Bretton Hall Solar Farm Chester Road Bretton Flintshire, U.K

Project No: P305150.001

Environmental Impact Assessment Screening Report

Prepared for:

Bretton Hall Solar Farm Chester Road Bretton Flintshire, U.K. CH4 0DF

Contents Amendment Record

This report has been issued and amended as follows:

Revision Description Date Signed

1.0 Draft 19 March 2020 S Bell

2.0 Final 24 April 2020 S Bell

Mabbett & Associates Ltd, Corporate and Registered Office: Mabbett House, 11 Sandyford Place, Glasgow, U.K. G3 7NB Registered in Scotland No: SC 163378 [email protected] www.mabbett.eu

Acknowledgement

This report has been prepared for the sole and exclusive use of Ynni Newydd Cyf (Ynni Newydd) in accordance with the scope of work presented in Mabbett & Associates Ltd (Mabbett) Letter Agreement (M305150.001/LA/SB), dated 12 February 2020. This report is based on information and data collected by Mabbett. Should any of the information be incorrect, incomplete or subject to change, Mabbett may wish to revise the report accordingly.

This report has been prepared by the following Mabbett personnel:

MABBETT & ASSOCIATES LTD

______Susan Bell BSc (Hons) MSc PIEMA REIA Principal Environmental Planner

This report has been reviewed and approved by the following Mabbett personnel:

MABBETT & ASSOCIATES LTD

______Jamie Roddie, CEnv, MIEMA, PCQI Manager, Environment

Table of Contents

Section 1.0: Introduction 3 1.1 Introduction 3 1.2 The Applicant 3 1.3 Application Procedure 3 1.4 Environmental Impact Assessment & Screening 4

Section 2.0: Characteristics of the Development 5 2.1 Introduction 5 2.2 Proposed Development 5 2.2.1 Design 5 2.2.2 Access 6 2.2.3 Construction Phase 6 2.2.4 Operational Phase 6 2.3 Cumulative Developments 6 2.4 Natural Resources 7 2.5 Waste 7 2.6 Pollution & Nuisances 8 2.7 Major Accidents & Disasters 8 2.8 Human Health Risks 8

Section 3.0: Application Site & Surrounding Area 9 3.1 Introduction 9 3.2 Application Site 9 3.3 Surrounding Land Use 9 3.4 Site Selection 9

Section 4.0: Environmental Considerations 11 4.1 Introduction 11 4.2 Landscape & Visual 11 4.2.1 Introduction 11 4.2.2 Baseline Conditions 11 4.2.3 Likely Effects 12 4.2.4 Summary 12 4.3 Biodiversity 13 4.3.1 Introduction 13 4.3.2 Baseline Conditions 13 4.3.3 Likely Effects 16 4.3.4 Summary 16 4.4 Cultural Heritage & Archaeology 17 4.4.1 Introduction 17 4.4.2 Baseline Conditions 17 4.4.3 Likely Effects 19 4.4.4 Summary 19 4.5 Water Environment 19 4.5.1 Baseline Conditions 19

4.5.2 Likely Effects 20 4.5.3 Summary 21 4.6 Traffic & Transportation 21 4.6.1 Baseline Conditions 21 4.6.2 Likely Effects 21 4.6.3 Summary 22 4.7 Other Environmental Considerations 22 4.7.1 Glint & Glare 22

Section 5.0: Conclusions and Recommendations 23

Figures Figure 1: Location Plan Figure 2: Aerial Context Plan Figure 3: Layout Plan Figure 4: Environmental Constraints Plan Figure 5: Bareground Zone of Theoretical Visibility Figure 6: Modified Zone of Theoretical Visibility

Appendices Appendix A: Ecology Survey Report Appendix B: LVA Letter

Section 1.0: Introduction

1.1 Introduction YnNi Newydd (hereinafter referred to as “the Applicant”) intends to apply to the Welsh Planning Inspectorate (PINS) and Cheshire West and Chester Council for the construction and operation of a proposed 30MW solar farm development and the associated infrastructure on land at Bretton Hall Farm, Chester Road, Flintshire, CH4 0DF (hereinafter referred to as the “proposed development”). The application site crosses the national boundary; the northern area lies within Flintshire County Council and the southern area lies within Cheshire West and Chester Council.

Mabbett & Associates (Mabbett), on behalf of the Applicant, requests an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Screening Direction from the Welsh Ministers pursuant to regulation 31(1) of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (Wales) Regulations 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the “Welsh EIA Regulations”). In addition, the Applicant also requests an EIA Screening Opinion from Cheshire West and Chester Council, pursuant to Regulation 6(1) of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the “English EIA Regulations”), to determine whether the proposed development constitutes “EIA Development” within the remit of the EIA Regulations.

This EIA Screening Report is supported by the following Figures and Appendices:

▪ Figure 1: Location Plan; ▪ Figure 2: Aerial Context Plan; ▪ Figure 3: Layout Plan; ▪ Figure 4: Environmental Designations Plan; ▪ Figure 5: Bareground Zone of Theoretical Visibility; ▪ Figure 6: Modified Zone of Theoretical Visibility; ▪ Appendix A: Ecology Survey Report, and ▪ Appendix B: LVA Letter.

1.2 The Applicant The proposed development comprises a community energy project being developed by YnNi Newydd (New Energy), a society with the mission of developing and building community-owned renewable energy developments across Wales. The aim of the proposed development is to generate a source of clean, renewable energy to mitigate climate change and to provide benefits to the local community.

1.3 Application Procedure The total generation capacity of the proposed development is 30MW. As noted in Section 1.1 above, the application site lies within the administrative boundaries of both Flintshire County Council and Cheshire West and Chester Council, therefore spanning two Local Planning Authority boundaries, but also the national boundary between Wales and England.

The largest proportion of the application site area lies within Flintshire County Council, with a generation capacity of approximately 16MW. As this generation capacity exceeds 14MW, the proposed development within the Welsh boundary constitutes a ‘Development of National Significance’ (DNS) as prescribed within the Developments of National Significance (Specified Criteria and Prescribed Secondary Consents) (Wales) Regulations 2016.

The generation capacity of the proposed development within Cheshire West and Chester Council comprises approximately 14MW, with a site area in excess of 0.5-hectares, therefore constituting a ‘major’ planning application, as prescribed within the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015.

Although the proposed development crosses the national boundary, with two separate planning applications being required, the two planning applications share a common EIA as this is the most effective way to deal with the proposed development.

1.4 Environmental Impact Assessment & Screening EIA Screening is the process of determining whether a proposed development falls within the remit of the EIA Regulations, by identifying whether it is likely to have significant effects on the environment. The EIA Regulations set out thresholds for Schedule 1 development, whereby EIA is always required. Where a proposed development is listed on Schedule 2, an EIA may be required if significant effects on the environment are considered likely, by virtue of factors such as size or location.

Where proposed developments are listed within column 1 of Schedule 2, and meet or exceed the thresholds in column 2, an Applicant can request an EIA Screening Opinion or Direction from the competent authority to determine whether EIA is required. The proposed development falls within Schedule 2, Type 3(a) for “industrial installations for the production of electricity, steam and hot water (unless included in Schedule 1)” with an application site exceeding 0.5-hectares in size. The Applicant requests a Screening Direction/ Opinion to determine whether any future planning applications should be accompanied by an Environmental Statement (ES).

In accordance with Regulation 31(2) of the Welsh Regulations and Regulation 6(2) of the English Regulations, and where relevant Schedule 3, this EIA Screening Report includes the following requirements:

▪ plan sufficient to identify the land; ▪ a description of the development, including in particular— o a description of the physical characteristics of the whole development and, where relevant, of demolition works; o a description of the location of the development, with particular regard to the environmental sensitivity of geographical areas likely to be affected; ▪ a description of the aspects of the environment likely to be significantly affected by the development; ▪ a description of any likely significant effects, to the extent of the information available on those effects, of the proposed development on the environment resulting from— o the expected residues and emissions and the production of waste, where relevant, and o the use of natural resources, in particular soil, land, water and biodiversity. ▪ a statement that the request is made in relation to a development of national significance for the purposes of section 62D of the 1990 Act (Welsh EIA Regulations), and ▪ such other information or representations as the person making the request may wish to provide or make including any features of the proposed development or any measures envisaged to avoid or prevent what might otherwise have been significant adverse effects on the environment.

Section 2.0: Characteristics of the Development

2.1 Introduction Schedule 3 of the EIA Regulations sets out the selection criteria for screening Schedule 2 development. The characteristics of development must be considered having regard to:

▪ the size and design of the development; ▪ the cumulation with other existing development and/or approved development; ▪ the use of natural resources, in particular land, soil, water and biodiversity; ▪ the production of waste; ▪ pollution and nuisances; ▪ the risk of major accidents and/or disasters relevant to the development concerned, including those caused by climate change, in accordance with scientific knowledge, and ▪ the risks to human health (for example due to water contamination or air pollution).

2.2 Proposed Development The proposed development as a whole, comprises the construction and operation of a circa 30MW solar farm development and the associated infrastructure, including:

▪ Solar PV modules mounted on to frames to form arrays; ▪ Transformer units; ▪ Switchroom; ▪ Fencing and security measures; ▪ Access tracks; ▪ Battery storage; ▪ Onsite cabling, and ▪ Offsite cabling connecting the main switchroom to the Saltney Primary Substation (grid connection).

2.2.1 Design It is envisaged that the generation capacity of the proposed development would be 30MW. An indicative Layout Plan is illustrated on Figure 3. The current design of the proposed development has considered the baseline environmental conditions onsite, including habitats, water features and flood risk. The layout of the proposed development may be amended prior to the submission of the planning application, to consider any constraints identified during the environmental assessment process, or feedback received during the community consultation process.

2.2.1.1 Solar PV Arrays The proposed development comprises the installation of solar photovoltaic (PV) modules, fixed to a mounting structure (frame) to form arrays across the site. These frames are strong, robust and not easily damaged, allowing them to withstand environmental pressures. The metal racks would be pile driven into the ground, and therefore would not require concrete foundations. This construction method limits the footprint associated with the proposed development and allows for the remaining land beneath and between the arrays to remain accessible so it can continue to be utilised for livestock grazing purposes.

The PV modules would either be mounted on to static frames which would be orientated to face the south, or mounted on to trackers which would be orientated to the east and west. As outlined within Section 2.2.1 above, the final design will be confirmed prior to the submission of the application.

The arrays would have a clearance above ground level of up to 2.0m, with an upper height of no more than 4.6m above ground level. The lower height of the arrays has been determined through the modelling of flood risk across the site, allowing for sufficient clearance during a flood event.

2.2.1.2 Transformer Units Transformer units are required to control the voltage of the electricity generated by the proposed development, prior to reaching the substation. The solar PV modules will be connected to inverter units to

Bretton Hall Solar Farm: EIA Screening Report P305150.001 © 2020, Mabbett & Associates Ltd Page 5 of 23 convert the direct current produced by the modules into alternating current, which is compatible with the local electricity distribution network.

2.2.1.3 Switchroom A switchroom is proposed to be constructed which will connect the high voltage (HV) cabling across the proposed development.

2.2.1.4 Grid Connection The proposed development will be connected to the local electricity distribution network at the Saltney Primary Substation, which is located to the north of the proposed development. Underground cabling will connect the main switchroom onsite to the substation via the public highway. The underground cable route will follow the Bretton Hall Farm access road, the A5104, Saltney Ferry Road and the local road providing access to the substation for a distance of approximately 1.7km.

2.2.1.5 Fencing & Security Measures Fencing will be constructed around the proposed development for health and safety and security reasons. The fencing is anticipated to measure no more than 2.0m in height and will comprise green wire mesh. However, this will be confirmed prior to the submission of the planning application.

2.2.2 Access The application site lies within close proximity to the local highway network. Access to the application site is currently possible from the A5104 (Chester Road) located to the north. An existing junction exits this road onto the Bretton Hall Farm access road, which runs along the length of the western site boundary, in a southerly direction. A new access point would be constructed from this road, providing access to the proposed development. From here, internal access tracks would be constructed to provide access to the solar arrays and associated infrastructure. Further information in relation to transportation and access is included within Section 4.6 of this EIA Screening Report.

2.2.3 Construction Phase The construction phase of the proposed development is anticipated to take place over a period of approximately six months. The type of construction activities that may be required include:

▪ Site preparation; ▪ Construction of the solar PV arrays and associated infrastructure; ▪ Solar farm commissioning; ▪ Site reinstatement, and ▪ Landscape planting and habitat enhancement measures.

A construction compound would be located in close proximity to the site access point to facilitate the construction of the proposed development. The compound would allow for the laydown of materials and vehicle parking throughout the duration of the construction phase.

2.2.4 Operational Phase The proposed development would be operational for a period of up to 40 years. During the operational phase the proposed development would be unmanned and would be monitored externally. Activity onsite during the operational phase would therefore be limited to vegetation and habitat management, equipment maintenance, servicing of components and any emergency servicing requirements.

Following the operational phase, the solar farm components would be removed from the site and the land restored to grassland.

2.3 Cumulative Developments Schedule 3 of EIA Regulations require that the characteristics of a proposed development must be considered in relation to the “cumulation with other existing development and/or approved development.” A search was undertaken in March 2020 of other existing and/or approved solar farm developments within

Bretton Hall Solar Farm: EIA Screening Report P305150.001 © 2020, Mabbett & Associates Ltd Page 6 of 23 the vicinity of the application site. The existing and/or approved developments within 5km of the application site are detailed within Table 2.1 below.

