
7.3 Review of Changes to Planning Policy Context 2. On the basis of the findings from the initial May 2010 trial runs, together with swept path analysis of the access track and other studies, a plan was developed of those areas of roadside that would 1. The Planning Policy Context remains the same as described in the original ES. need to be widened or used as laybys; referred to as ‘pinch points’. This plan covers verges and areas adjacent to the road or track-way that may need to be encroached on in order to 7.4 Assessment Methodology and Significance Criteria accommodate the abnormal loads (Appendix 8-G, Volume II of this SEI).
1. The assessment methodology and significance criteria follow those in the original assessment. 3. A number of pinch points exist along the trunk road route, and at these locations it is anticipated Additional field survey work was undertaken in 2008 in order to address the information gaps that some sections of verge vegetation may need to be trimmed back or cut into, with consequent identified in the original ES and comments received from consultees in response to the original ES implications on habitats that may support .bird interests (Table 7-1). The scope of this SEI therefore primarily describes this novel information and considers its influence on those aspects of the assessment which are relevant. 4. However, the great majority of the pinch points are situated along the access track linking the A483 to the windfarm, and these pinch points do not encompass habitats that are known as being important for birds, or involve substantial tracts of habitat (Appendix 8-G, Volume II of this SEI). 7.4.1 Changes to Legislation This track is relatively narrow and will need widening in a number of places. Surveys were carried 1. Since the original assessment was completed there have been a number of updates to legislation out on by ADAS on all areas where it is anticipated that widening and or vegetation cutting may and criteria which were used to determine the Nature Conservation Importance of bird species. need to take place, with the full results presented in Appendix 8-G, Volume II of this SEI. These updates have been consulted and are listed below: 7.5 Review of Baseline Conditions The European Union Council Directive on the conservation of wild birds 2009/147/EC (EU Birds Directive) ; 1. Baseline conditions remain the same as in the original ES, with the exception of those supplemented or altered by the additional surveys conducted in 2008 (see Appendix 7-A, Volume The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (‘The Habitats Regulations’); II of this SEI). Subsequent paragraphs summarise the results of these additional surveys.
Birds of Conservation Concern Wales 2 – 2009 (Ref. 7-1); and 7.5.1 Additional Survey Work
Species and Habitats of principal Importance for the Conservation of Biodiversity – Jan 2009 1. Two of the red kite nest territories, noted in the original ES, were occupied again in 2008 (Site 1 update (Ref. 7-2). and Site 2, see Confidential Figure A). However, Site 2 was out with the boundary of the survey area for the current design layout for the Development, and Site 1 (700 m from nearest proposed 2. The review of these updates did not lead to any alterations in the species which were considered turbine) was a new pair which did not settle to breed. There were three other kite nest territories in the assessment. located within the 2 km survey boundary in 2008; Site 8 (1.8 km from nearest proposed turbine), Site 9 (2 km from nearest proposed turbine) and Site 10 (2.1 km from the nearest proposed turbine). All three attempted to breed, with two pairs fledging two chicks (Confidential Figure A). 7.4.2 Additional Survey Work
1. The additional work undertaken since the original ES consisted of further collection of flight activity 2. Further flight activity data were recorded, adding mainly to the hours of observation in the breeding data, breeding bird surveys of moorland which had not been previously surveyed, additional period (April to August) which increased to 545 hours overall, with the non-breeding period increased to nearly 555 hours. This brought the division of hours between the two seasons to about 50% each, when compared with the original ES, where it was 39% in the breeding period.
