Appendix 5.1 LVIA and ... - Cairn Duhie Wind Farm

Appendix 5.1 LVIA and Visualisation Methodology

Cairn Duhie Wind Farm Environmental Impact Assessment Report RES

Environmental Impact Assessment Report Appendix 5.1: LVIA and Visualisation Methodology 5 - 1

Appendix 5.1: LVIA and Visualisation Methodology Introduction

5.1 This appendix sets out the detailed methodology used in Chapter 5: Landscape and Visual Amenity. The methodology for the production of accompanying visualisations was based on current good practice guidance as set out by Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH)1, now renamed as NatureScot.

5.2 Landscape and visual assessments are separate, although linked, processes. LVIA therefore considers the potential effects of a proposed development on:

5.3 Landscape as a resource in its own right (caused by changes to the constituent elements of the landscape, its specific aesthetic or perceptual qualities and the character of the landscape); and

5.4 Views and visual amenity as experienced by people (caused by changes in the appearance of the landscape).

5.5 LVIA deals with landscape and visual effects separately, followed by an assessment of cumulative landscape and visual effects where relevant.

Guidance

5.6 This methodology has been developed by Chartered Landscape Architects (Chartered Members of the Landscape Institute (CMLI)) at LUC, who have extensive experience in the assessment of landscape and visual effects arising from wind energy developments.

5.7 The methodology has been developed primarily in accordance with the principles contained within the Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment, 3rd Edition (GLVIA3)2. SNH cumulative guidance3 also informs the approach to the assessment of cumulative landscape and visual effects in relation to onshore wind energy development.

Scope of an Assessment

5.8 An LVIA considers physical changes to the landscape as well as changes in landscape character. It also considers changes to areas designated for their scenic or landscape qualities, and the visual impacts of a proposed development as perceived by people.

1 Scottish Natural Heritage (2017) Visual Representation of Wind Farms Guidance, Version 2.2 2 The Landscape Institute and Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (2013) Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment, 3rd Edition

5.9 All potentially significant landscape and visual effects (including cumulative effects) are examined, including those relating to construction, operation and, where relevant, decommissioning.

5.10 Where it is judged that significant effects are unlikely to occur, the assessment of potential effects on some receptors may be ‘scoped out’; for an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) development this is usually agreed at scoping stage.

Assessment Methodology

Study Area

5.11 The study area for an LVIA is determined by the nature and scale of the development proposed and the nature of the study area (e.g. complex topography or extensive tree cover leading to visually enclosed areas may limit the extent of likely significant effects).

Methodological Overview

5.12 The key steps in the methodology for assessing landscape and visual effects are as follows:

• the landscape of the study area is analysed and landscape receptors identified, informedby desk and field survey;

• the area over which the development will potentially be visible is established through thecreation of an initial Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) plan4;

• the visual baseline is recorded in terms of the different receptors (groups of people) whomay experience views of the development (informed by the initial ZTV) and the nature oftheir existing views and visual amenity;

• potential assessment viewpoints are selected, as advocated by GLVIA3 to represent arange of different receptors and views, in consultation with statutory consultees;

- ‘Representative viewpoints, selected to represent the experience of different types ofvisual receptor, where larger numbers of viewpoints cannot all be included individuallyand where the significant effects are unlikely to differ – for example, certain points maybe chosen to represent the views of users of particular public footpaths and bridleways;

- Specific viewpoints, chosen because they are key and sometimes promoted viewpointswithin the landscape, including for example specific local visitor attractions, viewpoints inareas of particularly noteworthy visual and/or recreational amenity such as landscapeswith statutory landscape designations, or viewpoints with particular cultural landscapeassociations;

- Illustrative viewpoints, chosen specifically to demonstrate a particular effect or specificissues, which might, for example, be the restricted visibility at certain locations’ (GLVIA3,Para. 6.19, Page 109).

3 Scottish Natural Heritage (2012) Guidance: Assessing the Cumulative Impact of Onshore Wind Energy Developments 4 A ZTV indicate areas from where a development is theoretically visible, but they cannot show what it would look like, nor indicate the nature or magnitude of landscape or visual impacts

RES Cairn Duhie Wind Farm

Environmental Impact Assessment Report

5 - 2 Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Appendix 5.1: LVIA and Visualisation Methodology

• likely significant effects on both the landscape as a resource and visual receptors areidentified; and

• the level (and significance) of landscape and visual effects are judged with reference tothe nature of the receptor (commonly referred to as the sensitivity of the receptor), whichconsiders both susceptibility and value, and the nature of the effect (commonly referredto as the magnitude of effect), which considers a combination of judgements includingsize/scale, geographical extent, duration and reversibility.

Direction of Effects

5.13 As required by the EIA Regulations5, the assessment must identify the direction of effect as either being beneficial (positive), adverse (negative) or neutral.

5.14 The direction of landscape, visual and cumulative effects (beneficial, adverse or neutral) is determined in relation to the degree to which the proposal fits with the existing landscape character or views, and the contribution to the landscape or views that the proposed development makes, even if it is in contrast to the existing character of the landscape or views.

5.15 With regard to wind energy development, whilst there is a broad spectrum of response from the strongly positive to the strongly negative, an assessment is required to take an objective approach. Therefore, to cover the ‘maximum case effect’ situation, potential landscape and visual effects relating to commercial scale wind farm developments are generally assumed to be adverse (negative).

Method for Assessing Landscape Effects

5.16 As outlined in GLVIA3 ‘An assessment of landscape effects deals with the effects of change and development on landscape as a resource.’ (GLVIA3, Para 5.1, Page 70). Changes may affect the elements that make up the landscape, the aesthetic and perceptual aspects of the landscape and its distinctive character.

5.17 An assessment of landscape effects requires consideration of the nature of landscape receptors (sensitivity of receptor) and the nature of the effect on those receptors (magnitude of effect). GLVIA3 states that the nature of landscape receptors, commonly referred to as their sensitivity, should be assessed in terms of the susceptibility of the receptor to the type of change proposed, and the value attached to the receptor. The nature of the effect on each landscape receptor, commonly referred to as its magnitude, should be assessed in terms of size and scale of effect, geographical extent, duration and reversibility.

5.18 These aspects are considered together, to form a judgement regarding the overall significance of landscape effects (GLVIA3, Figure 5.1 Page 71). The following sections set out the methodology used to evaluate sensitivity and magnitude.

5 The Electricity Works (Environmental Impact Assessment) (Scotland) Regulations (2017) (as amended)

Sensitivity of Landscape Receptors

5.19 The sensitivity of a landscape receptor to change is defined as high, medium or low and is based on weighing up professional judgements regarding susceptibility and value, as set out below.

Sensitivity of Landscape Receptors

Higher Lower

Susceptibility

Attributes that make up the character of the landscape offer very limited opportunities for the accommodation of change without key characteristics being fundamentally altered by wind energy development, leading to a different landscape character.

Attributes that make up the character of the landscape are resilient to being changed by wind energy development.

Value

Landscapes with high scenic quality, high conservation interest, recreational value, important cultural associations or a high degree of rarity.

Areas or features designated at a national level e.g. National Parks or National Scenic Areas or key features of these with national policy level protection.