Table 2.1: Existing and/or Approved Solar Farm Developments Development Name & LPA Reference Description Distance Location Huntington Water Erection of solar photovoltaic panels Treatment Works, Chester 17/05078/FUL and associated works with a 4.2km east road, Huntington, Chester, generation capacity of 7.2MW. Cheshire, CH3 6EA Huntington Water Installation of a 4.997MW ground Treatment Works, Chester mounted solar photovoltaic (PV) array 15/03102/LDC 4.2km east road, Huntington, Chester, and associated infrastructure on four Cheshire, CH3 6EA separate parcels of land. It is considered that, due to the separation distance between the proposed development and the solar farm developments identified within Table 2.1 above, significant cumulative effects are not anticipated.

2.4 Natural Resources The land within the application site currently comprises agricultural land used for livestock grazing. Field 8 (as illustrated on Figure 3) has recently been used for the production of winter crop. According to the Cranfield University Soilscapes Map1, the soil within the application site comprises “slowly permeable, seasonally wet, slightly acidic but base-rich loamy and clayey soils”. In addition, the Soil Survey of England and Wales 1986 identifies the soil as belonging to the Dowels soil series. The characteristics of this soil series comprise “moderately permeable prominently mottled stoneless clays over acid peat. Seasonally waterlogged with fluctuating groundwater within 50cm depth.”

In terms of agricultural land, an Agricultural Land Classification (ALC) survey will be undertaken to determine the quality of the land within the application site. The land is currently used for livestock grazing, with the exception of Field 8 which was recently harvested for winter crop. It should be noted that the proposed development would allow agricultural activity to continue throughout the operational phase, with sheep able to graze the land between and beneath the solar arrays. In addition, the proposed development is reversible, with the land within the application site boundary capable of being restored as close as practicable to its original, or to a better condition following decommissioning.

2.5 Waste It is anticipated that waste would not be generated during the operational phase of the proposed development due to the solar farm being un-manned and monitored remotely. During the construction phase, waste would be generated from the following sources:

▪ Soil stripping to accommodate new access tracks; ▪ Earthworks associated with the excavation of cable trenches, and ▪ Packaging waste associated with panels and infrastructure.

The waste generated from packaging would be managed at the appropriate waste management facility.

In relation to soil stripping and earthworks, careful management of soil would be implemented during any excavation works. This will allow for the re-use of soil resources onsite, preventing the need to remove soil from the application site. The applicant would prepare a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) prior to the commencement of the construction phase. The CEMP would include site specific measures to reduce environmental effects onsite, based upon the findings of the environmental assessment process. In addition, best practice guidance would be included within the CEMP and adopted during the construction phase to avoid, minimise or mitigate effects on the environment.

1 Cranfield Soil and Agricultural Institute. Soilscapes. Available online: http://www.landis.org.uk/soilscapes/ Bretton Hall Solar Farm: EIA Screening Report P305150.001 © 2020, Mabbett & Associates Ltd Page 7 of 23

2.6 Pollution & Nuisances The construction phase of the proposed development is not anticipated to result in the generation of pollution. Some noise will be generated throughout the construction phase, in the form of HGV traffic movements and the installation of the solar arrays and infrastructure. However, this will be short-term and is not considered to be significant. As outlined above, the CEMP will advise of best practice measures to be implemented throughout the construction phase to limit pollution and nuisances during this phase of development. The operational phase will not generate any pollution or nuisance in the form of noise or vibration.

2.7 Major Accidents & Disasters The EIA Regulations require that impacts on the environment from major accidents and disaster risk be assessed where appropriate, including the risk associated with climate change. Due to the low lying nature of the proposed development, significant effects in relation to accidents and disasters are not anticipated. However, any electrical installation, by its nature, will carry some degree of fire risk, although fires caused by PV panels are rare2.

In relation to risks from climate change, the application site lies within an area identified as being at risk of flooding. However, a Flood Risk Assessment / Flood Consequence Assessment will be undertaken, and mitigation measures implemented to allow for the safe construction and operation of the proposed development. The FRA/FCA will be submitted in support of the planning application.

2.8 Human Health Risks The proposed development is not considered to pose a risk to human health. The application site does not lie within an area identified as being contaminated or involve any hazardous substances during construction or operation.

There are health and safety risks associated with the construction phase of any development. Measures will be implemented to promote health and safety across the site. During the construction and operational phases of the proposed development the site will be secured by fencing, to prevent people accessing the site.

2 BRE (2015) Fire Safety and Solar Electrical/ Photovoltaic Systems. Available online: https://www.bre.co.uk/page.jsp?id=3211 Bretton Hall Solar Farm: EIA Screening Report P305150.001 © 2020, Mabbett & Associates Ltd Page 8 of 23

Section 3.0: Application Site & Surrounding Area

3.1 Introduction Schedule 3 of the EIA Regulations states that the environmental sensitivity of geographical areas likely to be affected by development must be considered, having regard, in particular, to:

▪ the existing and approved land use; ▪ the relative abundance, availability, quality and regenerative capacity of natural resources (including soil, land, water and biodiversity) in the area and its underground; ▪ the absorption capacity of the natural environment, paying particular attention to the following areas: o wetlands, riparian areas, river mouths; o coastal zones and the marine environment; o mountain and forest areas; o nature reserves and parks; o European sites and other areas classified or protected under national legislation; areas in which there has already been a failure to meet the environmental quality standards laid down in Union legislation and relevant to the project, or in which it is considered there is such a failure; o densely populated areas; o landscapes and sites of historical, cultural or archaeological significance.

3.2 Application Site The application site covers approximately 49-hectares of relatively flat, low lying agricultural land with an elevation of between approximately 3-6m above ordnance datum (AOD). The land within the application site is divided into six medium-sized fields between four-hectares and 10-hectares, and two smaller fields of between two-hectares and four-hectares. The fields have been numbered on the proposed Layout Plan (Figure 3) as fields one to eight, with field number references used throughout this EIA Screening Report where necessary. The fields are bound by a combination of hedgerows, trees and drainage ditches, with a small area of woodland adjacent to the southern boundary.

The land within the application site boundary is currently used for agricultural purposes with the main use comprising improved pasture for livestock grazing.

3.3 Surrounding Land Use The surrounding area is characterised by a combination of agricultural, residential and industrial uses, including the following:

▪ Agricultural land surrounding the application site. ▪ Residential areas within close proximity include: o Saltney Ferry: 0.3km north; o Saltney: 0.6km to the northeast; o Bretton: 1.1km west, and o Broughton: 2.0km west. ▪ Industrial units located on Broughton Mills Road 0.9km to the west-northwest and Airbus and Hawarden Airport located 1.7km to the west. ▪ Transport links within the vicinity of the site include the North Wales Express Road (A55) approximately 0.1km to the south and Chester Road to the north. ▪ Recreational assets within the vicinity of the application site include a Public Right of Way (PROW) which follows the boundary of field seven and the Wales Coast Path located 0.3km to the north.

3.4 Site Selection The Applicant has considered alternative sites during the site selection process; however the application site has been selected for the following reasons:

▪ Sufficient distance from potentially sensitive residential receptors. ▪ The application site is bound by hedgerows and trees, allowing for natural screening of the proposed development.

▪ The application site lies within close proximity of the local highway network, with access available from Chester Road to the north. ▪ Accessibility for connection to the local electricity distribution network with a viable point of connection. ▪ The proposed development allows for farm diversification, providing an additional revenue stream for the landowner.

Section 4.0: Environmental Considerations

4.1 Introduction As discussed within Section 1: Introduction of this EIA Screening Report, the proposed development falls within column 1 of Schedule 2 of the EIA Regulations as development Type 3(a). The relevant threshold for this category is a site area exceeding 0.5-hectares. The application site covers approximately 49- hectares, and therefore exceeds this threshold.

The remainder of this EIA Screening Report has been prepared in accordance with the screening selection criteria as detailed within Schedule 3. The following sections of this EIA Screening Report examine the potential for significant effects on the environment for each topic area relevant to the proposed development. Where necessary, mitigation measures have been identified. It is considered that an EIA is not required for the proposed development, due to significant effects upon the environment being unlikely.

4.2 Landscape & Visual 4.2.1 Introduction Brindley Associates Ltd (Brindley) will undertake an assessment to establish a full visual baseline and highlight potential landscape impacts and visual effects associated with the proposed development. Appendix B contains further information in relation to the proposed Landscape and Visual Appraisal scope of works.

4.2.2 Baseline Conditions The application site comprises relatively flat agricultural fields bound by a combination of hedgerows and trees, with a small area of mature deciduous woodland adjacent to the southern boundary.

Within 5km of the application site boundary, the surrounding area is characterised by a combination of agricultural, residential and industrial uses. There are existing and/or approved solar developments within 5km of the site – at Huntington Water Treatment Works; therefore, the proposed development would not introduce a new or novel visual feature into the landscape.

According to the Cheshire West and Chester Council Local Plan3 and the Flintshire County Council Unitary Development Plan 2000-20154, there are no statutory or non-statutory landscape designations covering the application site. These guidance documents indicate that the site forms part of an area designated as green belt / green barrier. From a landscape and visual perspective, the type of development proposed would not harm the openness or overall function of the green belt / green barrier to an unacceptable degree.

In terms of landscape character, the Landscape Strategy for Cheshire West and Chester Borough5 indicates that the site lies partly across two Landscape Character Types (LCT) - Drained Marsh: LCA 4b: The Lache Eyes and LCT Estate Farmland: LCA 11a: Grosvenor Estate - whilst A Landscape Strategy for Flintshire6 shows how the Welsh part of the site is characterised as part of Landscape Character Area (LCA) 3: Dee Floodplain.

With reference to LANDMAP, the part of the site that lies in Wales is characterised by the following aspect areas:

3 Cheshire West and Chester Council (2015) Local Development Plan. Available online: http://consult.cheshirewestandchester.gov.uk/portal/cwc_ldf/adopted_cwac_lp/ 4 Flintshire County Council (2000) Unitary Development Plan. Available online: https://www.flintshire.gov.uk/en/Resident/Planning/Development-plans--policies.aspx 5 Cheshire West and Chester Council (2016) Local Landscape Character Assessment – Landscape Strategy 2016. Available online: https://www.cheshirewestandchester.gov.uk/residents/planning-and-building-control/total- environment/landscape-character-assessment.aspx 6 Flintshire County Council (1996) Landscapes Working for Wales: A Landscape Strategy for Flintshire, Vol 1. Available online: https://www.flintshire.gov.uk/en/PDFFiles/Planning/LDP-evidence-base/Local/Volume-1-The- Landscape-Strategy-Policies-and-Proposals-1996.pdf Bretton Hall Solar Farm: EIA Screening Report P305150.001 © 2020, Mabbett & Associates Ltd Page 11 of 23

▪ Cultural Landscape - FLNTCL018: Kinnerton; ▪ Geological Landscape - FLNTGL981: Saltney; ▪ Historic Landscape – FLNTHL745: Kinnerton; ▪ Landscape Habitats – FLNTLH025: Sealand grassland, and ▪ Visual & Sensory – FLNTVS076: Dee coastal levels.

4.2.3 Likely Effects 4.2.3.1 Zone of Theoretical Visibility Maps Initial Zone of Theoretical Visibility Maps (ZTVs) have been prepared to illustrate the potential visual effects attributable to the proposed development. The ZTVs were created by placing calculation points at an indicative height of 4.6m to represent the intended maximum height of the solar arrays, evenly across the extents of the application site.

The ZTVs have been prepared in accordance with SNH’s Visual Representation of Wind Farms Version 2.2 guidance (2017)7. According to the ZTVs, the following landscape receptors may experience change as a result of the proposed development:

▪ LCT Drained Marsh: LCA 4b: The Lache Eyes; ▪ LCT Estate Farmland: LCA 11a: Grosvenor Estate, and ▪ LCA 3: Dee Floodplain.

The proposed development may result in a change in views experienced from the following:

▪ Bretton Hall Cottages; ▪ The western settlement edge of Saltney; ▪ The southern settlement edge of Saltney Ferry; ▪ Bretton Hall; ▪ A55; ▪ A5104; ▪ Wales Link Path, and ▪ PROW, particularly routes around Bretton; Bretton Hall Farm and the Lache Eyes marshland.

Potential effects on the above receptors will be considered as part of the landscape and visual assessment.

4.2.3.2 Potential Cumulative Effects The cumulative study area will extend to 5km and consider the developments listed in Table 2.1: Existing and/or Approved Solar Farm Developments only unless further sites are identified by Flintshire County Council and/or Cheshire West and Chester Council.

4.2.3.3 Landscape Mitigation & Enhancement Measures A Landscape Development Framework graphic will be prepared to: inform the emerging design of the proposed development; illustrate proposed landscape mitigation and enhancement measures, and show how the proposed development will respond to landscape and visual opportunities/challenges.

4.2.4 Summary The screening influence provided by nearby mature field boundary, roadside and policy woodland cover would limit the potential for significant landscape and visual effects.

It is considered that any potentially significant effect could be suitably mitigated, thereby allowing the proposed development to settle into its immediate landscape surroundings. The retention and management of existing landscape features coupled with the promotion of mitigation measures to provide visual screening would add biodiversity value by creating connections between existing woodland areas. We consider the proposed development site capable of accommodating the proposed solar farm without leading to unacceptable levels of significant effects on landscape character and visual amenity.