December 2011 Llandinam Windfarm Repowering and Extension Environmental Statement – Supplementary Environmental Information Page 2 of Chapter 7 Chapter 7.0 Ornithology
For analysis the flight activity was assessed by proximity to the existing and proposed turbines with the addition of these extra data has increased the red kite flight activity at risk height within a 200 a 200 m buffer of each of the turbine types being used, as in the original ES. m buffer of both the existing and the proposed turbines, when assessed for the risk height bands used in the original ES. When a more accurate risk height band is used the time at risk height is 3. The result of this, for red kites, in contrast to the statement in the original ES, was that a large similar to that of the original ES for both the turbine types. amount of the flight activity was away from the majority of the turbines (existing and proposed) on the north-west side of the survey area (see Figure 7-5, Appendix 7-A, Volume II of this SEI). Half 8. The peregrines bred successfully in 2008 at the same location as 2007. Flight activity was the flying time recorded was in March alone. However, once the flights which occurred within recorded in spring/summer and autumn/winter, with many of the breeding period flights relating to 200 m of a turbine (existing or proposed) were selected, this flying time was reduced greatly (i.e. birds travelling to and from the nest. most flight activity was away from the turbine locations). For March 2008 only 131 seconds of flying time remained, with 88 seconds (67%) estimated to be at risk height of between 10 m and 9. As for the original ES, no evidence indicative of breeding by hen harrier, goshawk, merlin, barn owl 50 m (63 seconds (48%) at the actual risk height of 16.5 m to 45.5 m) of the existing turbines. For or short-eared owl was found within the survey boundaries in 2008. An incidental sighting of a the proposed turbines, in March 2008 only 344 seconds of flying time remained, with 123 seconds goshawk carrying prey in May suggests it may well have been breeding in the surrounding area (36%) estimated to be at risk height of between 30 m and 130 m of the proposed turbines (96 out-with the survey boundary. seconds (28%) estimated to be at the actual risk height of between 39 m and 121 m of the proposed turbines). 10. Eight breeding species were recorded during the surveys of the small areas omitted from the breeding bird surveys in the original ES. These surveys recorded only species considered to be of 4. Therefore, for the non-breeding season, combining the red kite flight data from the original ES with High or Moderate Nature Conservation Importance (see Table 7-2 in the original ES) and added the extra data recorded for 2008, leads to a final figure of 7112 seconds within 200 m of existing lesser redpoll and grasshopper warbler to the list of species breeding or present in the turbines and 3528 seconds (50%) at the risk height for these turbines of between 10 m and 50 m Development survey area (both of moderate Nature Conservation Importance as defined by Table (2558 seconds (36%) at risk height of 16.5 to 45.5 m). Combining the original and extra data, for 7-2 of the original ES). the non-breeding season, for the proposed turbines leads to a final figure of 7154 seconds within 200 m of a proposed turbine and 3049 seconds (43%) at the risk height for these turbines of 11. The supplementary surveys for breeding curlew and snipe produced evidence indicating that there between 30 m and 130 m (2112 seconds (30%) at the risk height of between 39 m and 121 m). were five occupied curlew territories in 2008, along with seven snipe territories. The closest (Data estimated for the broader risk height bands as in the original ES i.e. by assuming uniform centres of the curlew territories were approximately 65, 165, 190, 400 and 625 m from an existing distribution of flight activity across 10 m elevation intervals within each recorded height band, then turbine and approximately 70, 160, 220, 230 and 410 m from a proposed turbine. For the snipe summing activity for the intervals between 30 m and 130 m. Data for actual risk height estimated territories the closest centres were approximately 125 m from an existing turbine and 135 m from a by assuming uniform distribution of flight activity within each recorded height band for that flight, proposed turbine, with almost all being less than 360 m from an existing or a proposed turbine. then proportioning these data for the actual rotor length occurring within the height bands). 12. Kestrels were found to be active throughout the survey period and so the assertion from the 5. For red kites in April to August 2008, 4224 seconds of flying time was within the 200 m buffer of original ES that they were mostly active within the non-breeding period is no longer valid. The the existing turbine layouts, with 2678 seconds (63%) estimated to be at risk height of between 10 distribution of flight activity was similar to the kites, mostly in the north west of the survey area m and 50 m (1941 seconds (46%) at the actual risk height of 16.5 m to 45.5 m). For the proposed (Technical Appendix 7-A, Volume II of this SEI, Figure 7-4) away from the majority of the proposed turbines in April to August 2008 only 4590 seconds of flying time remained, with 2214 seconds turbines. However, contrary to the original ES less time was estimated to be at risk height once (48%) estimated to be at risk height of between 30 m and 130 m of the proposed turbines (1560 only the flights which occurred within a 200 m buffer of the turbines were selected. seconds (34%) estimated to be at the actual risk height of between 39 m and 121 m of the proposed turbines). 13. During March 2008, no kestrel flights occurred within the 200 m buffer. Therefore for the non- breeding season, kestrel flight data from the original ES leads to a final figure of 1636 seconds 6. Therefore for the breeding season, combining the red kite flight data from the original ES with the within 200 m of an existing turbines and 1037 seconds (63%) at the risk height for these turbines of extra data recorded for 2008, leads to a final figure of 6680 seconds within 200 m of the existing between 10 m and 50 m (752 seconds (46%) at risk height of 16.5 to 45.5 m). The original data for turbines and 3481 seconds (52%) at the risk height for these turbines of between 10 m and 50 m the non-breeding season, for the proposed turbines, leads to a final figure of 1358 seconds within (2524 seconds (38%) at risk height of 16.5 to 45.5 m). Combining the original and extra data, for 200 m of a proposed turbine and 708 seconds (52%) at the risk height for these turbines of the breeding season, for the proposed turbines, leads to a final figure of 6637 seconds within 200 between 30 m and 130 m (502 seconds (37%) at the risk height of between 39 m and 121 m). m of a proposed turbine and 3300 seconds (50%) at the risk height for these