Landscape of poor condition and intactness, limited aesthetic qualities, or of character that is widespread.

Areas or features that are not formally designated.

Susceptibility of Landscape Receptors

5.20 Susceptibility is defined by GLVIA3 as ‘the ability of the landscape receptor (whether it be the overall character or quality/condition of a particular type or area, or an individual element and/or feature, or a particular aesthetic and perceptual aspect) to accommodate the proposed development without undue consequences for the maintenance of the baseline situation and/or the achievement of landscape planning policies and strategies’ (GLVIA3 paragraph 5.40).

5.21 A series of criteria are used to evaluate the susceptibility of Landscape Character Types (LCTs) or Landscape Character Areas (LCAs) to wind energy development as set out in the table below. These criteria or aspects are drawn from a range of published sources relating to wind farm development, including Siting and Designing Windfarms in the Landscape (SNH, 2017) and GLVIA3.

Aspects Influencing Susceptibility of Landscape Receptors to Wind Turbines

Characteristic/ attribute

Aspects indicating reduced susceptibility to wind energy development

Aspects indicating greater susceptibility to wind energy development

Cairn Duhie Wind Farm Environmental Impact Assessment Report

RES

Environmental Impact Assessment Report Appendix 5.1: LVIA and Visualisation Methodology

5 - 3

Aspects Influencing Susceptibility of Landscape Receptors to Wind Turbines

Scale Large scale

Small scale

Value Absence of strong topographical variety, featureless, convex or flat

Presence of strong topographical variety or distinctive landform features

Landscape pattern and complexity

Simple

Regular or uniform

Complex

Rugged and irregular

Settlement and man-made influence

Presence of contemporary structures e.g. utility, infrastructure or industrial elements

Absence of modern development

Presence of small scale, historic or vernacular settlement

Skylines

Non-prominent /screened skylines

Presence of existing modern man-made features

Distinctive, undeveloped skylines

Skylines that are highly visible over large areas or exert a large influence on landscape character

Skylines with important historic landmarks

Inter-visibility with adjacent landscapes

Little inter-visibility with adjacent sensitive landscapes or viewpoints

Strong inter-visibility with sensitive landscapes

Forms an important part of a view from sensitive viewpoints

Perceptual aspects

Close to visible or audible signs of human activity and development

Remote from visible or audible signs of human activity and development

5.22 Published landscape capacity or sensitivity studies (where they exist) may be reviewed to inform the evaluation of susceptibility, in addition to fieldwork undertaken across the study area. This review includes an evaluation as to the relevance of the publication to the assessment being undertaken (e.g. consideration of the purpose and scope of the published studies and whether they have become out of date).

5.23 Landscape susceptibility is described as being high, medium or low.

Value of Landscape Receptors

5.24 The European Landscape Convention advocates that all landscape is of value, whether it is the subject of defined landscape designation or not: ‘The landscape is important as a component of the environment and of people’s surroundings in both town and country and whether it is ordinary landscape or outstanding landscape.’6 The value of a landscape

6 Council of Europe, (2000). The European Landscape Convention – Council of Europe Treaty Series No. 176.

receptor is recognised as being a key contributing factor to the sensitivity of landscape receptors.

5.25 The value of landscape receptors is determined with reference to:

• Review of relevant designations and the level of policy importance that they signify (such as landscapes designated at international, national or local level); and/or

• Application of criteria that indicate value (such as scenic quality, rarity, recreational value, representativeness, conservation interests, perceptual aspects and artistic associations) as described in GLVIA3, paragraphs 5.44 - 5.47.

5.26 Internationally and nationally designated landscapes would generally indicate landscape of higher value whereas those without formal designation (such as a widespread or common landscape type without high scenic quality) are likely to be of lower value, bearing in mind that all landscapes are valued at some level. There is however variation across both designated and undesignated areas, and so judgements regarding value are also informed by fieldwork.

5.27 Landscape value is described as being high, medium or low.

Magnitude of Landscape Effect

5.28 The overall judgement of magnitude of landscape effect is based on combining professional judgements on size and scale, geographical extent, duration and reversibility. Further information on the criteria is provided below.

Size and Scale of Effect

5.29 For landscape elements/features this depends on the extent of existing landscape elements that would be lost or changed, the proportion of the total extent that this represents, and the contribution of that element to the character of the landscape.

5.30 In terms of landscape character, this reflects the degree to which the character of the landscape would change as a result of removal or addition of landscape components, and how the changes would affect key characteristics.

5.31 The size and scale of the effect is described as being large, medium, small, or barely perceptible.

Geographical Extent of Effect

5.32 The geographical extent over which the landscape effect would arise is described as being large (scale of the landscape character type, or widespread, affecting several landscape types or character areas), medium (more immediate surroundings) or small (site level).

RES


5 - 4


Duration of Effect

5.33 GLVIA3 states that ‘Duration can usually be simply judged on a scale such as short term, medium term or long term.’ For the purposes of the assessment, duration is often determined in relation to the phases of the proposed development, as follows:

• Short-term effects are those that occur during construction, and may extend into the early part of the operational phase, e.g. construction activities, generally lasting 0 - 5 years;

• Medium-term effects are those that occur during part of the operational phase, generally lasting 5 - 10 years; and

• Long-term effects are those which occur throughout the operational phase (in this instance 35 years), e.g. presence of turbines, or are permanent effects which continue after the operational phase, generally lasting over 10 years.

Reversibility of Effect

5.34 In accordance with the principles contained within GLVIA3, reversibility is reported as reversible, partially reversible or irreversible (i.e. permanent), and is related to whether the change can be reversed at the end of the phase of development under consideration (i.e. at the end of construction or at the end of the operational lifespan of the development).

5.35 Judgements on the magnitude of landscape effect (nature of landscape effect) are recorded as high, medium or low and are guided by the table below.

Magnitude of Landscape Effect

Higher

Lower

Size/Scale

Extensive loss of landscape features and/or elements, and/or change in, or loss of key landscape characteristics, and/or creation of new key landscape characteristics

Limited loss of landscape features and/or elements, and/or change in or loss of some secondary landscape characteristics

Geographical Extent

Change in landscape features and/or character extending considerably beyond the immediate site and potentially affecting multiple landscape character types/areas

Change in landscape features and/or character extending contained within or local to the immediate site and affecting only a small part of the landscape character type/area

Duration Changes experienced for a period of around 10 years or more

Changes experienced for a shorter period of up to 5 years

Reversibility

Change to features, elements or character which cannot be undone or are only partly reversible after a long period

A temporary landscape change which is largely reversible following the completion of construction, or decommissioning of the development

Judging Levels of Landscape Effect and Significance

5.36 The final step in the assessment requires the judgements of sensitivity and magnitude of effect to be combined to make an informed professional assessment on the significance of each landscape effect (GLVIA3, Figure 5.1, Page 71).

5.37 There may be a complex relationship between the value attached to a landscape and the susceptibility of the landscape to a specific change. Therefore, the rationale for judgements on the sensitivity of landscape receptors needs to be clearly set out for each receptor. It should be noted that whilst landscape designations at an international or national level are likely to be accorded the highest value, it does not necessarily follow that such landscapes all have a high susceptibility to all types of change, and conversely, undesignated landscapes may also have high value and susceptibility to change (GLVIA3, Page 90).