7 SNH (2017) Visual representation of wind farms – Version 2.2. Available online: https://www.nature.scot/visual- representation-wind-farms-version-22-february-2017 Bretton Hall Solar Farm: EIA Screening Report P305150.001 © 2020, Mabbett & Associates Ltd Page 12 of 23

It is our professional opinion that potential landscape and visual effects would not necessitate the requirement for an EIA. As a result, it is our intent to prepare a Landscape and Visual Appraisal (LVA) as opposed to a Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA).

4.3 Biodiversity 4.3.1 Introduction Solar farm developments have the potential to impact upon ecological receptors through habitat loss, fragmentation or the displacement of species. However, solar farm developments also present an opportunity to enhance biodiversity value of sites through the creation of relatively undisturbed habitats.

An extended phase 1 habitat survey has been undertaken for the proposed development to identify habitats onsite and to determine their potential to support any protected or notable species, the findings of which are set out within the Ecology Survey Report contained within Appendix A of this EIA Screening Report. The text below provides a summary of the findings of the Ecology Survey Report.

4.3.2 Baseline Conditions 4.3.2.1 Designate Sites As illustrated on Figure 4, there are a limited number of statutory ecological designations located within 5km of the application site boundary. Statutory designations within 5km of the application site have been identified in Table 4.1 below. Site citations have been obtained from the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC), North Wales Environmental Information Service (COFNOD) and Natural England.

Table 4.1: Statutory Designations within 5km of Application Site Distance from Designation Summary Application Site Special Area of Conservation (SAC) River Dee and Annex I habitats that are a primary reason for selection of the site: Bala Lake/ Afon Dyfrdwy a 1.5km north ▪ Water courses of plan to montane levels with the Llyn Tegid Ranunculion fluitantis and Callitricho-Batrachion vegetation. (Wales) Annex II species that are a primary reason for selection of the site:

▪ Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar), and ▪ Floating water-plantain (Luronium natans).

River Dee and Annex II species present as a qualifying feature, but not a primary Bala Lake 1.9km northeast reason for site selection: (England) ▪ Sea lamprey (Petromyzon marinus); ▪ Brook lamprey (Lampetra planeri); ▪ River lamprey (Lampetra fluviatilis); ▪ Bullhead (Cottus gobio), and ▪ Otter (Lutra lutra).8 Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Afon Dyfrdwy (River Dee) is of special interest for its fluvial geomorphology, Carboniferous geology, range of river habitat types, saltmarsh transition habitats, populations of floating water Afon Dyfrdwy plantain (Luronium natans), slender hare’s-ear (Bupleurum 1.5km north (River Dee) tenuissimum), sea barley (Hordeum marinum), hard-grass (Parapholis strigose), otter (Lutra lutra), salmon (Salmo salar), bullhead (Cottus gobio), brook lamprey (Lampetra planeri), river lamprey (Lampetra fluviatilis), sea lamprey (Petromyzon

8 JNCC. River Dee and Bala Lake/ Afon Dyfrdwy a Llyn Tegid Citation. Available online: https://sac.jncc.gov.uk/site/UK0030252 Bretton Hall Solar Farm: EIA Screening Report P305150.001 © 2020, Mabbett & Associates Ltd Page 13 of 23

marinus), club-tailed dragonfly (Gomphus vulgatissimus) and other aquatic invertebrates9. The River Dee is notified for its nationally important transition through a range of river types from mesotrophic to eutrophic. It is also notified for Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar), otter (Lutra lutra), club-tailed dragonfly (Gomphus vulgatissimus) and fluvial geomorphology.

The River Dee lies within both England and Wales, and is notified as separate SSSIs – the River Dee (England) and the Afon Dyfrdwy-River Dee SSSI in Wales. The features for which the two River Dee 1.9km northeast SSSIs are notified, in particular the range of river types and (England) migratory fish, depend upon the whole river ecosystem. The fluvial geomorphological interest occurs in both England and Wales.

The English sections of the river are therefore notified as components of the whole ecosystem for which the river is a nationally important example, and because the otter, club-tailed dragonfly and the geomorphological interest occurs on the English reaches10. The Cheshire West and Chester Local Plan identifies local ecology designations. The closest of which is the Lache Eyes Local Wildlife Site, which lies adjacent to the southern boundary of Field 5 and the eastern boundary of Fields 6 and 7.

4.3.2.2 Habitats An extended phase 1 habitat survey was undertaken for the proposed development on 28 October 2019, the findings of which are contained within the Ecological Surveys Report contained within Appendix A of this document. The surveys covered all vegetation to phase 2 level, including bryophytes and protected species. It should be noted that the Ecology Survey Report refers to fields A – E rather than 1 – 8 as outlined within this EIA Screening Report: (A=7, B=6, C=5, D=3, E=4+2+1. Field 8 was not surveyed).

The surveys identified the following habitats onsite:

▪ Improved pasture; ▪ Hedgerows; ▪ Mixed broad-leaved woodland; ▪ Ditches which were flooded at the time of the survey, and ▪ Access tracks.

Field 8 was not included within the extended phase 1 habitat survey; however habitats present include arable land as a winter crop has just been harvested from this field.

4.3.2.3 Protected Species The Ecology Survey Report identified the potential of the application site to support protected and notable species. Table 4.2 below summarises the findings.

Table 4.2: Protected Species within the Application Site Species Survey Summary & Conclusions Mitigation Measures No signs of badgers were noted anywhere Badger within the study area. None identified.

9 North Wales Environmental Information Service. Afon Dyfrdwy (River Dee) Citation. Available online: https://www.cofnod.org.uk/resources/sssi/2554/SSSI_2554_Citation_EN001.pdf 10 Natural England River Dee (England) Citation. Available online: https://designatedsites.naturalengland.org.uk/PDFsForWeb/Citation/2000452.pdf Bretton Hall Solar Farm: EIA Screening Report P305150.001 © 2020, Mabbett & Associates Ltd Page 14 of 23

Badgers will not be affected by the proposal. Indeed, it is considered there is no need for further survey for this species. No potential bat roosts were noted in trees either within the larger hedgerow trees (Willows and Poplars) or in the small copse described in the Ecology Survey Report.

Bats, which may well roost in the Bretton Hall farm building complex nearby, may well feed Bats over the study area but would be unaffected None identified. by the development since they are active at night.

Bats will not be affected by the proposal. No tree felling is anticipated of trees that might develop suitable bat roost potential. No further survey for the presence of bats is required. It is considered the whole area subject to the proposals is sub-optimal habitat as far as reptiles are concerned. This is partially because there is little vegetation cover but also the low-lying nature of the area makes it very vulnerable to flooding. The presence of Reptiles None identified. sheep grazing throughout would also disturb reptiles.

Reptiles will not be affected by the proposal. It is considered there is no requirement for further reptile survey. The study area is not a rich habitat for birds. Indeed, no signs of previous nests were noted.

Construction works should avoid the bird The study area does not appear to be an nesting season if at all possible. important habitat for birds.

Birds Alternatively, a pre-construction nesting Whilst the study area is not considered to be bird survey should be undertaken by a suitable for ground-nesting species, it should suitably qualified ecologist prior to be borne in mind that the hedgerows, though construction during the nesting season. neither ancient nor particularly diverse, will nevertheless provide nesting habitat especially for small bird species. The following Reasonable Avoidance No holts or lie-up sites were found associated Measures (RAMs) should be adopted with any of the ditches. Indeed, despite very during the construction phase: careful search, no spraints were found either.

▪ Any unnecessary works along ditch It is likely that otters do feed along these edges will be avoided. In particular, ditches but generally it is considered the any vegetation developing along the habitat is sub-optimal for this species due to ditches will be retained wherever the general lack of cover. Otter possible since otters will favour any

cover for concealed movement. Since no signs of otter activity were noted ▪ Otters are naturally inquisitive animals during the present survey, it is considered and are likely to investigate a unlikely this species will be affected by the construction site. Therefore, during the proposed development. However, there is a construction phase all machinery possibility that otters might be affected during which could harm otters will be made the construction process even though there is safe, or cordoned off with temporary no evidence of the presence of holts or lie-up fencing at the end of the working day. Bretton Hall Solar Farm: EIA Screening Report P305150.001 © 2020, Mabbett & Associates Ltd Page 15 of 23

sites within the principle construction zone ▪ All works will be restricted to daylight areas. hours so as to cause as little disturbance as possible to these largely nocturnal creatures. Night working that might require artificial lighting will be avoided. ▪ Suitable ramps will be placed within any temporary or permanent deep excavations in case otters become trapped within them. No signs of water voles were noted anywhere within the survey area. The lack of plant food diversity suggests the habitats here are sub- optimal for this species. In addition, the high water-table present throughout the proposal Water area would suggest these ditches are None Identified. Vole unsuitable for this species. Burrows would become flooded.

Water voles will not be affected by the proposed scheme.

4.3.3 Likely Effects 4.3.3.1 Habitats In relation to habitats identified onsite, the Ecology Survey Report concludes:

“No protected species of plants were noted during the survey. Indeed, the entire study area as far as vegetation is concerned is made up of low-lying, improved sheep-grazed pastures of very little floristic interest. These are either bordered with hedgerows, most of which have been recently planted (exhibiting little plant species diversity) or by ditches which have received little routine maintenance for many years and, as a result, are choked with vegetation, again of low species diversity. There are no ecological implications in widening the access tracks to these fields.

A COFNOD Local Biodiversity Information Centre search revealed the presence of Fine-leaved Water Dropwort (Oenanthe aquatica) and Small Pondweed (Potamogeton berchtoldii) in a small field pond a little to the southwest of the Bretton Hall Farm building complex in 1982. Neither of these species were noted during the present survey. If they are present in the ditches seen in the study area, they are unlikely to be affected by the proposal since there are no plans to affect the ditches in any way.

It is concluded that there is no need for further vegetation surveys.”

4.3.3.2 Protected Species The Ecology Survey Report did not identify significant impacts upon protected species. No further survey work has been required for the proposed development.

4.3.4 Summary It is considered that the application site is of low biodiversity value and with the implementation of the mitigation measures identified, significant effects upon ecology receptors are not considered. It is anticipated that through the proposed development, the biodiversity onsite can be enhanced through the implementation of a Biodiversity Management Plan. Therefore, an EIA is not required in this respect.

4.4 Cultural Heritage & Archaeology 4.4.1 Introduction Solar farm developments have the potential to impact upon cultural heritage assets, either directly or indirectly. An assessment will be undertaken to support any forthcoming planning application to identify potential direct and indirect effects as a result of the proposed development.

4.4.2 Baseline Conditions There are no statutory designated assets located within the application site boundary. Scheduled Monuments within 5km of the application site boundary have been identified within Table 4.3 and Listed Buildings within 2km of the application site boundary have been identified within Table 4.4 below. Descriptions have been obtained from Cadw where relevant.

Table 4.3: Scheduled Monuments within 5km of Application Site Asset Description Distance The monument comprises the remains of a well-preserved medieval moated homestead, the interior of which measures around 32m by 36m and forms a rough grass covered square, with a few trees present. Traces of well-dressed stone walling is visible on the north-west and south-west sides, presumably revetting the moat. The moat is water filled and measures between 7-10m wide. Bretton Hall Moated Site The monument is of national importance for its potential to enhance 0.15km west (id: FL185) our knowledge of medieval settlement. The monument is well preserved and is an important relic of the medieval landscape. It retains significant archaeological potential, with a strong probability of the presence of intact archaeological deposits and structural evidence. The scheduled area comprises the remains described and areas around them within which related evidence may be expected to survive11. The monument comprises the remains of a well-preserved medieval moated homestead. The site is essentially a U-shaped ditch enclosing a level rectangular area measuring 110m (NNW- SSE) by 80m max within which lies a coeval ditched mound. The ditch is still well preserved on the N and E having a depth of about 1m but on the W side it has been almost completely ploughed out and is now visible only as a slight linear depression towards the N end. Green Lane

Farm Moated The monument is of national importance for its potential to enhance 3.4km west Site (id: our knowledge of medieval settlement. The monument is well FL176) preserved and is an important relic of the medieval landscape. It retains significant archaeological potential, with a strong probability of the presence of intact archaeological deposits and structural evidence.

The scheduled area comprises the remains described and areas around them within which related evidence may be expected to survive. The monument consists of the remains of a castle, dating to the Hawarden medieval period. A castle is a defended residence or stronghold, Castle (id: built mainly of stone, in which the principal or sole defence 4.6km northwest FL016) comprises the walls and towers bounding the site. Some form of keep may have stood within the enclosure but these were not

11 Cadw Scheduled Monuments – Full Report: Bretton Hall Moated Site. Available online: www.cadwpublic- api.azurewebsites.net/reports/sam/FullReport?lang=en&id=237 Bretton Hall Solar Farm: EIA Screening Report P305150.001 © 2020, Mabbett & Associates Ltd Page 17 of 23

significant in defensive terms and served mainly to provide accommodation.

Hawarden Castle consists of a masonry castle built upon an earlier motte and bailey castle. The earlier castle was constructed by Hugh, Earl of Chester, and consists of a steep sided conical mound with a bailey to the north-east. The masonry castle was constructed from c.129, and was partially demolished c.1660. The remaining structure includes a shell keep on the motte, a curtain wall around the bailey, and a hall with an elaborate barbican. The site has been greatly affected by the landscaping associated with Hawarden Castle Park.