turbines of between 30 m and 130 m (2414 seconds (36%) at the risk height of between 39 m and 121 m). (Data 14. For kestrel in April to August 2008, 459 seconds of flying time remained, with 363 seconds (79%) estimated for the broader risk height bands as in the original ES i.e. by assuming uniform estimated to be at risk height of between 10 m and 50 m (273 seconds (59%) at the actual risk distribution of flight activity across 10 m elevation intervals within each recorded height band, then height of 16.5 m to 45.5 m) of the existing turbines. For the proposed turbines in April to August summing activity for the intervals between 30 m and 130 m. Data for actual risk height estimated 2008, 3589 seconds of flying time remained, with 1311 seconds (37%) estimated to be at risk by assuming uniform distribution of flight activity within each recorded height band for that flight, height of between 30 m and 130 m of the proposed turbines (773 seconds (22%) estimated to be then proportioning these data for the actual rotor length occurring within the height bands). at the actual risk height of between 39 m and 121 m of the proposed turbines). Therefore for the breeding season, combining the kestrel flight data from the original ES with the extra data recorded 7. When compared with the original ES the addition of the extra data leads to an overall increase in for 2008, leads to a final figure of 1067 seconds within 200 m of an existing turbines and 715 the red kite flight activity at risk height 10 to 50 m for the existing turbines (51% up from 37%), seconds (67%) at the risk height for these turbines of between 10 m and 50 m (528 seconds (49%) along with a similar flight activity (37%) as reported in the original ES, being produced for the at risk height of 16.5 to 45.5 m). Combining the original and extra data, for the breeding season, for slightly reduced risk height band of 16.5 to 45.5 m. The proposed turbines also have a raised flight the proposed turbines, leads to a final figure of 4211 seconds within 200 m of a proposed turbine activity (46% up from 39%) with the addition of the extra data for the broader risk height band of 30 and 1671 seconds (40%) at the risk height for these turbines of between 30 m and 130 m (1036 to 130 m used in the original ES, but a slightly lower flight activity (33%) for the slightly smaller risk seconds (25%) at the risk height of between 39 m and 121 m). height band of 39 to 121 m than that reported in the original ES. Therefore it can be reported that
December 2011 Llandinam Windfarm Repowering and Extension Environmental Statement – Supplementary Environmental Information Page 3 of Chapter 7 Chapter 7.0 Ornithology
15. When compared with the original ES the addition of the extra data leads to an overall decrease in 7.5.2 Transport Route the kestrel flight activity at risk height 10 to 50 m for the existing turbines (65% down from 70%), along with a lower flight activity (47%) being produced for the slightly reduced risk height band of 1. Reed bunting and willow warbler were recorded at one location along the access road between the 16.5 to 45.5 m. The proposed turbines also have a decreased flight activity (43% down from 56%) A483 and the windfarm. Reed bunting is a Welsh Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) species (Ref. 7- with the addition of the extra data for the broader risk height band of 30 to 130 m used in the 2) and willow warbler is on the Welsh ‘Red List’ (Ref. 7-3), and so both species are of Moderate original ES, with a much lower flight activity (28%) for the slightly smaller risk height band of 39 to Nature Conservation Importance (see Table 7-2 in the original ES). It is likely that other breeding 121 m than that reported in the original ES. Therefore it can be reported that the addition of the passerines will occur in a number of hedgerows and trees where land take will be required for road extra data has decreased the kestrel flight activity at risk height within a 200 m buffer of both the widening along the access road and at areas of land take and laybys required on the trunk road existing and the proposed turbines, when assessed for the risk height bands used in the original network (Appendix 8-G, Volume II of this SEI). Based on the habitats present and more detailed ES. When a more accurate risk height band is used the time at risk height is even further reduced surveys conducted previously (reported by the original ES) it is unlikely that they will support a from that of the original ES for both the turbine types. notable abundance or a markedly wider species diversity involving birds of Nature Conservation Importance. 16. Also of note was a pair of ring ouzels seen in April 2008, within the north-eastern part of the Development Site; they were in suitable breeding habitat but were not located again in May. 2. Tall grassy areas were also considered to have the potential to support ground nesting birds (Appendix 8-G, Volume II of this SEI), though given the narrow nature of the verges this is unlikely. 17. With respect to the elapsed time between the original surveys described by the original ES, the No ground nesting birds were observed during surveys around the access road between the A483 later supplementary surveys and this SEI Chapter it is considered unlikely that further and the windfarm (Appendix 8-G, Volume II of this SEI) or in surveys of comparable habitat contemporary surveys would materially alter the conclusions of this SEI Chapter. This reported by the original ES. consideration has several bases. The fundamental finding of both the original ES and this SEI Chapter (see section 7.6.5) is that the Development presents a reduced collision risk compared 7.6 Assessment of Design Change Effects and Mitigation Measures with the existing turbines. This is largely due to changes in the number of turbines, changes in the collision risk height band, and that raptor flight activity is more concentrated on slopes and at the 1. Assessment methods and significance criteria follow those described in the original ES, as top of slopes (i.e. closer to the existing turbines than those of the Development). The latter finding discussed in this SEI chapter. Subsequent subsections describe quantitative impact assessments is expected given locations of nest sites and, probably more importantly, that such topographical based on these potential impacts in view of the supplementary field surveys in 2008 and other features provide for more efficient hunting due to declivity wind currents. These features would not novel information which has come to light since the original ES. When the supplementary be changed (turbine characteristics) or would be unlikely to be changed (topographical influence information has had no bearing on conclusions reached by the original ES, this is stated; when it on flight activity) by further survey. has potentially affected conclusions of the original ES, these changes are described.