5.38 Although a numerical or formal weighting system is not applied, consideration of the relative importance of each aspect is made to feed into the overall decision. Levels of effect are identified as negligible, minor, moderate or major where moderate and major effects are considered significant in the context of the EIA Regulations.

5.39 This determination requires the application of professional judgement and experience to take on board the many different variables which need to be considered, and which are given different weight according to site-specific and location-specific considerations in every instance. Judgements are made on a case by case basis, guided by the principles set out in Diagram 1 below. A rigid matrix-type approach, which does not take on board professional judgement and experience, and where the level of effect is defined simply based on the level of sensitivity (nature of receptor) combined with the magnitude of change (nature of effect), is not used. As such, the conclusion on the level of effect is not always the same.


RES


5 - 5

Method for Assessing Visual Effects

Significance of Visual Effects

5.40 As outlined in GLVIA3 ‘An assessment of visual effects deals with the effects of change and development on views available to people and their visual amenity’ (GLVIA3, Para. 6.1, Page 98). Changes in views may be experienced by people at different locations within the study area including from static locations (normally assessed using representative viewpoints) and whilst moving through the landscape (normally referred to as sequential views, e.g. from roads and walking routes).

5.41 Visual receptors are individuals or groups of people who may be affected by changes in views and visual amenity. They are usually grouped by their occupation or activity (e.g. residents, motorists, recreational users) and the extent to which their attention is focused on the view (GLVIA3, Paras. 6.31 – 6.32, Page 113).

5.42 GLVIA3 states that the sensitivity of visual receptors should be assessed in terms of the susceptibility of the receptor to change in views and/or visual amenity and the value attached to particular views. The magnitude of effect should be assessed in terms of the size and scale, geographical extent, duration and reversibility of the effect.

5.43 These aspects are considered together, to form a judgement regarding the overall significance of visual effect (GLVIA3, Figure 6.1 Page 99). The following sections set out the methodology used to evaluate sensitivity and magnitude.

Sensitivity of Visual Receptor

5.44 The sensitivity of a visual receptor to change is defined as high, medium or low and is based on weighing up professional judgements regarding susceptibility and value, and each of their component considerations, as set out in the table below.

Sensitivity of Visual Receptors

Higher

Lower

Susceptibility

Viewers whose attention or interest is focused on their surroundings, including communities/ individual residential receptors/ people engaged in outdoor recreation/ visitors to heritage assets or other attractions where views of surrounding area an important contributor.

People whose attention is not on their surroundings (and where setting is not important to the quality of working life) such as commuters/ people engaged in outdoor sports/ people at their place of work.

Value

Views may be recorded in management plans, guide books, and/or which are likely to be experienced by large numbers of people.

Views may be associated with nationally designated landscapes; local authority designated landscapes; designed views recorded in citations for historic parks, gardens/scheduled monuments etc.

Views which are not documented or protected.

Views which are more incidental, and less likely to be associated with somewhere people travel to or stop, or which may be experienced by smaller numbers of people.

Susceptibility of Visual Receptors

5.45 The susceptibility of visual receptors to changes in views/visual amenity is a function of the occupation or activity of people experiencing the view and the extent to which their attention is focused on views (GLVIA 3, para 6.32). This is recorded as high, medium or low informed by the table below.

Diagram 1 - Judging levels of effect – Landscape or Visual (including cumulative)

RES


5 - 6


Susceptibility of Visual Receptors

High Medium Low

Viewers whose attention or interest is focussed on their surroundings, including:

• communities where views contribute to the landscape setting enjoyed by residents;

• visitors to heritage assets, other attractions and popular hill summits where views of surroundings are an important contributor to experience; and

• formal or promoted stopping places on scenic or tourist routes.

• People engaged in outdoor recreation (including users of cycle routes, footpaths and public rights of way whose interest is likely to be partly focused on the landscape);

• People travelling in vehicles on scenic routes and tourist routes, where attention is focused on the surrounding landscape, but is transitory; and

• People at their place of work whose attention is focused on the surroundings and where setting is important to the quality of working life.

• People travelling more rapidly on more major roads, rail or transport routes (not recognised as scenic routes);

• People engaged in outdoor sport or recreation which does not involve or depend upon appreciation of views of the landscape; and

• People at their place of work whose attention is not on their surroundings (and where setting is not important to the quality of working life).

Value of View or Visual Amenity

5.46 GLVIA3 also requires evaluation of the value attached to the view or visual amenity and relates this to planning designations and cultural associations (GLVIA3, Para. 6.37, Page 114).

5.47 Recognition of the value of a view is determined with reference to:

• planning designations specific to views including views with recognised scenic value; • whether it is recorded as important in relation to designated landscapes (such as views

specifically mentioned in the special qualities of a National Park or National Scenic Area); • whether it is recorded as important in relation to heritage assets (such as designed views

recorded in citations of Gardens and Designed Landscapes (GDL) or views recorded as of importance in Conservation Area Appraisals); and

• the value attached to views by visitors, for example through appearances in guide books or on tourist maps, provision of facilities for their enjoyment and references to them in literature and art.

5.48 A designated viewpoint or scenic route advertised on maps and in tourist information, or which is a significant destination in its own right, such as a Munro summit, is likely to indicate a view of higher value. High value views may also be recognised in relation to the special qualities of a designated landscape or heritage asset, or it may be a view familiar from photographs or paintings.

5.49 Views experienced from viewpoints or routes not recognised formally or advertised in tourist information, or which are not provided with interpretation or, in some cases, formal access are likely to be of lower value.

5.50 Judgements on the value of views or visual amenity are recorded as high, medium or low.

Magnitude of Visual Effect

5.51 The overall judgement of magnitude of visual effect (nature of visual effect) is based on weighing up professional judgements on size and scale, geographical extent, duration and reversibility. Further information on the criteria is provided below.

Size and Scale

5.52 The size and scale of a visual change depends on:

• the scale of the change in the view with respect to the loss or addition of features in the view and changes in its composition, including the proportion of the view occupied by the proposed development;

• the degree of contrast or integration of any new features or changes in the landscape with the existing or remaining landscape elements and characteristics in terms of form, scale and mass, line, height, colour and texture; and

• the nature of the view of the proposed development, in terms of the relative amount of time over which it will be experienced and whether views will be full, partial or glimpses.

5.53 All changes are assumed to be during winter, representing a ‘maximum case effect’ scenario with minimal screening by vegetation and deciduous trees. Note that wireframes and ZTVs prepared to illustrate potential visual effects are calculated on the basis of bare ground and therefore demonstrate the maximum extent of visibility possible, in the absence of buildings or vegetation. Where forestry is present, consideration is given to felling regimes if levels of screening by forestry are likely to change notably during the lifetime of the proposed development.

5.54 In this assessment scale of visual change is described as being large, medium, small or barely perceptible.

Geographical Extent

5.55 The geographical extent of a visual change records the extent of the area over which the changes will be visible e.g. whether this is a unique viewpoint from where the proposed wind farm can be glimpsed, or whether it represents a large area from which similar views are gained. Geographical extent is described as being large, medium or small.