Table 4.4: Listed Buildings within 2km of Application Site Asset Description Distance Well House Grade II listing, comprising an unusually well-detailed mid C19 Farm (id: 0.6km northwest farmhouse, retaining good architectural character12. 85415) Grade II listing, comprising a cheese factory, which is now disused. Balderton 1874-75 by John Douglas for the first Duke of Westminster. Red Dairy (id: brick and plaster-panelled timber framing; slate roof. One storey 0.6km south 1115836) and attic and single storey. Four-bay main block with additional wings to right and to rear left. Grade II listing, comprising a farmhouse, mid C17, much altered Roughhill (id: and added to. Brown brick in English bond and garden wall bond 1.0km southeast 1138386) with graded grey slate roofs. Greenwalls, Grade II listing, comprising farm buildings dating to probably the Farm late C18. The farm buildings are constructed from brown brick in 1.2km south Buildings (id: English garden wall bond, with a grey slate roof. 1129917) Greenwalls Grade II listing, comprising a farmhouse of probably late C17, with Farmhouse a C19 wing. The farmhouse has been constructed from brown 1.2km south (id: 1136070) brick, with irregular bond, with graded grey slate roofs. Dodleston Hall (id: Grade II listed farmhouse, dating to 1793, altered. 1.7km southwest 1129920) Grade II listing, comprising a dovecote, probably circa 1793. The Dovecote at listing comprises a circular tower of brick, capped by conical slate Dodleston roof in two stages, below and above a louvred ventilator. An 1.7km southwest Hall external flight of stone steps leads to a boarded access door. A (id:1136130) circular flight-hole faces the back of the hall. The interior has tiers of brick nesting boxes.

In addition to the Listed Buildings identified in Table 4.3 above, there are a large number of Listed buildings located within Chester, approximately 3.6km to the northeast, at the closest. There are a large number of intervening buildings between Chester and the application site, which will limit intervisibility.

There are three, non-designated assets identified by the Welsh Archaeological Trusts Historic Environment Records (HERs) located within the application site boundary, including two boundary markers which lie along the national boundary between Wales and England, including Bretton Hall Boundary Stone I (Primary Reference Number (PRN): 39779) and Bretton Hall Boundary Stone II (PRN:39780). The third HER lies adjacent to the boundary of Field number 1, which comprises the Bretton Hall Circular Earthwork (PRN:132218).

12 Cadw Full Report for Listed Buildings – Well House Farm. Available online: www.cadwpublic- api.azurewebsites.net/reports/listedbuilding/FullReport?lang=en&id=85415 Bretton Hall Solar Farm: EIA Screening Report P305150.001 © 2020, Mabbett & Associates Ltd Page 18 of 23

The application site is recorded by LANDMAP as being located within FLNTHL745: Kinnerton. The LANDMAP description identifies this area as comprising:

“Diverse fieldscape types of different periods including irregular fields representing more ancient piecemeal clearance and enclosure of farmland possibly of medieval and later date, reorganised strip fields representing the enclosure of former medieval open fields with some remnant ridge and furrow, and straight-sided fields representing later 18th and 19th-century enclosure, landscape reorganisation or drainage and reclamation. Field boundaries mostly hedged. Scattered post-medieval marl pits, of which many survive as small ponds. Small areas of broadleaved and mixed woodland and strip plantation. Modern settlement represented by scattered farmsteads mostly of 18th and 19th-century date and by the small nucleated settlements at Higher Kinnerton and Bretton which are ultimately of early medieval origin. Medieval high-status rural settlement represented by moated sites. Wat's Dyke, an early medieval linear earthwork boundary, runs through the south-western part of the area. Remains of Cold War defence site at Dodlestone.”

4.4.3 Likely Effects It is considered that the main potential impact upon cultural heritage assets will be of an indirect, visual nature. However, due to the low-lying nature of solar farm developments, the separation distance and intervening vegetation and built structures, the potential visual impact is considered to be insignificant. A modified ZTV has been modelled, which shows limited visibility of the proposed development within the local area. To enhance the existing boundary vegetation, and to further limit views of the proposed development a Landscape Plan will be developed.

In terms of the potential direct impact upon unrecorded archaeology, the solar arrays will be pile driven into the ground, with no requirement for excavation for the footings. Small areas of excavation will be required for the foundations of the switchroom and battery storage areas. In addition, excavation will be required for the formation of cable trenches for the laying of cables. The HERs located within the application site lie adjacent to field boundaries, which will not be constructed upon, with sufficient separation distance maintained between the boundaries and the arrays.

A Cultural Heritage and Archaeology Assessment will be undertaken and will be submitted in support of the planning application. The Assessment will include a detailed desk-based assessment to describe the existing baseline conditions, including statutory and non-statutory assets. This will include consultation of the following data sources:

▪ Historic Wales map enabled portal for historic environment information in Wales; ▪ Coflein, the online database for the National Monuments Record of Wales (NMRW); ▪ LANDMAP the all-Wales landscape resource containing information on historic landscape characterisation; ▪ Clwyd Powys Historic Environment Record (HER); ▪ Local plan information (conservation areas), and ▪ Historic Ordnance Survey mapping.

4.4.4 Summary Due to the low-lying nature of the solar arrays and proposed layout, it is considered that the potential indirect visual impact of the proposed development will be limited. The groundworks associated with the Proposal are minimal, therefore the potential to impact upon unknown assets is considered to be low. With the implementation of archaeological mitigation, this potential impact would be reduced further. Therefore, potential impacts in relation to cultural heritage are considered to be insignificant and would not warrant the production of an EIA.

4.5 Water Environment 4.5.1 Baseline Conditions The application site lies at a low elevation (ranging between 2.69-6.34mAOD) and low gradient (averaging 1-2°) grassland. Critically, the development does not plan to alter the topography of the site or the land use.

4.5.1.1 Watercourses The River Dee lies approximately 1.2km to the north of the application site, at its closest. The Balderton Brook lies approximately 540m to the east of the application site, flowing in a south to north direction. In addition, there are a number of water features present within the application site boundary, including drainage ditches which run along field boundaries.

The site is located within the Balderton Brook catchment. This watercourse drains into the estuary of the River Dee to the north of the application site. Drainage into the River Dee estuary is controlled by a sluice and pump arrangement. A number of watercourses flow around or through the site and all flow into Balderton Brook. These watercourses are classed as main rivers.

4.5.1.2 Geology The bedrock beneath the site is characterised entirely by sandstones of the Kinnerton Sandstone Formation (part of the Sherwood Sandstone Group), deposited in an aeolian environment between 252- 247 million years ago in the Triassic period. The superficial geology beneath the site is characterised nearly entirely by tidal flat deposits comprised of clay, silt and sand, with a small area of the site to the south west and the general western and southern surrounds of the site being composed of glacial tills.

BGS 625,000 scale hydrogeology maps indicate that the bedrock beneath the site is classed as a highly productive aquifer (the Sherwood Sandstone Group is a nationally important aquifer). However, the overlying superficial deposits are composed of relatively impermeable deposits which are likely to limit the connectivity between the bedrock aquifer and the surface.

4.5.1.3 Flood Risk According to Environment Agency (EA) and Natural Resources Wales (NRW) flood data, the proposed development lies nearly wholly within Flood Zone 3 (a >1% annual probability of flooding) with the western margins of the site lying within Flood Zone 2 (0.1-1% annual probability of flooding). Only a small portion of the south western margin of the site lies within Flood Zone 1.

The flood risk is stated as being from the rivers and sea, though it is not clear from the information if the flood risk originates from the River Dee estuary or Balderton Brook, although information from the 13 Balderton Brook - Hydraulic Modelling study indicates it is highly likely the latter.

There are only two spatially limited flood defences identified in the area and it is not certain if these are located on the site or not.

NRW and EA data indicate three episodes of historic flooding at the site. The results of the sequential test indicate that the current site is the most appropriate site available.

4.5.2 Likely Effects 4.5.2.1 Flood Risk The application site has been assessed for various flood risk sources including:

▪ Fluvial flood risk: the site lies almost entirely within Flood Zone 3 and Flood Zone 2 with flood risk arising from the rivers and sea, likely to be sourced from Balderton Brook. No reservoir flooding has been identified for the site. Natural Resources Wales and Environment Agency data indicate that the site is not classed as a flood storage area, however this contradicts the stakeholder views and the Cheshire West and Chester Strategic Flood Risk Assessment that indicates that the area is a possible flood storage area. ▪ Groundwater flood risk: there is a very low risk of groundwater flooding at the site. ▪ Tidal flooding: there is no risk of tidal flooding at the site. ▪ Surface water flooding: there is a low risk of surface water flooding at the site.

4.5.2.2 Construction & Operation There are no significant changes in land cover planned by the scheme design, for example permeable grassland to impermeable surfaces. However, changes in the site land surface due to construction and the presence of impermeable solar PV modules need to be considered. The construction phase of the proposed development has the potential to impact upon permeability, mostly through the compaction of surfaces.

Increased soil compaction can lead to greatly reduced surface water infiltration which can lead to pooling of water during rainfall and increased surface runoff and erosion. Mitigation measures have been identified which will be adopted throughout the construction phase, which will be detailed within the CEMP to be developed prior to construction.

Once operational, the solar PV modules will be mounted above the ground, fixed at levels above the anticipated flood depth across the application site. The presence of the PV modules will lead to the generation of runoff from the face of the modules during rainfall events. This runoff would fall down the surface of the PV module and be discharged onto a small area of the land surface immediately below the lowest edge of the PV module. The increased concentration of water being discharged on the land surface below the PV module could lead to an increase in ponding of water and increased runoff from the site as well as the potential for soil erosion as areas of concentrated flow merge over time. However, as the site is to remain as grass beneath the solar PV modules, this will assist in controlling surface runoff (due to high surface roughness) and maintaining a relatively natural infiltration capacity.

4.5.3 Summary The proposed development has the potential to impact upon the water environment. However, through the implementation of recommended mitigation measures, significant effects on the environment are not anticipated, and therefore do not warrant an EIA for this aspect. A Flood Risk Assessment and Flood Consequence Assessment will be undertaken and submitted in support of each application.

4.6 Traffic & Transportation 4.6.1 Baseline Conditions The application site is well connected to the local highway network. The main A5104 (Chester Road) lies to the north and the A55 (North Wales Expressway) lies to the south. There is an existing junction from the A5104 to the north, which provides access to the Bretton Hall Farm and offices access road, which runs in a southerly direction, adjacent to the western boundary of the application site.

4.6.2 Likely Effects 4.6.2.1 Construction Phase There will be traffic movements associated with the construction phase of the proposed development. However, this is only of short duration and most traffic movements are expected to take place over a period of approximately six months.

It is anticipated that access for vehicles travelling to and from the east is likely to be via A55 junction 36A (which has east facing on and off-slips) while access from the west would be via A55 junction 35A which has both east and west facing slip roads to the A55. Vehicles would then route via the B5125/A5104 roundabout and east on the A5104 for approximately 2.6km. Construction staff may come to site using other roads but the roads in the area are generally of a good standard and the temporary uplift in trip generation is unlikely to cause any significant problems.

A new access point would be constructed from the Bretton Hall Farm access road, providing access to Field 1. From here, internal access tracks would be constructed to provide access to the other fields within the application site.

It is considered that the road network in this area is generally of a good standard and suitable to accommodate HGV traffic without modification.

4.6.2.2 Operational Phase The operational phase of the proposed development is expected to occur over a period of 40 years. During this time, the proposed development will only require access for service personnel and for routine maintenance and servicing of the infrastructure, landscaping and vegetation. Additional visits may be necessary in the event of unexpected maintenance requirements. However, service personnel will access the site by light goods vehicles, such as 4x4 or vans. These limited movements are not considered to result in a significant impact upon the highway network.

4.6.3 Summary In order to address traffic movements associated with the construction phase, a Transport Statement will be produced, which will also include a Route Study. The Route Study will assess the route options for accessing the site for both construction and operational traffic movements. However, the volume of traffic generated during the construction and operational phases of the proposed development is not considered to be significant. Therefore, an EIA is not considered necessary for this aspect of the proposed development.

4.7 Other Environmental Considerations 4.7.1 Glint & Glare Glint and glare refer to light reflected off smooth surfaces, either momentarily and intense (glint) or less intense for a more sustained period (glare). Solar panels are designed to absorb as much radiation as possible and to limit the amount of light reflected. Glint and glare has the potential to impact upon sensitive ground based receptors, such as residential dwellings, roads and railways, as well as aviation receptors, such as airports and airfields.

Solar Trade Association guidance document on ‘Impacts of Solar PV on Aviation and Airports14’ states that “from the evidence we have seen so far the STA does not believe that there is cause for concern in relation to the impact of glint and glare from solar PV on aviation and airports, nor relating to infringement on airspace or interference with communications equipment. Solar PV panels are designed to absorb not reflect light, and their level of reflectivity is lower than that of other objects commonly visible on and around aerodromes, e.g. metal roofs, glass windows, cars, and bodies of water.”

However, a Glint and Glare Assessment will be undertaken for the proposed development. This assessment will consider the potential impact upon ground-based receptors within close proximity to the application site and the potential impact upon Hawarden Airport, which lies approximately 1.7km to the west of the application site. Detailed geometric analysis will be undertaken using a Glint and Glare model for all receptors.

14 Solar Trade Association (2016) Impact of Solar PV on Aviation and Airports. Available online: http://www.solar- trade.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/STA-glint-and-glare-briefing-April-2016-v3.pdf Bretton Hall Solar Farm: EIA Screening Report P305150.001 © 2020, Mabbett & Associates Ltd Page 22 of 23

Section 5.0: Conclusions and Recommendations

The proposed development comprises the construction and operation of a circa 30MW solar farm development and the associated infrastructure. This type of development is listed in the first column of Schedule 2 of the EIA Regulations, and covering an area of 49-hectares, exceeds the relevant threshold identified in the second column. Therefore, the Applicant requests an EIA Screening Direction/Opinion from Welsh Ministers and Cheshire West and Chester Council to determine whether the proposed development constitutes EIA development.