18. The location of scarce raptor (red kite and peregrine) nest sites potentially influences the potential 7.6.1 Decommissioning of Existing Turbines effects of disturbance of birds at nest sites during all phases of the Development (i.e. decommissioning of existing turbines, construction, operation, and decommissioning of proposed 1. The dismantling of the existing windfarm will be as stated in the original ES. The impacts will turbines). Both red kite and peregrine tend to be highly faithful to nest site locations between therefore be broadly the same as stated in the original ES. The increase in the number of curlew years, which are limited by the availability of suitable nesting habitat (notably the crag-nesting breeding territories located in the 2008 surveys will consequently lead to an increase in the peregrine). This fidelity was reflected by the similarity between the 2006 and 2008 surveys. There potential number of birds which may be displaced and/or disturbed during the decommissioning were no indications from the two years of survey data or the distribution of suitable nesting habitat phases. However, the number of birds is still less than 1% of the known Welsh population, even that novel sites through population expansion would be located at a distance at which disturbance though the curlew population in Wales has experienced a decline of 81% from 1993 to 2006 to due to the Development could potentially occur for scarce raptors at nests. Moreover, as noted by 1,099 pairs (Ref. 7-3). The disturbance would be a short term effect and loss of productivity of the original ES (and see section 7.6.7 of this SEI Chapter and Appendix 7-D, Volume II of this SEI) some or all of the five pairs, although a very high local (site) effect would have a low effect on the there is an embedded mitigation commitment on this issue under a Breeding Bird Protection Plan long-term viability of the local breeding population and a negligible effect on curlew productivity at for the site. the regional level.
19. Similarly, breeding curlew also show high nest-site fidelity between years; hence the distribution of 2. As in the original ES, the modest population of skylarks and song thrush pairs would be potentially curlew is unlikely to have changed appreciably since 2008: for example, the habitat has probably affected. However, the same conclusions of low local effect and a negligible effect on the regional not changed appreciably. The major difference between the 2006 and 2008 surveys has been in populations can be drawn. The surveys in 2008 detected breeding lesser redpoll and grasshopper substantially elevating the number of pairs/territories within the Development site (as noted above), warbler, which were not recorded during the surveys described by the original ES (see Appendix 7- due to additional survey effort. It is unlikely that the adverse effects ascribed to the survey results A, Volume II of this SEI). It is unlikely that any disturbance of these birds would have any based on the detailed 2008 survey data as described by this SEI Chapter would be substantially detectable long-term effect on local populations and there is no possibility they would have even a influenced by more recent survey data. However, so far as monitoring is concerned (see section measurable effect on regional populations. 7.6.8 of this SEI Chapter), it is recommended that, in consultation with CCW, prior to construction of the Development further intensive survey of breeding waders should be conducted: this would 3. As stated in the original ES although both red kites and kestrels forage over the existing windfarm provide an additional year of survey data in recognition of the criticism of previous studies noted by area they are largely unaffected by disturbance, and so decommissioning will be highly unlikely to Whitfield et al 2010: Ref. 7-6). The results of this monitoring will also inform the mitigation noted have material long-term effects on kite or kestrel populations and so would still have a negligible within the Breeding Bird Protection Plan. effect at the regional level.
4. Similarly, as the surveys in 2008 did not show any change in the infrequent use of the area by hen harrier, goshawk, merlin and peregrine, the original ES statement stands for these species (negligible effect at the regional level).