Duration

5.56 The duration of visual effects is reported as short-term, medium-term or long-term, as defined for the duration of landscape effects (see above).

Reversibility

5.57 Reversibility is reported as irreversible (i.e. permanent), partially reversible or reversible, and is related to whether the visual change can be reversed at the end of the phase of development under consideration (i.e. at the end of construction or at the end of the operational lifespan of the development). Operational visual effects are generally considered


RES


5 - 7

to be partially reversible as the decommissioning phase will remove turbines and most infrastructure at the end of the operational phase.

5.58 Judgements on the magnitude of visual effect are recorded as high, medium or low guided by the table below.

Magnitude of Visual Effects

Higher

Lower

Size/Scale A large visual change resulting from the proposed development is the most notable aspect of the view, perhaps as a result of the development being in close proximity, or because a substantial part of the view is affected, or because the development introduces a new focal point and/or provides contrast with the existing view and/or changes the scenic qualities of the view.

A small or some visual change resulting from the proposed development as a minor or generally unnoticed aspect of the view, perhaps as a result of the development being in the distance, or because only a small part of the view is affected, and/or because the development does not introduce a new focal point or is in contrast with the existing view and/ does not change the scenic qualities of the view.

Geographical Extent The assessment location is clearly representative of similar visual effects over an extensive geographic area.

The assessment location clearly represents a small geographic area.

Duration Visual change experienced over around 10 years or more

Visual change experienced over a short period of up to 5 years.

Reversibility A permanent visual change which is not reversible or only partially reversible following decommissioning of the proposed development.

A temporary visual change which is largely reversible following the completion of construction, or decommissioning of the proposed development.

Direction of Visual Effects

5.59 The direction of visual effects (beneficial, adverse or neutral) is determined in relation to the degree to which the proposal fits with the existing view and the contribution to the view that a proposed development makes, even if it is in contrast to the existing character of the view.

5.60 With regard to wind energy development there is a broad spectrum of response from the strongly positive to the strongly negative. However, to cover the ‘maximum case effect’ situation, potential visual effects relating to commercial scale wind energy developments are generally assumed to be adverse.

Judging the Level of Visual Effect and Significance

5.61 As for landscape effects, the final step in the assessment requires the judgements of sensitivity of visual receptor and magnitude of visual effect to be combined to make an informed professional assessment on the significance of each visual effect.

5.62 The evaluations of the individual aspects set out above (susceptibility, value, size and scale, geographical extent, duration and reversibility) are considered together to provide an overall profile of each identified visual effect. An overview is then taken of the distribution of judgements for each aspect to make an informed professional assessment of the overall level of effect, drawing on good practice guidance provided in GLVIA3.

5.63 The sensitivity of visual receptors may involve a complex relationship between a visual receptors (e.g. people’s) susceptibility to change and the value attached to a view. Therefore, the rationale for judgements of sensitivity is clearly set out for each receptor in relation to both its susceptibility (to the type of change proposed) and its value.

5.64 A rigid matrix-type approach, where the level of visual effect is defined simply based on the level of sensitivity combined with the magnitude of effect is not used. As such, the conclusion on the level of effect is not always the same. Although a numerical or formal weighting system is not applied, consideration of the relative importance of each aspect is made to feed into the overall decision. Levels of visual effect are identified as negligible, minor, moderate or major where moderate and major visual effects are considered significant in the context of the EIA Regulations.

5.65 This determination requires the application of professional judgement and experience to take on board the many different variables which need to be considered, and which are given different weight according to site-specific and location-specific considerations in every instance. As such, the conclusion on the level of effect is not always the same. Judgements are made on a case by case basis, guided by the same principles as set out in Diagram 1 above.

Cumulative Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment (CLVIA)

5.66 The aim of a Cumulative Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (CLVIA) is to ‘describe, visually represent and assess the ways in which a proposed windfarm would have additional impacts when considered together with other existing, consented or proposed windfarms’ (Para. 55, SNH, 2012).

5.67 The cumulative assessment therefore focuses on the additional cumulative change which may result from the introduction of a proposed development. The cumulative assessment also makes reference to total (also referred to as combined) cumulative effects, where these have the potential to be significant. A cumulative assessment may also consider the potential interactions between different types of development (e.g. transmission infrastructure, other energy generation stations or other built development) if these are likely to result in similar landscape and visual impacts.

RES


5 - 8


5.68 As with an LVIA, a CLVIA deals with cumulative landscape and visual effects separately.

Differences between LVIA and CLVIA

5.69 Although both LVIA and CLVIA look at the effects of a proposed development on the landscape and on views, there are differences in the baseline against which the assessments are carried out.

5.70 For the LVIA, the baseline includes existing wind farm developments which are present in the landscape at the time of undertaking the assessment, which may be either operational or under construction, as they form a part of the baseline situation. Their presence has the potential to influence the assessment of effects on landscape character and the assessment of effects on views. For the CLVIA the baseline is partially speculative and includes:

• Scenario 1 – operational, under construction and wind farms which have been granted planning consent but are not yet constructed (consented); and

• Scenario 2 – Scenario 1, plus submitted valid wind farm applications which are currently awaiting determination by the relevant consenting authority, including those at appeal and in some instances those currently at scoping when specifically requested (proposed).

5.71 The cumulative assessment considers the operational and under construction sites, as well as consented and proposed sites, and differs from that contained in the assessment of landscape effects and the assessment of visual effects in that it focuses specifically on the cumulative (additional) impact of the proposed development in association with all other wind energy developments, and assesses the detailed relationship between them.

5.72 Where the magnitude of change that would occur as a result of the introduction of the proposed development in the LVIA is identified as either low or barely perceptible, potential cumulative effects are scoped out of the cumulative assessment as it is considered that such an addition would not give rise to a significant cumulative effect.

Types of Cumulative Effects

5.73 Assessing the Cumulative Impact of Onshore Wind Energy Developments7 states that ‘cumulative landscape effects can impact on either the physical fabric or character of the landscape, or any special values attached to it’ (Para. 48, SNH, 2012).

5.74 Three types of cumulative effects on visual amenity are considered in the assessment: combined, successive and sequential:

• Combined effects occur where a static viewer is able to view two or more wind farms from a viewpoint within the viewers’ same arc of vision (assumed to be about 90 degrees for the purpose of the assessment);

• Successive effects occur where a static viewer is able to view two or more wind farms from a viewpoint, but needs to turn to see them; and

7 https://www.nature.scot/sites/default/files/2017-09/A675503%20-%20Assessing%20the%20cumulative%20impact%20of%20onshore%20wind%20energy%20developments.pdf

• Sequential effects occur when a viewer is moving through the landscape from one area to another, for instance when a person is travelling along a road or footpath, and is able to see two or more wind farms at the same, or at different times as they pass along the route. Frequently sequential effects occur where wind farms appear regularly, with short time lapses between points of visibility. Occasionally sequential effects occur where long periods of time lapse between views of wind farms, depending on speed of travel and distance between viewpoints.

Assessing Cumulative Effects

Assessment Methodology for CLVIA

5.75 The CLVIA considers the potential effects of the addition of a proposed development, against a baseline landscape that includes wind farms that may or may not be present in the landscape in the future, i.e. wind farms that are consented but not yet built, and/or undetermined planning applications. The wind farms included in each scenario are assumed to be present in the landscape for the purposes of the CLVIA.