As detailed throughout this EIA Screening Report, the proposed development is not likely to result in significant effects upon the environment, therefore it is considered that an EIA is not required. A number of mitigation measures have been identified throughout this EIA Screening Report which would be implemented throughout the construction and operation of the proposed development.

Although it is considered that an EIA is not required, detailed technical and environmental assessments would be undertaken to support any future planning application, including:

• Landscape and Visual Appraisal; • Cultural Heritage and Archaeology Assessment; • Flood Consequence / Flood Risk Assessment; • Transport Assessment (including route identification); • Glint and Glare Assessment; • Planning Statement, and • Design and Access Statement.

As noted in Section 4, an extended phase 1 habitat survey has been undertaken and the Ecology Survey Report is submitted as an appendix to this EIA Screening Report. This will also be submitted in support of any forthcoming application to PINS and Cheshire West and Chester Council.

Appendix A: Ecology Survey Report

BRETTON HALL FARM

ECOLOGICAL SURVEYS

Dr Rod Gritten PhD PGCE CBiol MRSB GRITTEN ECOLOGY

th 27 November 2019

1 1.0 INTRODUCTION A community group, Community Energy Wales, wish to develop a solar PV array on land owned by Bretton Hall Farm near Chester. The land subject to the proposal straddles the Wales/England boundary and, therefore, the Flintshire/Cheshire LPA boundary.

Gritten Ecology have been commissioned to undertake an extended Phase 1 Ecological Survey of the fields subject to the proposal, which was carried out during clear dry weather on 28.10.19. These surveys covered all vegetation to Phase 2 level, including bryophytes and all Protected Species. The access tracks to the suite of fields were also included since it is anticipated they might need widening to allow large plant access. A Local Records Centre search was also commissioned.

Map 1 shows the area subject to the Ecological Surveys. Map 2 shows an aerial photograph. There are no statutory nature conservation designations within or close to the study area.

Map 1: The boundaries of Bretton Hall farm are shown in red and those of the proposed solar PV array in magenta.

Map 2: An aerial photograph of Bretton Hall Farm with the fields subject to the ecological surveys shown bordered in red.

2.0 SURVEY LIMITATIONS There had been several weeks of unusually heavy rain preceding the ecological surveys and, as a result, many of the fields subject to the survey were partially flooded and, therefore, inaccessible.

3.0 VEGETATION

3.1 Legislative Context Under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, it is an offence to intentionally pick, uproot or destroy any wild plant included in Schedule 8. Particular care must be taken if any plants (or habitats) listed under Section 42 of the NERC Act (2002) might be affected. This act was superseded by the Environment (Wales) Act 2016 and its Section 7 List of Species and Habitats of Principal Importance for Wales. The implications of this are that “Welsh Ministers” must take all reasonable steps to maintain and enhance the living organisms and types of habitat included in any list published under this section of the Act. The list of habitats and species is currently exactly the same as the Section 42 (2002) list but this is under review.

3 3.2 Results For clarity Map 3 shows the annotation for the five separate fields that were surveyed. By and large all the fields were best described as Improved pastures or as arable (planted) (Field D).

Map 3: The fields subject to the proposal are marked as A-E. Note the small woodland to the west of Field C which was also surveyed.

3.2.1 Field A This is an Improved pasture (Photo 1) grazed by sheep and, at the time of the survey, partially flooded due to weeks of heavy rain previously. Species noted here (with DAFOR abundances) were Lolium perenne (D), Trifolium repens (O), Urtica dioica (R), Poa annua (R), Cirsium arvense (R) and Cerastium fontanum (R). The sward corresponds to an NVC: MG7 Lolium perenne ley and is floristically very uninteresting.

3.2.2 Hedge between Field A and B This hedge (Photo 2) is double fenced and dominated by mature trees, namely Populus alba, P. x canadensis agg. with Salix alba and Crataegus monogyna. Additional species noted within the hedge were Urtica dioica, Dactylus glomerata, Galium aparine, Phragmites australis, Rosa canina, Carex rostrata, Angelica sylvestris, Solanum dulcamara, Hedera helix, Anthriscus sylvestris, Alliaria petiolata and the moss Brachythecium rutabulum. The density of Nettles is an indicator of heavy and regular use of inorganic nitrogen fertiliser

Photo 1: Field A.

Photo 2: The hedge between Field A and B seen from Field A. Note flooding.

5 on the adjoining fields. Whilst not technically a ditch, the presence of species such as Phragmites australis indicate impeded drainage.

3.2.3 Hedge along western boundary of Field A This hedge (Photo 3) appears to have been quite recently established and is clearly flailed annually. It is composed almost entirely of Crataegus monogyna and Prunus spinosa with a single semi-mature Quercus petraea. Other species noted growing within this hedge were Rosa canina agg., Galium aparine, Alliaria petiolata, Rubus fruticosus agg., Agrostis capillaris, Dactylus glomerata, Calystegia sepium and the moss Brachythecium rutabulum. The hedge is, by and large, quite species poor.

Photo 3: The hedge along the western boundary of Field A

3.2.4 Field B This too is an Improved pasture (Photo 4) currently grazed by sheep, is clean and appears to have been quite recently sown. Species noted here (with DAFOR abundances) were Lolium perenne (D), Trifolium repens (O), Urtica dioica (R), Poa annua (R), Cirsium arvense (R) and Rumex obtusifolius (R). The sward corresponds to an NVC: MG7 Lolium perenne ley and is floristically very uninteresting.

Photo 4: Field B.

Photo 5: The narrow strip of woodland to the south of Field A.

7 3.2.5 Woodland to the south of Field A This is a narrow strip of mixed broadleaved woodland (Photo 5) between Field A and the A55 Trunk road to the south. Although there will be no impact on the woodland as a result of the proposals (it lies outside of the proposal area), a rapid survey was undertaken since it may provide connectivity for species such as birds and bats.

Species noted in the woodland were Betula pubescens, Pinus sylvestris, Fraxinus excelsior, Castanea sativa, Crataegus monogyna, Acer pseudoplatanus, A. campestre, Quercus cerris, Larix x eurolepis and Sambucus nigra. Many of the woodland species have clearly been planted.

3.2.6 Ditch on the eastern border of Field A and B This ditch was flooded at the time of the survey (Photos 6 and 7) and was considered too dangerous to survey in detail. It is choked with Phragmites australis and Urtica dioica with smaller amounts of Solanum dulcamara, Juncus effusus, Typha latifolia and the moss Brachythecium rutabulum. As with most of the ditches within the study area, they are fenced on either side so as not to create an animal welfare issue. They have clearly not been dredged (maintained) for many years. While the water level in these ditches was at the same height as the surrounding fields, in some cases levels were higher and water had spilled over into the fields either side.

Photo 6: The ditch to the east side of Field B is choked with Phragmites australis. Note owl box.

Photo 7: The ditch to the east of Field A is choked with Urtica dioica.

3.2.7 The small copse to the north of Field B This small woodland (Photo 8) has probably been planted (or an abandoned field corner) as game cover and lies outside the proposal area but was surveyed as it may provide habitat and connectivity for faunal species that might feed in the surrounding fields. Its integrity will be unaffected by the proposal.

Species noted here were Acer pseudoplatanus, A. campestre, Quercus petraea, Fraxinus excelsior with an understorey of Crataegus monogyna, Sambucus nigra, Corylus avellana and a ground flora consisting of Hedera helix, Urtica dioica, Dactylis glomerata, Rosa canina agg., Anthriscus sylvestris, Rubus fruticosus agg. and Schednonorus giganteus. There is a considerable amount of bare soil dominated by leaf litter. The habitat is species-poor and corresponds most closely to the Hedera helix (d) sub-community of the NVC: W8 Fraxinus excelsior-Acer campestre-Mercurialis perennis woodland though it has probably been considerably modified by planting in the past.

3.2.8 Field C Though partially flooded at the time of the survey (Photo 9), it was possible to determine that the field is Improved, as are all the other pastures within the study area, and corresponds to an NVC: MG7 Lolium perenne ley. The field is clean and is dominated by the following species: Lolium perenne(D), Trifolium repens (F), Poa annua (O), Urtica dioica (O), Rumex obtusifolius (O), Cirsium vulgare (R), Alopecurus geniculatus (O-F) and Stellaria media (R).

Photo 8: The small copse to the north of field B.

Photo 9: Field C which was partially flooded at the time of the survey.

10 3.2.9 Ditch along the north-eastern boundary of Field C Photo 10 shows this ditch which was flooded at the time of the survey and considered to be too dangerous to survey for vegetation. Similar species were noted as with all the other ditches in the study area with, in addition, Solanum dulcamara, Lemna minor, Glyceria declinata and Lamium purpureum.

Photo 10: The flooded ditch along the north-eastern boundary of Field C. Field D can be seen beyond.

3.2.10 Field D This field (Photo 11) had been previously planted with spring wheat, harvested and was currently fallow at the time of the survey. Thus, plant species noted growing here were mostly weed species. (It should be noted that not all of this field was surveyed as there was a (Crow) shoot currently in progress at the time of the survey). Scattered weed species noted here were Lolium perenne, Dactylus glomerata, Plantago major, Sonchus oleraceus, Cirsium arvense, Polygonum aviculare, Matricaria discoidea and Rumex obtusifolius.

Photo 11: Field D.

3.2.11 Field E This sheep-grazed field appears on the ground to be an amalgamation of three separate fields. There are areas of more-or-less exposed bedrock where the altitude is a little higher than the rest of the study area but the majority of these fields were flooded at the time of the survey indicating their low-lying nature (Photos 12 and 13). These fields are also Improved but correspond most closely to NVC: MG6 Lolio-Cynosuretum cristati grassland. Species noted here were Lolium perenne (D), Urtica dioica (O-R), Cirsium arvense (O), C. vulgare (R), Capsella bursa-pastoris (R), Ranunculus acris (R), Agrostis capillaris (O), A. stolonifera (O) and Cynosurus cristatus (F). The fields are bordered to the east by a row of Lombardy Poplar (Populus nigra) (Photo 13).

3.2.12 Hedge to west of Field E Like all the other hedges in the study area, this hedge (Photo 14) has been recently planted, is regularly flailed and is species poor. It is largely composed of Crataegus monogyna, Prunus spinosa and Corylus avellana with occasional Malus domestica, Acer campestre, Fraxinus excelsior and Rubus fruticosus agg.. Both Calystegia sepium and Solanum dulcamara were noted here.

Photo 12: Much of this Improved field was flooded at the time of the survey.

Photo 13: The east side of Field E is lined with Lombardy Poplars.

Photo 14: The hedge to the west of Field E.

3.2.13 The access tracks It is anticipated that the tracks which will need to be used to gain access to the fields described above may need some widening. Thus, surveys were carried out to ascertain whether there will be any implications for the vegetation or hedges present on and either side of these tracks.

Photo 15 shows the section of access track between the small copse to the north of Field B (3.2.7) and the entrance to Field E. This is an unmetalled (dirt) track which is partially vegetated with Lolium perenne and Urtica dioica. There is no hedge along its northern boundary.

Photo 16 shows the track between the copse and the main track to the Bretton Hall farm complex. This is mainly concreted but the odd vegetation that has developed here is the same for the track just described. There are no lining hedges.

Photo 17 shows the rest of the track as far as the Bretton Hall farm complex. This is entirely concreted with a Crataegus monogyna hedge along one side and a fence the other. The narrow verges are composed almost entirely of Lolium perenne grassland of little floristic interest.

To conclude, should it be decided that the access tracks need to be widened, this can be done by expanding the tracks on the sides away from hedges. Despite the fact that the hedges are species-poor, their removal would be ecologically damaging and have an impact on connectivity.

Photo 15: The northern section of the access track to Field E.

Photo 16: The middle section of the access track is concreted.

Photo 17: The rest of the track as far as the farm complex is concreted. It could be widened on the right side if required without damaging the Hawthorn hedge.

3.2.14 Conclusion No protected species of plants were noted during the survey. Indeed, the entire study area as far as vegetation is concerned is made up of low-lying Improved sheep-grazed pastures of very little floristic interest. These are either bordered with hedgerows, most of which have been recently planted (exhibiting little plant species diversity) or by ditches which have received little routine maintenance for many years and, as a result, are choked with vegetation, again of low species diversity. There are no ecological implications in widening the access tracks to these fields.

A COFNOD Local Biodiversity Information Centre search revealed the presence of Fine-leaved Water Dropwort (Oenanthe aquatica) and Small Pondweed (Potamogeton berchtoldii) in a small field pond a little to the southwest of the Bretton Hall Farm building complex in 1982. Neither of these species were noted during the present survey. If they are present in the ditches seen in the study area, they are unlikely to be affected by the proposal since there are no plans to affect the ditches in any way.

It is concluded that there is no need for further vegetation surveys.

16 4.0 BADGERS (Meles meles)

4.1 Legislative Context Badgers enjoy statutory protection under the Protection of Badgers Act 1992. Under this legislation, it is an offence to: • willfully kill, injure, take, possess or cruelly ill-treat a badger, or to attempt to do so, • or to intentionally or recklessly interfere with a sett. Sett interference includes disturbing badgers whilst they are occupying a sett, as well as damaging or destroying a sett or obstructing access to it. Under this legislation, a sett is defined as “any structure or place which displays signs indicating current use by a badger”. It is thus important to be able to distinguish between an old unoccupied sett and one in current usage.