December 2011 Llandinam Windfarm Repowering and Extension Environmental Statement – Supplementary Environmental Information Page 4 of Chapter 7 Chapter 7.0 Ornithology
5. The main existing access route to the windfarm will have increased traffic during the months of the effects of this disturbance can be assessed as for decommissioning and therefore is deemed decommissioning. It will be widened in a number of locations to accommodate abnormal loads and not significant under the EIA Regulations. up to five passing laybys are proposed to be added along the length of the road. The possible locations of these road widening and laybys have been surveyed for ecological impacts (see 4. For other species, and as noted above, the novel information collected in 2008 does not materially Chapter 8: Ecology and Appendix 8-G, Volume II of this SEI). The peregrine nest location is over affect the assessment of the original ES. 500 m from the closest part of this road (Technical Appendix 7-A, Confidential Figure A). Peregrines are known to often become inured to human disturbance, even when this is relatively 5. In conclusion, it is predicted that construction works, acting on their own and in combination with frequent (Ref 7-5) and certainly this location has been used successfully during recent years, decommissioning activities, would have low or negligible, and short-term adverse effects on birds. despite the presence of maintenance traffic. Several studies have shown that raptors exposed to Although several of the species present are birds of high or moderate Nature Conservation human disturbance are relatively tolerant of additional disturbance (Ref 7-11). So these peregrines Importance, the predicted effects are not likely to be significant in terms of the EIA Regulations. could be described as being of low sensitivity to these disturbing factors. Thus considering these factors the possible disturbance due to the increase in traffic on the road during decommissioning 7.6.4 Transport Route is negligible and short-term and therefore not significant under the terms of the EIA Regulations. 1. To avoid disturbing breeding birds, any cutting of trees, hedges and scrub will be undertaken 6. No novel information needs were required for assessment of the modest numbers of non-breeding during the period September through to February, i.e. outside the breeding season. If this is not golden plover which use the site and its environs, and therefore the conclusion of the original ES is practicable, then a suitably qualified ecologist will undertake checks for nesting birds prior to unaltered: no lasting consequences are predicted to occur as a result of disturbance during commencement of any felling works. The measures included within the Breeding Bird Protection decommissioning works and therefore the effects are judged to be short-term, and not significant Plan will also apply to the access routes, so that during construction and decommissioning no under the terms of the EIA Regulations. nesting birds listed in Schedule 1 of the WCA (e.g. red kite) will be unduly disturbed.
7. In conclusion, it is predicted that decommissioning works would have low/negligible and short-term 2. The land take (and habitat loss) associated with the construction of the access road between the adverse effects on regional bird populations. Although several of the species present are birds of A483 and the windfarm will be relatively small (Appendix 8-G, Volume II of this SEI). This loss will high or moderate Nature Conservation Importance, the predicted effects are not significant under not have any discernible adverse effects on bird populations, even those of Moderate Nature the terms of the EIA Regulations. Conservation Importance (e.g. willow warbler) since the scale of loss will be undetectable in the context of the scale of habitats occupied by these populations. 7.6.2 Land Take 3. Traffic along the transport route during operation of the Development will be relatively infrequent 1. The total land-take has been reduced from that described within the original ES and, broadly, the and will also be comparable with levels during the operation of the existing windfarm. Hence, the conclusions of the ES still stand. Hence, the effects on birds due to this relatively small loss are prospects for potential disturbance will be negligible per se and will also not be additive to those considered to be negligible at the local level. Even in the case of those species present that are of experienced by birds as a result of the existing windfarm. highest Nature Conservation Importance (see Table 7-6 of the original ES) it is unlikely that these effects would be significant under the terms of the EIA Regulations. 4. In conclusion, it is predicted that at all stages of the Development, all effects introduced by the transport route will have negligible effects on all bird species. These effects would not be 7.6.3 Construction significant under the terms of the EIA Regulations.
1. Construction works associated with the Development are anticipated to overlap with the 7.6.5 Operational Disturbance decommissioning of the existing windfarm and last for approximately 25 months, as discussed in Chapter 4: Project Description of this SEI. Depending on the timing of start of work, the 1. The Development is anticipated to be operational for 25 years (see original ES). The presence and construction activities would therefore potentially affect up to three bird breeding cycles. However, operation of wind turbines would potentially displace birds from nesting and foraging areas, with construction in the northern and southern parts of the Development would not be potential consequences on territory occupation and breeding success. contemporaneous and therefore only two breeding cycles would be affected in each part. In each case, one of the breeding cycles would be also subject to disturbance by decommissioning 2. The potential influence of displacement is not materially changed by the supplementary information activities. gathered during 2008 for the majority of species, as previously discussed. The exception is the potential for adverse displacement effects as a result of operation of the Development on breeding 2. The supplementary surveys in 2008 located five pairs of