5.76 The methodology for the CLVIA follows that of the LVIA, which considers the introduction of a proposed development to a baseline which includes existing (operational and under construction) wind farms. The size and scale of cumulative change focuses on:

• the pattern and arrangement of wind farms in the landscape or view, e.g. developments seen in one direction or part of the view (combined views), or seen in different directions (successive views in which the viewer must turn) or developments seen sequentially along a route;

• the relationship between the scale of the wind farms, including turbine size and number, and if wind farms appear balanced in views in terms of their composition, or at odds with one another;

• the position of the wind farms in the landscape, e.g. in similar landscape or topographical context;

• the position of the wind farms in the view, e.g. on the skyline or against the backdrop of land; or how the proposed development will be seen in association with another development (separate, together, behind etc.); and

• the distances between wind farms, and their distances from the viewer.

5.77 For the purposes of this assessment, cumulative wind farms within the study area have been clustered into two distinct geographical groups: east and west. Their effects and interaction with the Proposed Development are therefore addressed as groupings, rather than individually. This reflects the fact that wind farms across similar areas and with similar characteristics will result in similar cumulative effects. Grouping them for assessment purposes avoids repetition. In the same way, where effects on LCTs, or viewpoints within the


RES


5 - 9

same area are likely to be very similar, they are drawn together and effects set out collectively.

Significance of Cumulative Effects

5.78 As for a LVIA, judging the significance of cumulative landscape and visual effects requires consideration of the sensitivity and the magnitude of effect on those receptors. The following sections set out the methodology applied for the assessment of cumulative effects for both landscape and visual receptors and explain the terms used.

Assessing Cumulative Landscape Effects

Sensitivity 5.79 An assessment of cumulative landscape effects requires consideration of the sensitivity of the

landscape receptors. This requires consideration of susceptibility and value, and is as recorded in the LVIA.

Magnitude of Cumulative Landscape Effects 5.80 Similarly to the methodology applied for an LVIA, the magnitude of cumulative landscape

effect (nature of cumulative landscape effect) is based on combining professional judgements on size and scale, geographical extent, duration and reversibility. Judgements on the magnitude of cumulative landscape effect (nature of cumulative visual effect) are recorded as high, medium or low.

Size and Scale

5.81 The size/scale of cumulative landscape change is the additional influence the proposed development has on the characteristics and character of the area assuming the other wind farm developments considered in the CLVIA baseline scenarios are already present in the landscape. This is influenced by:

• how the proposal fits with existing pattern of cumulative wind farm development, including the relationship to landscape character types and areas; and

• the siting and design of the proposed development in relation to other existing and proposed wind farm developments (including distance between wind farms, composition, size and scale).

Geographical Extent

5.82 As for the LVIA, the geographical extent over which the cumulative landscape change will be experienced is described as being large (scale of the landscape character type, or widespread, affecting several landscape types or character areas), medium (immediate surroundings) or small (site level).

Duration & Reversibility

5.83 For the purpose of the cumulative landscape assessment consideration of the judgements of the duration and reversibility of landscape effects are as recorded in the LVIA.

5.84 Judgements on the magnitude of cumulative landscape effect are recorded as high, medium or low.

Levels of Cumulative Landscape Effect and Significance 5.85 The final step in the assessment of cumulative landscape effects requires the judgements of

sensitivity and magnitude of cumulative landscape effect to be combined to make an informed professional assessment on the significance of each cumulative landscape effect.

5.86 As for the LVIA the levels of cumulative landscape effect are described as negligible, minor, moderate or major where moderate and major cumulative landscape effects are considered significant in the context of the EIA Regulations.

5.87 More significant effects are likely where:

• the proposed development extends or intensifies a landscape effect; • the proposed development ‘fills’ an area such that it alters the landscape resource; and

/ or • the interaction between the proposed development and other wind farm developments

means that the total effect on the landscape is greater than the sum of its parts.

5.88 GLVIA 3 states ‘The most significant cumulative landscape effects are likely to be those that would give rise to changes in the landscape character of the study area of such an extent as to have major effects on its key characteristics and even, in some cases, to transform it into a different landscape type. This may be the case where the project being considered itself tips the balance through its additional effects. The emphasis must always remain on the main project being assessed and how or whether it adds to or combines with the others being considered to create a significant cumulative effect’ (para 7.28 GLVIA 3).

5.89 This determination of cumulative landscape effects requires the application of professional judgement and experience to take on board the many different variables which need to be considered, and which are given different weight according to site-specific and location-specific considerations in every instance. Judgements are made on a case by case basis.

Assessing Cumulative Visual Effects

Sensitivity 5.90 The assessment of the significance of cumulative visual effects requires consideration of the

sensitivity of the visual receptors. This requires consideration of susceptibility and value, and is as recorded in the LVIA.

RES


5 - 10


Magnitude of Cumulative Visual Effects 5.91 As for cumulative landscape effects and the methodology for the LVIA, the magnitude of

cumulative visual effect (nature of cumulative visual effect) is based on combining professional judgements on size and scale; geographical extent; duration and reversibility. Judgements on the magnitude of cumulative visual effect (nature of cumulative visual effect) are recorded as high, medium, low or barely perceptible.

Size and Scale

5.92 The size/scale of cumulative change to views depends on the additional influence the proposed development has on views assuming the other wind farm developments are already present in the landscape. This is influenced by:

• Whether the proposed development introduces development into a new part of the view so that the proportion of the developed part of the view increases;

• the relationship between the proposed development and other wind farm developments in terms of design, size and layout;

• the apparent visual relationship of cumulative wind farm developments to landscape character types and or landscape character areas; and / or

• in the case of magnitude of change to routes, the relative duration of views of wind farm developments from routes.

5.93 There has to be clear visibility of more than one wind farm development, of which one must be the proposed development, for there to be a cumulative effect (given this is an assessment of the effects of the proposed development and not a broader CLVIA of combined cumulative effects or capacity study). Where the proposed development is clearly visible and other wind farm developments are not, the effect is likely to be the same as recorded in the LVIA (i.e. the effect is not a cumulative effect).

Geographical Extent

5.94 As for the LVIA, the geographical extent of cumulative visual changes records the extent of the area over which the changes will be visible e.g. whether this is a unique viewpoint from where the proposed wind farm can be glimpsed, or whether it represents a large area from which similar views are gained from large areas. Geographical extent is described as being large, medium or small.

Duration & Reversibility

5.95 For the purpose of the cumulative visual assessment consideration of the judgements of the duration and reversibility of visual effects are as recorded in the LVIA.

8 Scottish Natural Heritage (2006) and Version 2.2 (2017) Visual Representation of Windfarms: Good Practice Guidance.

Levels of Cumulative Visual Effect and Significance 5.96 The final step in the assessment of cumulative visual effects requires the judgements of

sensitivity and magnitude of cumulative visual effect to be combined to make an informed professional assessment on the significance of each cumulative visual effect.

5.97 As for the LVIA the levels of cumulative visual effect are described as negligible, minor, moderate or major where moderate and major cumulative visual effects are considered significant in the context of the EIA Regulations.