In Wales, the Welsh Government (WG) provide licences for developments and construction activities which might disturb badgers but for developments listed under S.55(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, it is Natural Resources Wales (NRW) who have the appropriate powers. Natural England (NE) are the licensing authority in England. Developments and construction activities include: • the use of heavy machinery (generally defined as tracked vehicles) within 30 metres of any entrance to an active sett, • the use of lighter machinery (generally defined as wheeled vehicles), particularly for any digging operations, within 20 metres, • light work such as hand digging or scrub clearance within 10 metres.

In practice, construction activities that require blasting with explosives will need to be licensed if more than 30 metres from an active sett. Thus, the need for a licence (and mitigation) will depend on the precise location and extent of the proposed development in relation to an active sett. In any event, it is probably best to consult NRW, WG and/or NE if there is any reasonable doubt about the possibility of disturbance to a sett.

4.2 Survey Methodology Badgers are nocturnal animals and are rarely seen during the day, generally emerging from their setts at dusk. Thus, survey techniques rely on being able to detect field signs of these surprisingly common animals. Setts are the most obvious feature and a surveyor will be able to determine whether setts are active or not and gain some understanding of the population size and its fecundity by the number of entrances being used and the nature of the spoil outside these sett entrances. Other field signs include latrines, runs and footprints, feeding scrapes and the presence of their characteristic hairs caught on barbed-wire fences and other obstructions. If runs were located, these were followed for some distance in an attempt to find the location of active setts.

The entire survey area was assessed for signs of badgers.

17 4.3 Results No signs of badgers were noted anywhere within the study area. This is hardly surprising since the whole area is so low-lying and clearly subject to flooding. Setts dug in the area would flood very quickly.

4.4 Conclusion Badgers will not be affected by the proposal. Indeed, it is considered there is no need for further survey for this species.

5.0 BATS

5.1 Legislative Context All species of bats have been listed on Annex IV of the EC Habitats & etc. Species Directive (1994). Bats are, therefore, ‘European Protected Species’. The domestic UK legislation which underpins this Directive ensures that individual bats and their breeding sites (maternity roosts), nursery roosts and resting places (roosts) are protected. Many bat species are also listed under Section 7 of the Environment (Wales ) Act (2016). Before undertaking any works that might either directly affect bats or their roosts, surveys have to be carried out to ascertain the degree, if any, of usage by bats. Should any signs of bats be found, a licence from NRW (or NE) has to be applied for before works commence. Developers starting such works will be breaking the law if a licence has not been granted before works commence.

5.2 Survey Methodology Bats are nocturnal and remain well-hidden during the day. They are generally inactive in the winter when they are hibernating. Different species prefer different roosting sites. In the present context, surveys were confined to the trees on the site. The following features of the trees were identified as providing possible roost sites: cavities, loose bark, fissures and the presence of Ivy (Hedera helix) cover. These trees were placed into any one of four categories according to their suitability as bat roosts: None Low Potential Medium Potential High Potential Trees were assessed from the ground using binoculars and a high- powered Clulite torch. It was considered unnecessary in the present context to undertake dusk or dawn bat detector surveys.

5.3 Results No potential bat roosts were noted in trees either within the larger hedgerow trees (Willows and Poplars) or in the small copse described in 3.2.7 above. Bats, which may well roost in the Bretton Hall farm building complex

18 nearby, may well feed over the study area but would be unaffected by the development since they are active at night.

It is understood too that the owner of Bretton Hall farm is fastidious in pruning or felling any of the larger hedgerow trees if they become storm damaged. Thus, any cavities or tears that might become suitable as bat roosts are usually rapidly removed by routine tree maintenance. Indeed, a large hedgerow Willow between Field A and B was being felled at the time of the survey.

5.4 Conclusions Bats will not be affected by the proposal. No tree felling is anticipated of trees that might develop suitable bat roost potential. No further survey for the presence of bats is required.

6.0 REPTILES

6.1 Legislative Context Under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, it is an offence to intentionally kill, injure or take any reptile included in Schedule 5. In the present context, this would include Adder (Vipera berus), Common Lizard (Zootoca vivipara), Slow-worm (Anguis fragilis) and Grass Snake (Natrix helvetica). The Countryside and Rights of Way Act (NERC) 2006 gives additional protection against “reckless” behaviour that might endanger the life of these reptiles. All four species are included on the Section 42 list and are now included on the Section 7 list of the Environment (Wales) Act (2016). It is now accepted practice, where there is a known and significant population of any of the above reptile species or the development is of such a scale, to exclude them from the site by appropriate fencing, capture and translocation.

6.2 Methodology It is most unusual to find reptiles during a survey, so survey was therefore based on simply assessing the suitability of the study area as reptile habitat.

6.3 Results It is considered the whole area subject to the proposals is sub-optimal habitat as far as reptiles are concerned. This is partially because there is little vegetation cover but also the low-lying nature of the area makes it very vulnerable to flooding. The presence of sheep grazing throughout would also disturb reptiles.

19 6.4 Conclusion Reptiles will not be affected by the proposal. It is considered there is no requirement for further reptile survey.

7.0 BIRDS

7.1 Legislative Context Under the UK Wildlife and Countryside Act (1981), it is an offence to take, damage or destroy the nest of any wild bird while that nest is in use or being built, or to take or destroy an egg of any wild bird. Under the same legislation, it is an offence to intentionally or recklessly disturb any bird included in Schedule 1 while it is building a nest or is in, on or near a nest containing eggs or young, or disturb dependent young of such a bird. Many bird species are also listed under Section 7 of the Environment (Wales) Act (2016). Should there be a possibility that any bird nests be damaged during the construction period, works would have to stop until the young had flown and there was no possibility of a second or subsequent brood being raised in the same nest.

7.2 Survey Methodology A careful search was made throughout the survey area for nests and birds. Binoculars were used to facilitate identification. This was effectively a preliminary walk-over survey rather than following any standardised protocols.

7.3 Results Table 1 lists the bird species seen during the survey.

Species Species Habitat Jackdaw Corvus monedula Woodland and hedges Herring Gull Larus argentatus Feeding on flooded fields Carrion Crow Corvus corone corone Large numbers throughout Buzzard Buteo buteo Flying overhead Wood Pigeon Columba palumbus Seen in copse Great Black-back Gull Larus marinus Feeding on flooded fields Black-headed Gull Larus ridibundus Feeding on flooded fields Robin Erithacus rubecula Hedgerows Wren Troglodytes troglodytes Hedgerows Magpie Pica pica Throughout Coot Fulica atra Ditches Blackbird Turdus merula Hedgerows Great Tit Parus major Hedgerows Blue Tit Cyanistes caeruleus Hedgerows Table 1: List of birds seen during the survey.

The study area is not a rich habitat for birds. Indeed, no signs of previous nests were noted. The three Gull species must be considered as opportunistic,

20 feeding on dead invertebrates killed by the recent flooding - the dee Estuary is only about eight miles from the study area. Generally, the most common birds noted are those associated with Improved farmland (Carrion Crows, Magpies), whilst the smaller species generally associated with the hedgerows and small areas of woodland were few in number (Robins, Blackbirds, Tits, for example). It is considered unlikely this is a rich habitat for small migratory (woodland) species.

There was an opportunity to discuss birds with both a forester and a farm working during the survey. They both confirmed the area has a low diversity of species, as much as anything else because of poor cover in this open landscape and because of the relatively poor feeding opportunities available. However, they did mention that the following species have been seen on occasion: Greylag Geese (Anser anser), Pink-Footed Geese (Anser brachyrhynchus), Mallard (Anas platyrhynchos) and Teal (A. crecca).

A Barn Owl (Tyto alba) box has been recently erected by the landowner (Photo 6) close to the small copse but it is not known whether this species has nested here.

An RSPB survey was carried out of Bretton Hall Farm in 2010 and few additional species were recorded. The farm is clearly not an important habitat for birds. However, the RSPB survey did mention a sighting of both Lapwing (Vanellus vanellus) and Curlew (Numenius arquata). Indeed, both are Priority Species for England’s Countryside Stewardship Scheme targeting. Data about both these species is both poor and confusing. According to RECORD, the Biodiversity Information System for Cheshire, Halton, Warrington and Wirral, a flock of more than 200 Lapwing were recorded about a kilometer away south of the A55 in 2017, so clearly the area is suitable for this species.

A BASC (British Association for Shooting and Conservation) survey in 2005 reported both Curlew and Lapwing a little over one kilometer to the west of Bretton Hall Farm but no further details are available. Neither Lapwing nor Curlew were noted during the present survey.

7.4 Conclusion and Recommendation The study area does not appear to be an important habitat for birds. However, an additional survey is recommended for over-wintering birds.

Whilst the study area is not considered to be suitable for ground-nesting species, it should be borne in mind that the hedgerows, though neither ancient nor particularly diverse, will nevertheless provide nesting habitat especially for small bird species. Accordingly, construction works should avoid the bird nesting season if at all possible.

21 8.0 OTTERS (Lutra lutra)

8.1 Legislative Context The European Otter is fully protected in England and Wales under Sections 9.1 and 9.5 of Schedule 5 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 under which it is an offence to kill, injure or take an otter without a licence; to intentionally damage, destroy or obstruct a holt; or to disturb an otter in its resting place.

In addition, it is protected under the European Habitats & etc. Directive (92/43/EEC) since it falls under Annex 2a and 4a of the Bern Convention (Appendix III). Otters are, therefore, ‘European Protected Species’. They also receive worldwide protection under CITES (Convention on International Trade of Endangered Species). Licences are required for checking known holts or for carrying out work that may disturb otters such as the management of trees that are known to be used as resting (lie-up) sites. In Wales, the licensing authority is NRW, in England, NE.

8.2 Survey Methodology Otters are very largely nocturnal animals and in practice are rarely seen during surveys. Instead, surveyors have to rely on characteristic field signs. The most common of these are their droppings, known as spraints. These have a very distinctive smell and appearance and are used to mark otter territories. They are, therefore, often deposited on prominent riparian features such as rocks, beneath bridges or on large tufts of tussocky vegetation. Careful examination of these spraints can often reveal the recent diet of these illusive animals since fish bones, scales etc. pass through the otter’s gut relatively unaffected by digestive enzymes. The texture and appearance of spraints can also be used to determine how recently they were deposited. The frequency of their distribution can also inform surveyors of the relative otter activity within a catchment. The characteristic smell of fresh spraints can often be detected some time before the spraints themselves are seen.

Other field signs are also important indicators of otter activity. These include prey remains, footprints and slides, holts and lie-up sites. Holts (breeding sites) and lie-up sites are usually marked by sprainting activity near their entrances.

In the context of the present survey, a careful search was made for, holts, lie-up sites and spraints and other otter signs along the numerous ditches present within the study area.

8.3 Results No holts or lie-up sites were found associated with any of the ditches. Indeed, despite very careful search, no spraints were found either. It is quite likely that otters do feed along these ditches but generally it is considered the habitat is sub-optimal for this species due to the general lack of cover.

8.4 Conclusion Since no signs of otter activity were noted during the present survey, it is considered unlikely this species will be affected by the proposal. However, there is a possibility that otters might be affected during the construction process even though there is no evidence of the presence of holts or lie-up sites within the principle construction zone areas. Therefore, the following Reasonable Avoidance Measures (RAMs) will be adopted during the construction period to minimise any impact on this species:

1. Any unnecessary works along ditch edges will be avoided. In particular, any vegetation developing along the ditches will be retained wherever possible since otters will favour any cover for concealed movement. 2. Otters are naturally inquisitive animals and are likely to investigate a construction site. Therefore, during the construction phase all machinery which could harm otters will be made safe, or cordoned off with temporary fencing at the end of the working day. 3. All works will be restricted to daylight hours so as to cause as little disturbance as possible to these largely nocturnal creatures. Night working that might require artificial lighting will be avoided. 4. Suitable ramps will be placed within any temporary or permanent deep excavations in case otters become trapped within them.

9.0 WATER VOLES (Arvicola amphibius)

9.1 Legislative Context Water Voles are protected by law and are a conservation priority within the UK’s Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP). Under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended by Variation of Schedule 5) (England) Order 2008 it is an offence to intentionally or recklessly: • damage, destroy or obstruct access to any structure or place that water voles use for protection or shelter, • disturb a water vole whilst it occupies such a place. This increased protection adds prohibitions against intentional killing, taking or injury, possession and sale. It should also be noted that Section 10 of the Act requires that “reasonable” steps are taken to avoid unnecessary damage to such structures or places.

Should it be considered that water voles might be disturbed by a development or construction activity, a licence will need to be obtained from NRW or NE.

9.2 Survey Methodology It is understood that water voles have declined by as much as 90% in the UK over the past few decades. Up to the 1950s and early ‘60s, in was common to

23 see water voles in daylight plopping into watercourses and swimming across the ditches, slow-moving streams, ponds and lakes that was their commonest habitat. Because of extensive land-drainage and the predation effects of American Mink (Neovison vison), particularly in lowland areas, it is now extremely uncommon to see water voles. Thus, this species is now more common in upland areas. As a result, surveying for the presence of water voles has to be based on field signs rather than hoping to see the animals themselves. This involves a careful and detailed examination of the riparian and wetland habitats where they live and looking for the following signs: burrows, latrines, runs and larders.