breeding curlew. As assumed previously curlew, due largely to the higher numbers of pairs documented by 2008 surveys compared with the in this chapter of the SEI, curlew breeding attempts may be disrupted during the decommissioning 2006 surveys reported by the original ES. Consultees also expressed concern over possible works therefore it can be assumed that construction works could disrupt breeding for a further displacement effects on this species, as described in Table 7-1. year. One curlew territory derived from the field observations in 2008 will contain the contractors compound, laydown area and two large borrow pits (BP-A and BP-B) (Technical Appendix 7-A, 3. Pearce-Higgins et al. (Ref. 7-4) in a correlative study across 12 operational windfarms and Figure 7-6). The combined area of all these elements amounts to around only 8% of the total area selected ‘reference’ (control) sites, concluded that curlew breeding density was reduced by 42% of this curlew territory as mapped, therefore this coupled with the fact that once construction is within 500 m of turbines, with an indication of turbine avoidance at 800 m “which suggests that complete these areas will be re-instated should maintain the disruption to this territory to only the breeding populations of this species may be particularly vulnerable to displacement”. This years of construction. As before, the spatial magnitude of this effect is judged to be very high at contrasts with Thomas (Ref. 7-5) who found no suggestion of a displacement effect up to 500 m for local level and negligible at a regional scale. breeding curlews at 10 UK windfarms. Both of these studies used the same fundamental study protocol (IR: Impact-Reference) with an IG (Impact-Gradient) element within the impact (windfarm) 3. During the construction period (and decommissioning phase), the nesting peregrines, may be sites. susceptible to disturbance due to increased traffic on the road, as previously discussed. However
December 2011 Llandinam Windfarm Repowering and Extension Environmental Statement – Supplementary Environmental Information Page 5 of Chapter 7 Chapter 7.0 Ornithology
4. Whitfield et al. (Ref. 7-6) employed a different approach, at five windfarm sites in the UK, by 10. If breeding curlews are displaced by operational wind turbines, then such an effect should already utilizing longer-term data and BACI (Before-After-Control-Impact), BA (Before-After) and IG study be evident at the Development site, due to the existing Llandinam windfarm. Evidence should designs. Although no study design is perfect in practice, BACI and BA protocols are considered consequently be forthcoming from a comparison of the baseline pre-construction distribution of more powerful than the correlative nature and high-dependency on choice of reference sites curlews associated with the existing Llandinam windfarm, with the current distribution. implicit in IR designs. Further detail is provided in Appendix 7-B, Volume II of this SEI. The Unfortunately, little can be gleaned from the baseline surveys as they merely documented that possibility of an immediate displacement effect (i.e. displacement occurred immediately after “curlew may breed on the site” (Ref. 7-10). Whether such a cursory mention is indicative of a low construction) was rejected at four sites. A gradual displacement effect (i.e. displacement took number of curlew or of a superficial assessment of ornithological interests is unknown. several years after construction to become evident) could be rejected at two (perhaps three) sites: at one windfarm, curlew territories shifted closer to turbine arrays over four years of their operation. 11. The current density of curlews on the site and their distribution in relation to existing turbines (approximately 65, 165, 190, 400 and 625 m from territory centres to the nearest turbine: see 5. Results from one windfarm provided tentative support for an immediate displacement effect Appendix 7-A, Volume II of this SEI) is arguably not a convincing indication that displacement has although alternative hypotheses not invoking displacement could not be rejected. There was no occurred, especially when most of the existing turbine locations are on drier ridge habitat which evidence that curlew nesting success was related to proximity to turbines at one site where such a curlew tend to avoid. During the 2008 surveys, curlews were regularly seen in close proximity to potential effect could be examined. These analyses therefore lent very little support to hypotheses and flying between the existing turbines. predicting that curlews are displaced by the operation of wind turbines, even at 200 m proximity, and predominantly indicated that breeding curlews are not sensitive to displacement. 12. The comparable values for the distance-to-turbine metric, after decommissioning of existing turbines and construction of proposed turbines are approximately 70, 160, 220, 230 and 410 m 6. Clearly, there is a discrepancy between the results of Pearce-Higgins et al. and those of Thomas from a proposed turbine. As might be expected, these are not radically different to the current and Whitfield et al. Displacement effects on birds can apparently vary between windfarm sites, and values for existing turbines; the main difference being that two pairs are closer to turbines and, this may explain the discrepancy in UK studies’ conclusions for curlew. There is large overlap these turbines are taller, but that several pairs will have fewer turbines within their territories. between study sites in these cases, however. Moreover, despite the conclusions of Pearce- These two potentially influential factors (turbine height and turbine density) may counteract each Higgins et al. on its purported sensitivity to displacement, for curlew there was no ‘fine-scale’ other, as taller turbines may be more disturbing but reduced turbine density would be less correlation inferring significant turbine avoidance, and only a significant ‘large-scale’ correlation. disturbing. Available evidence, however, does not provide any support for either effect (Ref. 7-10; This discrepancy between the two scales of analysis (important in the context of the findings of the Ref. 7-11). other studies) was ascribed to an 800 m range of turbine ‘avoidance’ available in the large-scale analysis which extended beyond the radius of the fine-scale analysis. In other words, the 13. The closest example to the Development which has been previously studied involves the Caton conclusion of Pearce-Higgins et al. that curlews were displaced at all and that, moreover, they Moor windfarm in Lancashire (Ref. 7-6). Here, after repowering of the original windfarm, which were especially vulnerable to displacement rests heavily on the finding at the 800 m distance band. essentially involved replacing an array of turbines with a more dispersed set of larger turbines, there was no evidence that curlews were immediately displaced by the change. 