5.98 The evaluations of susceptibility, value, size and scale, geographical extent, duration and reversibility are considered together to provide an overall profile of each identified visual effect. An overview is taken of the distribution of judgements for each aspect to make an informed professional assessment of the overall level of each visual effect, drawing on guidance provided in GLVIA3. Levels of effect are identified as negligible, minor, moderate or major where moderate and major visual effects are considered significant in the context of the EIA Regulations.

5.99 More significant effects are likely where:

• the proposed development extends or intensifies a visual effect; • the proposed development ‘fills’ an area such that it alters the view/ visual amenity; • the interaction between the proposed development and other developments means that

the total visual effect is greater than the sum of its parts; and / or • the proposed development will lengthen the time over which effects are experienced

(sequential effects).

5.100 This determination of cumulative visual effects requires the application of professional judgement and experience to take on board the many different variables which need to be considered, and which are given different weight according to site-specific and location-specific considerations in every instance. Again, as for the assessment of landscape and visual effects, judgements are made on a case by case basis, guided by the same principles as set out in Diagram 1 above.

Preparation of Visualisations

Viewpoint Photography Daytime

5.101 Photography for the 18 assessment viewpoints was taken between spring and summer 2020 using a Canon EOS 6D/ Nikon D750 full frame digital SLR camera, with a fixed 50mm focal length lens. The methodology for photography is in accordance with guidance from SNH8 and THC9.

5.102 A tripod with vertical and horizontal spirit levels was used to provide stability and to ensure a level set of adjoining images. A panoramic head was used to ensure the camera rotated

9 The Highland Council (2016) Visualisation Standards for Wind Energy Developments;


RES


5 - 11

about the no-parallax point of the lens in order to eliminate parallax errors between the successive images and enable accurate stitching of the images. The camera was moved through increments of 24 degrees and rotated through a full 360 degrees at each viewpoint. Fifteen photographs were taken for each 360 degree view.

5.103 The location of each viewpoint was recorded (GPS grid reference, location map and photograph of the tripod) in accordance with SNH and Landscape Institute guidance10.

5.104 Weather conditions and visibility were considered an important aspect of the field visits for the photography. Where possible, visits were planned around clear days with good visibility. Viewpoint locations were visited at times of day to ensure, as far as possible, that the sun lit the scene from behind, or to one side of the photographer.

Night-time

5.105 Baseline photographs from the four night-time assessment viewpoints were taken during September 2020, using the same camera equipment and similar procedure as the daytime views. 360 degree ranges of photography were taken at regular intervals starting shortly before sunset or sunrise (depending on the viewpoint) with subsequent ranges taken as natural light faded and existing manmade light sources became visible or before natural light increased at dawn.

5.106 Exposure settings were carefully optimised at each viewpoint with shutter speed, aperture and ISO levels balanced to ensure the photography provided an accurate representation of the conditions at the time.

Photograph Stitching, Wireframes and Photomontages 5.107 Photography stitching software (PTGui©) was used to stitch together the adjoining images to

form panoramic images in cylindrical projection.

5.108 The software package ReSoft© WindFarm version 4.2 was used to view the wind farm from selected viewpoints in wireframe format. OS Terrain 5 and OS Terrain 50 data were used to create a Digital Terrain Model (DTM) which provided a detailed and reliable representation of the topography for the wireframe view. Turbine locations, type and size, and viewpoint location coordinates were entered. Photomontages have been constructed to show the candidate turbine with the specified tip height, hub height and rotor diameter. Viewer height was set to 1.5m above ground level. On limited occasions this viewer height was increased by a small increment to achieve a closer match between the terrain data and photographic landform content. The pre-prepared panoramic photos were imported into the ReSoft© WindFarm software and the wireframe views overlaid and aligned with the photographs.

5.109 The presentation of fully rendered photomontages involved a number of additional stages as follows.

10 Landscape Institute. (2011). Practice Advice Note, Photography and photomontage in landscape and visual impact assessment. Advice Note 01/11.

Daytime

5.110 ReSoft© WindFarm software was used to render the turbines, taking account of the sunlight conditions and the position of the sun in the sky at the time the photograph was taken. Blade angle and orientation adjustments were also made to represent a realistic situation.

5.111 The next stage required the rendered turbines to be blended into the baseline photographic view. This was carried out using Adobe Photoshop© software and allowed, where relevant, for turbines or parts of turbines to be masked (removed) where they were located behind foreground elements that appeared in the original photograph. The software package 43D Topos© was used for adding the access tracks and other ancillary features. These elements were informed by infrastructure data either imported as a GIS shapefile or modelled in 3D to their specified dimensions and positioned within a DTM created from the same OS Terrain 5 and OS Terrain 50 data used for the turbine alignment and renders.

5.112 The proposed substation layout was provided to LUC as 2D layout plan and elevation PDFs, annotated with dimensions. The PDFs were geo-referenced and correctly scaled within AutoCAD and modelled in Autodesk 3DS Max© software. The 3D model contains the main components of the proposed substation modelled accurately in terms of their size and position within the compound and to a level of detail which we consider appropriate for the distance of viewpoint locations from where they would be visible. Cameras were set up within the 3D software to replicate the coordinate positions, view direction and field of view of the baseline photography and the model views were carefully aligned. The 3D model views were then rendered taking account of the sunlight conditions and the position of the sun in the sky at the date and time the photographs were taken. The 3DS Max exported images were then composited with the baseline photography using Adobe Photoshop© software to create the photomontage images.

5.113 Views were rendered and exported images composited with the turbine renders and photographs to create the photomontages.

5.114 ReSoft© WindFarm software was used for adding the proposed met mast using the specified dimension and position. An image showing the position of the met mast was exported as a guide and used in Adobe Photoshop© to composite the met mast into the photomontage.

5.115 Finally, and where applicable, the images were converted from Cylindrical Projection to Planar Projection using PTGui© software.

Night-time

5.116 3ds Max software was used to render the turbines with the aviation lighting proposed for the development. Light sources were created to match the specifications provided in terms of luminous intensity (candela units), colour and position. Real-time camera data was imported into the 3DS Max physical cameras within the model environment including F-stop and FOV

RES


5 - 12


(field of view) values. Depth of field (Bokeh) and vertical & horizontal lens shift data was also used to give additional accuracy to the placement of the views and enhance the depth and light level distortion from the required viewpoints. The sunlight and daylight system within the software was set to accurately simulate the natural light still present at the date, time and geographical location of night-time photography. The turbines in the night views were orientated with the hub facing the viewer (and not obscured by turbine blades). This ensures that the images show the maximum visibility of the lighting proposed to be installed on the hub.

5.117 As with the daytime images the exported renders were then composited with the baseline photographic view using Adobe Photoshop© software and converted from Cylindrical Projection to Planar Projection using PTGui© software.

Presentation of Photomontages 5.118 Two separate sets of photomontages for the viewpoints have been produced in accordance

with NatureScot and THC to allow them to be used independently.

NatureScot Compliant Visualisations

5.119 Adobe InDesign© software was used to present the figures. The dimensions for each image (printed height and field of view) are in accordance with NatureScot requirements. Photography information and viewing instructions are provided on each page where relevant.