A careful search was made along all the accessible ditches throughout the study area.

9.3 Results No signs of water voles were noted anywhere within the survey area. The lack of plant food diversity suggests the habitats here are sub-optimal for this species. In addition, the high water-table present throughout the proposal area would suggest these ditches are unsuitable for this species. Burrows would become flooded.

It should be noted that the same BASC survey mentioned in 7.3 above noted the presence of water voles a little over one kilometer to the west of the study area in 2005. It is considered most unlikely this species is still present in the area.

9.4 Conclusion Water voles will not be affected by the proposed scheme.

10.0 INVASIVE NON-NATIVE SPECIES (INNS) None was noted during the present survey.

11.0 OTHER SPECIES Hares (Lepus europaeus) were not seen during the survey but there are records within the BASC survey mentioned in 7.3 and 9.3 above in 2005. Indeed, both the forestry and farm workers, mentioned in 7.3 above, stated that hares are common on this farm. For reasons outlined in 12.0 below, hares are unlikely to be affected by the proposal, indeed their numbers may well increase.

24 12.00 DISCUSSION: MITIGATION AND HABITAT ENHANCEMENT There appears to have been very little research done on the impact of fixed tilt PV arrays on wildlife. In the present context, the site is of low ecological interest. It is prudent to mention the three broad areas of research that have been undertaken and the possible implications on the current proposal. These relate to birds, aquatic invertebrates and bats. (See ‘Potential ecological impacts of ground-mounted photovoltaic solar panels in the UK: an introduction and literature review (BSG Ecology (9.1.2014) which concludes that “… the ecological impacts of ground-mounted solar panels in the UK are relatively limited and location-specific”).

12.1 Birds The most authoritative consideration about the possible impacts of ground-mounted PV arrays on birds has been undertaken by the RSPB (2011). This briefing document concludes that “if correctly sited (so as not to impact on sensitive species) and with appropriate land/habitat management and other mitigation measures employed, the deployment of solar might be of benefit to birds in the wider countryside. There is no scientific evidence of fatality risks to birds associated with solar PV arrays. Collision is most likely to be a risk for waterfowl, which may be attracted to PV panels (though there is little evidence for this).”

12.2 Aquatic invertebrates It is worth considering the possible impact of ground-mounted PV arrays on aquatic invertebrates since much of the fields are surrounded by ditches. The most definitive study in this area is by Horváth et al. (2010). Egg laying behaviour over PV arrays has been observed in some aquatic insect groups presuming that these creatures are mistaking the panels for water bodies. This paper concludes, however, that for polarising surfaces that were broken by a white border or grid (as will be the case here), the occurrence of egg laying behaviours was reduced. The study found that “…the highly and horizontally polarising surfaces that had non-polarising, white cell borders were 10- to 26- fold less attractive to insects than the same panels without white partitions”. Moreover, the polarisation of light by these broken surfaces appeared from the results to be less than for water. As most existing and proposed solar parks in the UK employ grid-formed panels with anti-reflective films (as is the case here), it is possible that the reflection of polarised light from these surfaces is already substantially reduced. One must also take into consideration that these arrays are angled towards the south (26.5°from the horizontal) rather than being mounted horizontally.

12.3 Bats The most apposite research in this area is by Greif and Siemers (2010) who concluded that bats have an innate ability to echo-locate water, by

25 recognising the echo from smooth surfaces, and that bats may therefore perceive all smooth surfaces as water. The authors do not suggest that bats will be negatively affected by this mistake. Again, it is suggested the tilt of the arrays is likely to deter bats from confusing them with horizontal water bodies.

12.4 Habitat Enhancement The fields subject to the present proposal together with the ditches and hedges that border them are all more-or-less of marginal ecological interest. The vegetation is uninteresting, and the diversity of birds and animals associated with them limited due to the lack of plant species diversity. Regular routine inorganic fertiliser usage and the dominance of species such as Lolium perenne, whilst undoubtedly of some agricultural value, make the habitat uninteresting and thus an ideal location for a solar farm of this scale.

It is understood that the solar panels will be mounted some distance above ground (c 1.4 metres) so that sheep will still be able to graze the pastures beneath. This will clearly avoid the need to mow the fields regularly. It will be desirable too to avoid any reseeding and to cease the use of fertilisers. Though these fields have been treated with fertiliser for some time, the cessation of fertiliser use will, in time, improve the sward diversity. (The abundance of species such as Urtica dioica and Glyceria declinata are evidence of the high nitrogen input). Different grass species will colonise in time, such as Dactylus glomerata and Arrhenatherum elatius. These are tussocky grass species whose presence will increase the three-dimensional quality of the sward. Undoubtedly, this increase in floristic diversity will have the knock-on effect of improving the fields as feeding habitat, particularly for birds, and increase its cover value. Higher insect diversity associated with greater plant species diversity will increase the abundance of both birds and bats.

The lay-out of the solar panels (details to be submitted elsewhere) ensures a wide gap at the boundaries of the five fields (6 metres). This will allow tractor access at the field margins for the future maintenance of hedges and possibly of the ditches as well. None of these habitats will be affected by the proposal and they may, as a result, improve in diversity themselves, especially if fertiliser input is stopped.

It is recommended too that small scrapes are incorporated into the layout of the fields especially in the low-lying areas. These have been shown elsewhere to provide good habitat for Lapwings which are believed to frequent the area.

26 13.0 REFERENCES BSG Ecology (2014). Potential ecological impacts of ground-mounted photovoltaic solar panels in the UK: an introduction and literature review.

Greif, S., and Siemers, B. M. (2010). Innate recognition of water bodies in echo- locating bats. Nat. Commun.2(1).

Horváth G., Blahó M., Egri A., Kriska G., Seres I., Robertson B. (2010) Reducing the maladaptive attractiveness of solar panels to polarotactic insects. Conservation Biology, 24, 1644–1653.

Solar power, RSPB briefing (2011).

Appendix B: LVA Letter

Ref: 5554/1502

By Email

Dear Sir/Madam,

Proposed Extent of Landscape and Visual Assessment for Bretton Hall Solar Farm.

Brindley have been appointed as landscape consultants by Mabbett & Associates Ltd on behalf of Ynni Newydd.

As part of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Screening Report, Brindley intimated their intent to prepare a Landscape and Visual Appraisal (LVA) as opposed to a Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) as it is our professional opinion that landscape and visual effects associated with the proposed development would not necessitate the requirement for an EIA.

The purpose of this letter is to determine a proportionate extent of assessment for the LVA. It focusses solely on landscape and visual amenity matters and aims to avoid duplication of previously issued material.

Brindley intend to assess only those landscape and visual receptors considered as having the potential to experience potentially adverse effects. The following pages contain a detailed breakdown of receptors proposed for inclusion/ exclusion within our LVA. The list is based on findings from an initial site visit and of a review of the various Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) maps prepared to illustrate potential areas of visibility of the proposed development (see Figures 01-06).

Landscape Policy and Guidance

Reference will be made to the Cheshire West and Chester Council Local Plan and the Flintshire County Council Unitary Development Plan 2000-2015.

Regional landscape designations identified within the above documents will be considered.

Landscape Character Types (LCTs) identified within the following source material will be considered:

• Landscape Strategy for Cheshire West and Chester Borough;

• A Landscape Strategy for Flintshire; and

• LANDMAP. A summary of planning policy and guidance relevant to landscape and visual amenity will be included as an appendix to the LVA.

Assessment Methodology

The LVA will be prepared with reference to the third edition of Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (GLVIA3), published by the Landscape Institute.

1 20 March 2020

Bretton Hall Solar Farm Job no. 1502 LVA Scoping Consultation Mabbett & Associates Ltd on behalf of Ynni Newydd

All assessment work for the LVIA will be reviewed and approved by Chartered Landscape Architects employed by Brindley.

A detailed methodology outlining the assessment criteria will be included as an appendix to the LVA.

Study Area

We propose a 5km study area and to illustrate LCTs, landscape designations and recreational routes across the same extents.

The cumulative study area will similarly extend to 5km and consider the developments listed in Table 2.1: Existing and/or Approved Solar Farm Developments of the EIA Screening Report only unless further sites are identified by Flintshire County Council and/or Cheshire West and Chester Council.

Site Visits

An initial site visit was undertaken in the first week of April (2020) to obtain viewpoint photography from identified viewpoint locations during wintry conditions, i.e. before broadleaved trees leaf to ensure the visual effects associated with the proposed development are appraised against the ‘worst case’ visual scenario.

Following receipt of the EIA Screening and Scoping opinion responses, a further site visit will be undertaken by Brindley’s assessment team to appraise the level of change attributable to the proposed development on the baseline conditions.

Visualisations

All visualisations will be prepared to the Landscape Institute’s Technical Guidance Note on Visual Representation of Development Proposals.

We propose to visualise the proposed development to Type 3 Photomontage/ Photowire AVR Level 3 (and to include matching existing photography).

2 20 March 2020

Bretton Hall Solar Farm Job no. 1502 LVA Scoping Consultation Mabbett & Associates Ltd on behalf of Ynni Newydd

Landscape and Visual Effects

As per GLVIA3, landscape and visual effects will be considered separately. The sensitivity of landscape receptors will be based on the perceived susceptibility of the landscape receptor to the type of development proposed, whilst the sensitivity of visual receptors will be based on the susceptibility of the viewer to the type of development proposed.

Significance of Landscape and Visual Effects

An overall judgement will be made on the sensitivity of each receptor and the likelihood for potentially adverse effects resulting from the proposed development. Judgements will be based on value, susceptibility, scale, geographical extent, duration and reversibility – with reference made to any operational or under construction solar farms considered to form part of the baseline conditions.

Potential effects will be considered whilst the proposed development is under construction, operational and during decommissioning. As effects may be of variable duration, mention will be made to whether effects are considered to be temporary/ short-term/ long-term and/ or permanent/ reversible.

The LVA will determine where effects are beneficial, neutral or adverse.

Cumulative Effects

Potential cumulative landscape and visual effects will be assessed similarly to the process for the LVA. The difference being the consideration of baseline developments alongside those solar farms with planning consent (but for which no construction activity has occurred) and/ or similarly proposed developments with a valid planning application.

The cumulative assessment will consider the occurrence of effects where one or more developments are visible from a static position (simultaneous visibility) or when a viewer moves between positions (sequential visibility).

Zone of Theoretical Visibility Mapping

ZTVs will be prepared in accordance with SNH’s Visual Representation of Wind Farms Version 2.2 guidance.

Cumulative ZTVs may be prepared to illustrate the theoretical pattern of the proposed development when considered alongside any neighbouring development (based on shared planning status and/ or proximity).

Receptor List for Inclusion/ Exclusion

We have undertaken an initial appraisal of landscape/ visual receptors within approximately 5km of the proposed development. The following lists consider potential receptors within 5km; however, potential effects beyond these extents will be considered, particularly when considering the level of effects from transport and recreational routes.

Landscape and visual receptors highlighted below are proposed for inclusion within our LVA as they are considered to have the most potential to be susceptible to changes arising as a result of the proposed development.

3 20 March 2020

Bretton Hall Solar Farm Job no. 1502 LVA Scoping Consultation Mabbett & Associates Ltd on behalf of Ynni Newydd

Landscape Character Types (see Figure 05)

Name

LCT4 Drained Marsh: LCA 4b: The Lache Eyes

LCT4 Drained Marsh: LCA 4c: Dodleston drained marsh

LCT4 Drained Marsh: LCA 4d: Burton & Shotwick drained marsh

LCT6: Enclosed Farmland

LCT9: Cheshire Plain West: LCA 9d: Saughall to Waverton plain

LCT11: Estate Farmland: LCA 11a: Grosvenor Estate

LCT15: River Valleys: LCA 15f: Dee Valley

LCT: Urban Area

Landscape Character Area (LCA) 3: Dee Floodplain*

*Identified in A Landscape Strategy for Flintshire.

The Landscape Assessment will also pay reference the following aspect areas, which cover the site according to LANDMAP:

• Cultural Landscape - FLNTCL018: Kinnerton;

• Geological Landscape - FLNTGL981: Saltney;

• Historic Landscape – FLNTHL745: Kinnerton;

• Landscape Habitats – FLNTLH025: Sealand grassland; and

• Visual & Sensory – FLNTVS076: Dee coastal levels.

Designated Landscapes (see Figure 06)

Name Type of Designation

Eaton Hall Parks and Gardens

Overleigh Cemetery (North) Parks and Gardens

Grosvenor Park Parks and Gardens

Settlements (see Figures 03 and 04)

Name

Chester

Saltney (eastern settlement edge)

Saltney Ferry (southern settlement edge)

4 20 March 2020

Bretton Hall Solar Farm Job no. 1502 LVA Scoping Consultation Mabbett & Associates Ltd on behalf of Ynni Newydd

Bretton

Broughton

Dodleston

Hawarden/ Penarlâg

Higher Kinnerton

Old Warren

Pulford

Residential Properties within 2km (see Figures o3 and 04)

Name

Bretton Hall Cottages

Bretton Hall Farm

Hope’s Place

Sandy Lane Farm

Decoy Farm

Well House Farm

Moat Farm

Digby Farm

Key Transport Routes

Name

A55

A5104

A483

A548

B5125

B5129

B5445

5 20 March 2020

Bretton Hall Solar Farm Job no. 1502 LVA Scoping Consultation Mabbett & Associates Ltd on behalf of Ynni Newydd

Recreational Routes (See Figure 06)

Name Type of Route

Wales Link Path -

Route 5 Sustrans Route

Route 45 Sustrans Route

Route 70 Sustrans Route

Route 568 Sustrans Route

PROW covering Lache Eyes marshland Public Right of Way

PROW covering Bretton and Bretton Hall Farm Public Right of Way

Whilst there are further promoted rights of way within 5km of the proposed development, none are predicted to experience potentially adverse effects along their full extents.