7. Whitfield et al. present several arguments to suggest that this finding at such an extreme distance is an analytical anomaly. The first argument being the dubious reliance on one ‘outlier’ component 14. On the basis of generic and site-specific considerations, therefore, it is unlikely that breeding of the data. The second is that it is unlikely, given the small size of the reference sites used by curlew would be disturbed by the operation of the Development. Pearce-Higgins et al. that there were comparable density scales by way of control. The third is the incongruity in the fundamental assumption that curlews will be ‘disturbed’ by structures at such a 15. The original ES indicated that the effects of operational disturbance would be negligible for other substantial distance, which in many cases will be barely visible. An 800 m distance runs counter to species. As noted earlier, the novel survey results collected in 2008 have not materially affected what would be expected on the disturbance-distances of other waders and unrelated species original conclusions on the potential for disturbance/displacement effects for other species. which due to, for example, persecution by humans and life-history traits, are far more sensitive than curlews to disturbance at breeding sites (Ref. 7-7; Ref. 7-8). Furthermore, Hötker et al. (Ref. 16. In conclusion, it is predicted that operational disturbance would have a negligible adverse effect on 7-9), analysing results from scores of windfarms in Germany, concluded generically that non- local and regional bird populations in the short to long term. Although several of the species breeding birds were more vulnerable to displacement than breeding birds and none of 30 studies present are birds of high or moderate Nature Conservation Importance, the predicted effects are documented any sign of avoidance of turbines by non-breeding curlew at such an extreme not likely to be significant in terms of the EIA Regulations. distance. At Black Law windfarm, one of the sites involved in the analysis of Pearce-Higgins et al., it was apparent from Whitfield et al. that birds occupying territories over 800 m from turbines did 7.6.6 Collision Risk not maintain their occupancy over the course of several years. This was at odds with a putative displacement effect, because there were no apparent losses at much closer distances and territory 1. Birds that are not displaced from the Development Site would be potentially vulnerable to collision centres were increasingly recorded closer to turbines over the four year period of wind farm with the moving turbine blades. The level of collision with wind turbines is presumed to be operation. dependent on the amount of flight activity over the site and the ability of birds to detect and manoeuvre around rotating turbine blades. Birds that collide with a turbine are likely to be killed or 8. If these arguments are correct, then no research at UK windfarms has found any robust evidence fatally injured. This may in turn affect the maintenance of bird populations. Band et al. (Ref. 7-12) for a displacement effect on breeding curlew. described a Collision Risk Model (CRM) method by which field data on bird flight activity can be gathered and used to quantify the likelihood of collisions with turbines, and this method was used 9. It would appear, therefore, that it would be reasonable to conclude from studies elsewhere that in this Chapter following its use in the original ES. there will be no adverse displacement effects on breeding curlew at the Development site. Such generic findings are important in informing the assessment of site-specific proposals as in the 2. The original ES considered that three species of high/moderate conservation importance (red kite, Development, but as the current proposal involves ‘repowering’ of an existing windfarm, then golden plover and kestrel) were potentially vulnerable to the influence of collision mortality at the additional information may (potentially) be brought to bear on the assessment. Development site. The novel information gathered during 2008 has not altered this consideration. Of these three species, only the assessment of effects on red kite and kestrel could be potentially
December 2011 Llandinam Windfarm Repowering and Extension Environmental Statement – Supplementary Environmental Information Page 6 of Chapter 7 Chapter 7.0 Ornithology
altered by the information gap identified in the original ES and addressed by this SEI chapter. For proposed turbines, as described and used in the original ES) and by assuming an ‘exact’ risk golden plover, therefore, the conclusion of the original ES, that the Development would have a height band (16.5 – 45.5 m for existing turbines; 39 – 121 m for proposed turbines). negligible adverse effect, at worst, on golden plover collision mortality, is unaffected. Table 7-3. Summary of predicted collision mortality of kestrels based on the turbine layout (existing or 3. For red kite, CRMs were run using the full data on flight activity (i.e. including novel data collected proposed), season (breeding or non-breeding). Weighted estimates, based on a 95% avoidance rate, and in 2008), parameter values as described by the original ES, divided by season (breeding: April to using ‘broad’ or ‘exact’ risk height bands (the ES used only the ‘broad’ method). n/a = not available. August; non-breeding: September to March), and involving two avoidance rates (98% and 99%). Wind turbines Season Collisions per year Each model run included unweighted measures of flight activity from each Vantage point (VP) and also flight activity weighted by the contribution of each VP to overall area watched per hour. The ES SEI (broad) SEI (exact) results of CRMs pursuant from including the additional data collected in 2008, compared with Existing Breeding n/a 0.58 0.58 those from the original ES, are presented in Appendix 7-C, Volume II of this SEI. Existing Non-breeding 1.10 0.74 0.74 4. A representative selection of these results (using 98% avoidance rate and weighted estimates) is Proposed Breeding n/a 0.86 0.49 shown in Table 7-2. These results include estimates derived by assuming a ‘broad’ risk height Proposed Non-breeding 0.61 0.30 0.22 band (10 – 50 m for existing turbines; 30 – 130 m for proposed turbines, as described and used in the original ES) and by assuming an ‘exact’ risk height band (16.5 – 45.5 m for existing turbines; 39 – 121 m for proposed turbines). 