5.120 The elongated A1 width format pages presented for each viewpoint are set out as follows:

• The first three pages contain 90˚ baseline photography and wireline to illustrate the wider landscape and visual context. These are shown in cylindrical projection and presented on an A1 width page. Additional pages in the same format are provided where relevant to illustrate wider cumulative visibility up to 360˚;

• Subsequent pages contain a 53.5˚ wirelines and photomontages. These images are both shown in planar projection and presented on an A1 width page; and

• For four additional viewpoints it was agreed with NatureScot that wireline only visualisations would be prepared. For these viewpoints (Viewpoint 19 – 21) 90˚cumulative wirelines to illustrate wider cumulative visibility up to 360˚wirelines are presented.

THC Compliant Visualisations

5.121 Adobe InDesign software was used to present the figures. The dimensions for each image (printed height and field of view) are in accordance with THC requirements. Photography information and viewing instructions are provided on each page where relevant.

5.122 The A3 format pages for each viewpoint are set out as follows:

• The following two pages contain 65.5˚panoramic images for landscape assessment. The panoramic photomontage is followed by the panoramic wireline and baseline photograph. These images are all shown in planar projection; and

• The subsequent two pages contain the single frame images for visual impact assessment. The 50mm focal length photomontage precedes the 75mm focal length photomontage.

Appendix 5.2 Cairngorms National Park Special Landscape Qualities Assessment


Environmental Impact Assessment Report Appendix 5.2: Cairngorms National Park Special Landscape Qualities Assessment 5 - 1

Appendix 5.2: Cairngorms National Park Special Landscape Qualities Assessment Introduction

5.1 This appendix sets out an assessment of the effects of the Proposed Development upon the Special Landscape Qualities (SLQ) of the Cairngorms National Park (CNP). This assessment has been carried out in accordance with SNH’s working draft methodology ‘Assessing the impacts on Special Landscape Qualities’ which advocates a four stage approach, as follows:

• “Step 1 The Proposal – Gain as full an understanding of the proposal as possible;• Step 2 Define the Study Area and Scope of the Assessment identifying the area likely

to be affected;• Step 3 The Analysis of Impacts and Effects on SLQs; and• Step 4 Summary of Impacts on the SLQs, implications for the NSA/NP and possible

future effects on SLQs and recommendations for mitigation.”

Step 1

5.2 With regard to Step 1, the proposal is for a wind farm of 16 turbines at 149.6m to tip and associated ancillary development. The Proposed Development is located approximately 8km to the north of the CNP northern boundary, as shown on Figure 5.1.5a. At this distance the key components which are likely to result in effects on the SLQ of the CNP will primarily be the turbines. Aviation lighting is proposed on the Proposed Development, with the cardinal turbines lit with 25 candela red lights. Further details of and the assessment of effects of aviation lighting are included in Appendix 5.4: Aviation Lighting Night-Time Assessment. Further details on the overall project are included in Chapter 4 – Development Description.

Step 2

5.3 The study area (Step 2) has been informed by the Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV, refer to Figure 5.1.2a) which identifies theoretical visibility within 25km to the south-east of the site from summits on the very northern fringes/ just outside the CNP at: Carn Bad na Caorach, Carn na Loine and Tom Mor; the north facing upper hill flanks and summits along the ridge of the south-west to north-east aligned Hills of Cromdale (represented by Viewpoint 18); and the summit of Baddoch. There is also visibility from the A939 as road users travel north having left the CNP, and this is considered in the sequential assessment of the LVIA. However, visibility from this route within the CNP boundary is very limited.

5.4 To the south-west within 25km, there is theoretical visibility from the north-east facing hill flank and summit of Beinn Ghuilbin. However, coniferous forest cover has altered the hillside and will limit actual visibility. Beyond 25km, the pattern of theoretical visibility is

intermittent and limited to higher hills and mountains tops. The increased viewing distance and presence of operational wind farms in typically long distance, large scale views to the north of the CNP will limit the potential for significant effects on SLQ. As such, the study area is defined as follows and is focused on the hills which enclose Strathspey, to the north-east of Grantown-on-Spey, shown within the red dotted line below:

5.5 Plate 1 - CNP Study Area

Step 3

5.6 Table 1 sets out the analysis and effects on SLQ (Step 3) which is presented in tabular format to provide transparency in the judgements which have been taken at each stage of the assessment. The full suite of SLQs for the CNP are listed and expanded upon on the CNP

RES


5 - 2

Environmental Impact Assessment Report Appendix 5.2: Cairngorms National Park Special Landscape Qualities Assessment

website1. The SLQs which have been taken forward for assessment have been agreed through consultation with SNH (SNH letter 18/06/2020). The sensitivity of the resource is considered to be high given the national status of the CNP designations. In accordance with the methodology set out in Appendix 5.1, judgements on scale of effect and geographical extent inform the overall level of effect. With regard to duration and reversibly, all effects are judged to be long term and reversible, unless otherwise stated. Effects of moderate and above are considered to be significant in the context of the EIA Regulations.

5.7 With regard to proposed mitigation, the key mitigation for the wind farm has been embedded in the design process through selection of turbine size and layout considerations. The proposals do include for some localised areas of woodland planting, to help mitigate effects associated with the proposed substation on the northern flank of Cairn Duhie. However, any localised areas of new woodland planting is unlikely to contribute to notable screening of the turbines, once mature, and in views from the CNP. As such, operational year 1 effects will closely reflect residual effects over the operational phase of the project, from the CNP.

5.8 A summary of impacts on the SLQ and overall implications for the CNP is provided at the end of this appendix (Step 4). This final stage draws together all the strands of the assessment and provides a concluding statement of effect.

Table 1 Assessment of effects on selected SLQs

Relevant SLQs Underpinning landscape characteristics to inform detailed SLQ descriptions

Impacts of the Proposed Development on underpinning key characteristics

Level of effect

Vastness of space, scale and height

“Humans feel small in such a vast landscape of wide panoramas… The corries and glens are large and dramatic, and the wide, high plateaux are more expansive than any others in Britain. Open, rolling heather moorland covers great tracts of land, woodlands are extensive and the straths are on a grand scale, hosting majestic rivers.”

With reference to the study area, the areas with theoretical visibility are focused to open hilltops and upper hills flanks on the northern edge of the CNP, which are typically characterised by heather moorland and offer long distance, panoramic views. The Proposed Development will introduce a further wind farms into these long distance views to the north of the CNP. These views have already been altered by wind farms including Berry Burn and Paul’s Hill Wind Farm, with the latter being closer to the CNP boundary. Medium to longer distance views of further wind farm development outside the CNP is unlikely to compromise the vastness of space, scale and height across the study area, or wider parts of the CNP.

Low scale of change and small geographical extents, resulting in a minor (not significant) effect.