As a result, it is our intention to exclude all other promoted rights of way – aside from those mentioned above - from the recreational route assessment within the LVA, unless otherwise advised.

Representative Viewpoint Locations (see Figures 03 and 04)

In support of the visual assessment for the above visual receptors, the following four viewpoint locations have been identified to illustrate the range of views experienced across the study area.

As part of the visual assessment for each location, cumulative graphics/ visualisations will be determined on a case-by-case basis to ensure the assessment considers the worst-case cumulative development scenario.

Viewpoint Viewpoint Name Grid Reasons for Inclusion No. Reference

1 A5104 (Chester Road) and B5129 336936,364683 Part of regional and local road network, (Saltney Ferry Road) junction experienced by road users and recreational users of the Wales Link Path

2 Sandy Lane, edge of Saltney 337760, 364137 Experienced by residents. Part of local road network, experienced by road users

3 Field Entrance off Bretton Lane 335238, 363574 Part of local road network; experienced by road users. Broadly representative of views experienced by residents

4 Pedestrian Footbridge over A55 338949,362472 Localised vantage point experienced by walkers. Broadly experienced by road users of A483

Landscape Mitigation and Enhancement Measures

The LVA will include a Landscape Development Framework graphic, which will be prepared to: inform the emerging design of the proposed development; illustrate proposed landscape mitigation and enhancement

6 20 March 2020

Bretton Hall Solar Farm Job no. 1502 LVA Scoping Consultation Mabbett & Associates Ltd on behalf of Ynni Newydd measures; and show how the proposed development will respond to landscape and visual opportunities/challenges.

Summary of Questions

• Q1 – Do you agree with the proposed methodologies?

• Q2 - Do you agree with the proposed 5km LVA and cumulative study area?

• Q3 – Do you agree with the list of landscape receptors proposed to be assessed?

• Q4 – Do you agree with the list of key settlements proposed to be assessed?

• Q5 – Do you agree with the list of residential properties to be assessed?

• Q6 – Do you agree with the list of transport routes proposed to be assessed?

• Q7 – Do you agree with the list of recreational routes proposed to be assessed?

• Q8 – Do you agree with the list of representative viewpoints proposed to be assessed?

I’d like to thank you in advance for your response and co-operation.

Yours sincerely,

Enclosed:

Figure 01 – Landscape Character Types.

Figure 02 – Landscape Designations and Designated Routes.

Figure 03 – Bareground Zone of Theoretical Visibility.

Figure 04 – Modified Zone of Theoretical Visibility.

Figure 05 – Modified ZTV and Landscape Character Types.

Figure 06 – Modified ZTV, Landscape Designations and Designated Routes.

7 20 March 2020

¯ Bre tton Hall Solar Farm Figure 01 Land sc ape Charac te r Type s

Ke y

Site bound ary Stud y are a (5km offse t from site bound ary) Counc il bound arie s

Cheshire West and Chester Local Landscape Character Types

LCT 4 Draine d M arsh Flintshire County Council 4b. Lac he Eye s 4c . Dod le ston d raine d m arsh 4d . Burton & Shotwic k d raine d m arsh

LCT 6 Enc lose d Farm land LCT 9 Che shire Plain W e st 9d . Saughall to W ave rton plain LCT 11 Estate Farm land 11a. Grosve nor Estate LCT 15 Rive r V alle ys 15f. De e V alle y Urban are a

LANDMAP - Natural Resources Wales W ith re fe re nc e to LANDM AP, the part of the site that lie s in W ale s is c harac te rise d by the following aspe c t are as: - Cultural Land sc ape - FLNTCL018: Kinne rton; - Ge ologic al Land sc ape - FLNTGL981: Saltne y; - Historic Land sc ape – FLNTHL745: Kinne rton; - Land sc ape Habitats – FLNTLH025: Se aland grassland ; and - V isual & Se nsory – FLNTV S076: De e c oastal le ve ls.

Cheshire West and Chester Council

0 500 1,000 2,000 3,000 Meters 5km

(

! (

!( !

( !( ! !(

!( ! (

!( ! ( ( !( ! (!

( ! (

!( ! (!

(

! (! (! ( !

(

! ( !

( !

(

(! !

(! (! !( (! ! ( (! ( !

(! (! !(

!( !( ! ( ( ! (

(! ! !

(! ( (! ( !

( (! ! ! !( !(

!( ( (! (! (!

( ! ( ! ! !( ( (!

!( Bretton Hall Solar Farm

(! !(

! (

( ! ! ( ( !

( (! !

(! !( ! ( ( !( !

(

(! ! (! !( !

( ( ! ( ( !

(! (! (! !

(

! ! ¯

( (! (! (

(

(! (! ! (

(! ! !( (

(! (! !

( ( ! ! Figure 02 (! !(

(! !(

! (

( !

( ! ( ! (! (!

(! !( Landscape Designations and !

( (

(! ! ( (! ! (! (! (! !(

! (! ( ( ! !( (! (! !( !( Designated Routes

(! !( (! !(

(

! (!

!( !( (! (

(! (! ! ( !( ! !(

! !( ( ( !( !

( !

(

! !

(! !( (! ( ( (! !

(! (! (! (

(! !

! !(! Key

( ( ! ( ! ( ( ! (! (! (!

(! (! ! !( ( ( !( (! !

(! (! (! (!

! !( ( ( ! (!

(! (! !( Site boundary (!

( (! ! (! (! !( !(

(! ( (! !( ! (! Study area (! !(

(! !( (5km offset from site boundary)

(! !(

( (! ! !( (! !( (! (! (! (! (! !( Council boundaries

! (! (! (

( !! (! ( ( ! !( (! (! ! ! !( !( (! (! (! (! (! ! ( ( ( (!

!( (! (! (

(! ! (! (

!( ! !( (! ( ! Landscape Designations

(! !( !(

( ! (! (! (!

!( !(

(! (! W X !( Registered parks and gardens (! !( (! !( (! (! A. Eaton Hall !( XW (! (! !( (! (! ! !( (! B. Overleigh Cemetery (north) (! !( (! (! ( Flintshire County Council (! (! ! (! (! (! (! ( C. Grosvenor Park XW (! (! (! (! (! (! !( (! (! !( XW (! Cu(! ltural Heritage Designations (! ! ( (! XW (! Scheduled monuments XW XW (! XW

(! Conservation areas

XW XW

X (!

X W ( ! i. Chester

XW (! ii. Hawarden iii. Rossett (outwith study area) XW XW iv. Caergwrle (outwith study area) XWXW XW Designated Routes XW Public rights of way XW XW (! (! (! Sustrans route XW

XW XW XW Wales link path XW XW XW

XW XW XW XW XW XWCheshire West and Chester Council XW XW XW XW

XW W

X XW XW

XW X W

XW W

XW X XW XW XW XW XW 0 500 1,000 2,000 3,000 XW XW Meters

W X 5km

XW W XW X

XW Drawn Scale Size Date: X W

XW XW JA 1:50,000 A3 20/03/2020 X W XW Wrexham County Borough Council Spatial Reference: British National Grid ContXWains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database right 2020. Licence Number: 0100031673 XW XW ¯ Bretton Hall Solar Farm Figure 03 Bareground Zone of Theoretical Visibility

Key

Site boundary Study area (5km offset from site boundary) Proposed development theoretically visible (72.67% of 5km study area) Potential viewpoint location

Notes 1. Predicted visibility is defined from an observer eye level of 2m above ground. 2. Created using Ordnance Survey Terrain 50 dataset at 50m grid intervals. 1 3. The analysis does not take into account intervening screening by vegetation or buildings. 4. Reproduced from OS VectorMap District mapping by permission of Ordnance Survey. 5. Earth's curvature and light refraction has been 2 included in the calculation. 6. The software used to create this ZTV does not use mathematically approximate methods. 3 ZTV Run Data Site centre: 3 37007, 363617 Resolution: 1 0m Calculation: S ingle development 4 Counting method: 1 for each point visible Visible points: Solar panel height (4.6m)

% of 5km study area with theoretical visibility: 72.67%

Potential Viewpoint Information 1. A5104 (Chester Road) and B5129 (Saltney Ferry Road) junction (Grid ref.336936, 364683) 2. Sandy Lane, edge of Saltney (Grid ref. 337760, 364137) 3. Field entrance off Bretton Lane (Grid ref. 335238, 363574) 4. Pedestrian footbridge over A55 (Grid ref. 338949, 362472)

0 500 1,000 2,000 3,000 Meters 5km

Drawn Scale Size Date: SH 1:50,000 A3 20/03/2020 Spatial Reference: British National Grid Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database right 2020. Licence Number: 0100031673 ¯ Bretton Hall Solar Farm Figure 04 Modified Zone of Theoretical Visibility

Key

Site boundary Study area (5km offset from site boundary) Proposed development theoretically visible (11.61% of 5km study area) Potential viewpoint location Notes 1. Predicted visibility is defined from an observer eye level of 2m above ground. 2. Created using Ordnance Survey Terrain 50 dataset at 50m grid intervals. 1 3. The analysis takes into account intervening screening by woodland (nominal 10m height) and buildings (nominal 8.5m height) as shown on OS VectorMap District. 4. Reproduced from OS VectorMap District mapping 2 by permission of Ordnance Survey. 5. Earth's curvature and light refraction has been included in the calculation. 6. The software used to create this ZTV does not use 3 mathematically approximate methods.

ZTV Run Data Site centre: 3 37007, 363617 4 Resolution: 1 0m Calculation: S ingle development Counting method: 1 for each point visible Visible points: Solar panel height (4.6m)

% of 5km study area with theoretical visibility: 11.61% Potential Viewpoint Information 1. A5104 (Chester Road) and B5129 (Saltney Ferry Road) junction (Grid ref.336936, 364683) 2. Sandy Lane, edge of Saltney (Grid ref. 337760, 364137) 3. Field entrance off Bretton Lane (Grid ref. 335238, 363574) 4. Pedestrian footbridge over A55 (Grid ref. 338949, 362472)

0 500 1,000 2,000 3,000 Meters 5km

Drawn Scale Size Date: SH 1:50,000 A3 20/03/2020 Spatial Reference: British National Grid Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database right 2020. Licence Number: 0100031673 ¯ Bretton Ha ll Sola r Fa rm Figure 05 Mod ified ZTV a nd L a nd sc a p e Cha ra c ter Typ es Key

Site b ound a ry Stud y a rea (5km offset from site b ound a ry) Prop osed d evelop m ent theoretic a lly visib le (11.61% of 5km stud y a rea ) Potentia l viewp oint loc a tion

Counc il b ound a ries

Flintshire County Council Cheshire West and Chester Local Landscape Character Types 1 L CT 4 Dra ined Ma rsh 4b . L a c he Eyes 4c . Dod leston d ra ined m a rsh 4d . Burton & Shotwic k d ra ined m a rsh

2 L CT 6 Enc losed Fa rm la nd L CT 9 Cheshire p la in west 9d . Sa ugha ll to Wa verton p la in 3 L CT 11 Esta te Fa rm la nd 11a . Grosvenor Esta te L CT 15 River V a lleys 15f. Dee V a lley 4 U rb a n a rea LANDMAP - Natural Resources Wales With referenc e to L ANDMAP, the p a rt of the site tha t lies in Wa les is c ha ra c terised b y the following a sp ec t a rea s: - Cultura l L a nd sc a p e - FL NTCL 018: Kinnerton; - Geologic a l L a nd sc a p e - FL NTGL 981: Sa ltney; - Historic L a nd sc a p e – FL NTHL 745: Kinnerton; - L a nd sc a p e Ha b ita ts – FL NTL H025: Sea la nd gra ssla nd ; a nd - V isua l & Sensory – FL NTV S076: Dee c oa sta l levels. Cheshire West and Chester Council

Notes 1. For Mod ified Zone of Theoretic a l V isib ility notes a nd d a ta see Figure 04.

2.For viewp oint inform a tion see Figure 03.

0 500 1,000 2,000 3,000 Meters 5km

Dra wn Sc a le Size Da te: JA 1:50,000 A3 20/03/2020 Wrexham County Borough Council Sp a tia l Referenc e: British Na tiona l Grid Conta ins Ord na nc e Survey d a ta © Crown c op yright a nd d a ta b a se right 2020. L ic enc e Num b er: 0100031673 ¯ Bretton Hall Solar Farm Figure 06 Modified ZTV, Landscape Designations and Designated Routes Key

Site boundary Study area (5km offset from site boundary) Proposed development theoretically visible (11.61% of 5km study area) Potential viewpoint location

Council boundaries

Flintshire County Council Landscape Designations

Registered parks and gardens 1 A. Eaton Hall B. Overleigh Cemetery (north) C. Grosvenor Park

Cultural Heritage Designations 2 Scheduled monuments

Conservation areas i. Chester 3 ii. Hawarden iii. Rossett (outwith study area) iv. Caergwrle (outwith study area)

Designated Routes 4 Public rights of way

(! (! (! Sustrans route

XW XW Wales link path

Cheshire West and Chester Council Notes

1. For Modified Zone of Theoretical Visibility notes and data see Figure 04.

2. For viewpoint information see Figure 03.

0 500 1,000 2,000 3,000 Meters 5km