9. The incorporation of more data gathered in 2008 has decreased the predicted estimates of kestrel collision mortality in the non-breeding season from those described in the original ES, although the ES did not estimate breeding season mortality. These decreases were evident for both the existing Table 7-2. Summary of predicted collision mortality of red kites based on the turbine layout (existing or turbines and the Development’s turbines. proposed), season (breeding or non-breeding). Weighted estimates, based on a 98% avoidance rate, and using ‘broad’ or ‘exact’ risk height bands (the ES used only the ‘broad’ method). 10. Using the cruder ‘broad’ method for calculating the risk height band, including the additional 2008 Collisions per year data, the combined predicted estimates were similar across the year for the existing turbines and Wind turbines Season ES SEI (broad) SEI (exact) the proposed turbines of the Development (e.g. 95% avoidance rate, existing: 1.32 collisions per year; proposed: 1.16 collisions per year). Using the improved ‘exact’ method for calculating the risk Existing Breeding 0.63 1.88 1.88 height band, the combined annual predictions were lower for the proposed turbines of the Existing Non-breeding 1.66 1.70 1.70 Development (e.g. 95% avoidance rate, existing: 1.32 collisions per year; proposed: 0.71 collisions Proposed Breeding 0.47 0.87 0.68 per year) (Table 7-3). Proposed Non-breeding 0.79 0.80 0.56 11. Based on these findings it seems reasonable to conclude that the Development would have a neutral effect, at worst, on kestrel collision mortality or, more likely, have a slight beneficial effect 5. It is apparent that the inclusion of the additional data gathered in 2008 has increased most by reducing the number of kestrel collisions. predicted estimates of collision mortality from those described in the original ES, predominantly in the breeding season, with the largest increase for the existing turbines (about three times higher in 12. As an overall conclusion, it is predicted that collisions would have negligible adverse effects, at the breeding season). For the proposed turbines of the Development, the change was not so worst, on local and regional bird populations in the short to long term. In some species, the marked; indeed, employing the more appropriate ‘exact’ method for calculating the risk height Development may have a beneficial effect by reducing the current collision rate. Although several band, the predicted non-breeding mortality was lower than estimated by the original ES. of the species present are birds of high or moderate Nature Conservation Importance, the predicted effects are not likely to be significant in terms of the EIA Regulations. 6. It is worth reiterating a point made in the original ES in that the predicted levels of mortality may be at odds with what has been observed at the existing windfarm (i.e. predictions are too high). As 7.6.7 Decommissioning of Proposed Turbines noted in the original ES, this might be because collisions have occurred but not been recorded and the losses have been insufficient to cause a detectable change in local populations / distribution. 1. Decommissioning works are predicted to remain as described in the original ES. Thus they will Alternatively, it is possible that the avoidance rates used in the CRMs are too precautionary and have low/negligible and short-term adverse effects on birds. Even in the case of species of highest that a much higher rate should be adopted. Nature Conservation Importance these effects are not likely to be significant under the terms of the EIA Regulations, as discussed in the original ES chapter. 7. Critically, however, it is also apparent that predicted collision mortality is lower for the Development than for the existing windfarm. Taking the results from the ‘exact’ CRM runs, the predicted mortality 7.6.8 Mitigation and Enhancement is about three times lower for the Development and will likely have a net beneficial effect by reducing the magnitude of the existing mortality. It is reasonable to conclude, therefore, that the 1. No effects were identified as ‘significant’ in terms of the EIA Regulations. Development will not have any adverse effect on red kite collision mortality and will likely have a net beneficial effect by reducing the magnitude of the existing mortality. 2. Whilst mitigation measures are not required, because no potentially adverse effect was deemed to be significant, it is considered best practice that any potential local adverse effect should be 8. CRMs similar to those for red kite were constructed for kestrel, and avoidance rates of 95%, 98% minimised and that measures should be undertaken to exploit enhancement opportunities. and 99% were assumed. The results of these CRMs are presented in Appendix 7-C, Volume II of this SEI and a representative selection is shown in Table 7-3. These results include estimates 3. As alluded to by the original ES, surveys to locate the nests of birds listed in Schedule 1 of the derived by assuming a ‘broad’ risk height band (10 – 50 m for existing turbines; 30 – 130 m for WCA will be undertaken in advance of construction (and decommissioning) works progressing across the Development Area during the breeding period. A disturbance risk assessment
December 2011 Llandinam Windfarm Repowering and Extension Environmental Statement – Supplementary Environmental Information Page 7 of Chapter 7