Strong juxtaposition of contrasting landscapes

“A journey through the Park reveals many strong contrasts in an ever-changing array of surprise and visual delight. These include the sight of intimate, village gardens against a backdrop of snow-clad peaks; high, exposed mountains glimpsed through sheltered trees, or seen rising above fertile farmland; green pastures adjacent to heather moorland; heather intimately mixed with beautiful, ancient pines, or cladding the open hills in large swathes; rolling hills a short distance from enclosed glens; steep slopes ending suddenly at flat glen floors; a smooth, undulating plateaux abruptly falling away to dramatic

With reference to the study area, the areas with theoretical visibility are focused to the upper slopes and summits of rolling hills which enclose Strathspey. These hills include Carn Bad na Caorach, Carn na Loine and Tom Mor located on the very northern fringes/ just outside the CNP, along its northern boundary. There is also theoretical visibility from the upper northern hill flanks and ridgeline along the Hills of Cromdale including Cairn a Ghille Chearr and Creagan a’ Chaise (refer to Appendix wirelines 5A2.1a and 5A2.1b). The hills to the north of Strathspey will screen views of the Proposed Development from the valley floor. As such, the Proposed Development will be


1 https://cairngorms.co.uk/caring-future/cairngorms-landscapes/cairngorms-special-landscape-qualities/


RES


5 - 3



Level of effect

cliffs; high, mountain corries a short walk from a road; a designed, ordered landscape set amongst wild hills.”

visible in medium to longer distance views from upland areas to the north of the CNP. The juxtaposition of contrasting landscape in this area will remain intact, as upland areas to the north of the CNP are already subject to views of operational wind farms outside, and views from the valley floor of Strathspey will remain unaltered.

A landscape of layers and layers of receding ridge lines

“The landscape tends to be horizontally stratified, ascending to the summits in a series of layers: from a meandering river, through a strath of settlement and farmland, through rough pasture, wood pasture, wood and forestry, to moorland with its patchwork of muirburn, and eventually to the high, corrie-fringed mountains. Within the landscape there are also layers of time-depth, with traces of past land use stretching from present day back into prehistory.”

With reference to the study area, visibility of the Proposed Development will be limited to the upper hill flanks and summits of the hills which enclose the northern and southern side of Strathspey. From this higher ground, the Proposed Development will be apparent from localised upper hill flanks and summits in medium to long distance views which include operational wind farms, outside the CNP. As such, the appreciation of the layers of the landscape within Strathspey will largely remain unaltered as views north, towards the Proposed Development, are largely screened by the rising ground to the north of the valley.


The surrounding hills

“…The ‘lesser hills’ within the Park have their own ridges, summits and plateaux and would be impressive in any other location. They tend to be heather-covered, smooth and rounded, albeit with sudden unexpected crags, screes, gullies and glens. They contribute significantly to the wild, untamed appearance of the area, and many are easily accessible from the main roads.”

There will be no direct landscape effects on the ‘lesser hills’ including those with theoretical visibility on the northern fringes of the CNP and the Hills of Cromdale. They will remain undeveloped and continue to contribute to the wild and untamed appearance of the area. Medium to longer distance views of further wind farm development outside the CNP from localised upper areas of these hills is unlikely to compromise this SLQ. Certain lower lying hills on the northern fringes of the CNP, including Sgor Gaolithe near the hill track to Huntly’s Cave will experience some visibility of the Proposed Development (refer to Appendix Wireline 5A2.3). However, the rising landform further north outside the CNP, including the Knock of Braemoray and Hill of Aitnoch, will play a role in partially screening views of the Proposed Development. Furthermore, the northern boundary of the CNP tends to follow higher summits and ridges which, as soon as you drop south, will play a role in screening views north towards the Proposed Development.


Magnificent mountains towering over moorland, forest and strath and Grand panoramas and framed views

“The dramatic, glacial topography of mountain, corrie and glen, the swathes of open heather moorland, the great forests of pine and birch, and the broad straths of farmland and settlement stretching back into prehistory, together create a landscape which has held firm in the public imagination since the days of Queen Victoria. It is a landscape of great variety, with distinctive landforms, wildlife, colours and textures, and, equally important, containing less tangible qualities such as the evocation of wilderness, naturalness, remoteness, cultural continuity and recreational exploration. Its appeal is undiminished by familiarity through books, calendars, postcards and shortbread tins because the underlying force and grand scale of nature dominates and bestows a distinct, aesthetic beauty; and because the infinite variations in colour, atmosphere and weather mean the landscape rarely looks the same, even on consecutive days.”

With reference to the study area, and from the majority of locations within Strathspey, rising ground to the north of the valley will screen views towards the Proposed Development, and key views along the valley to the containing hills will remain unaltered. From the upper north facing hill flanks and summits which contain Strathspey, the Proposed Development will be visible, including from Cairn a Ghille Chearr and Creagan a’ Chaise (refer to Appendix wirelines 5A2.1a and 5A2.1b). The large-scale nature of these panoramic views is better able to accommodate this type of development and these views have already been altered by wind farm development to the north.


RES


5 - 4




Level of effect

Dramatic, historical routes

“The Grampians have always been a barrier to travel between the Central Lowlands and the north, with routes limited to the straths, glens and passes which cut through the mountains. The main roads still follow old routes through the dramatic, wild scenery of the high passes of Glenshee, The Lecht and Drumochter, following the line of the 18th century military roads. These passes provide a sense of anticipation during the ascent and during the descent the splendid Cairngorms’ landscape comes into view, giving a sense of arrival once traversed, and also a sense of security on reaching habitation. Other traditional routes such as the Lairig Ghru, Glen Feshie, Glen Tilt, Glen Dee, Jock’s Road and the Gaick Pass are now the domain of the hillwalker.”

There is very limited visibility from the main roads which pass through the study area. Rising landform to the north of A95, which runs through Strathspey, will screen views towards the Proposed Development. From the A939 (and Dava Way), which acts as an important gateway to the CNP from the north, visibility of the Proposed Development will be limited from the road itself within the CNP boundary, with the area around the high ground above Huntly’s Cave and around Lynemore being the main location with views (refer to Appendix wirelines 5A2.3 and 5A2.2 respectively). Around Lynemore, views of turbine blades will be limited and long distance as the A939 passes over the lower south-western flank of the Hills of Cromdale. However, due to the screening role providing by the intervening landform, viewing distance and fleeting nature of these views, this is unlikely to result in significant sequential effects, from this particular section of the route. Views north towards the Proposed Development will open up outside the CNP park boundary, when departing, and effects from this route are considered further in the sequential assessment. In terms of traditional routes which are now used by hill walkers, none of the routes listed in the SLQ will be subject to views of the Proposed Development. There is a walking route from the village of Cromdale to the summit of Creagan a’ Chase from which walkers can continue along the wider ridgeline. Long distance views of further wind farm development to the north of the CNP from this ridge is unlikely to compromise this SLQ.


Focal cultural landmarks of castles, distilleries and bridges

“The straths and glens have always been important strategically and defensive fortifications from duns to castles go far back in history. Many, such as Corgarff Castle, Blair Castle and the Ruthven Barracks, form prominent landmarks, marking periods of conflict and ‘restlessness’ (Woodburn, 1975). Numerous stone bridges remain, many dating back to the 18th century military roads. Found both on and off-road, these make attractive incidental features and are an interesting reminder of past transport links and military campaigns, forming an important tangible expression of the history of the landscape. A distinctive feature of several settlements is the traditionally-built whisky distillery with its associated bonded warehouses.”

With reference to the study area, rising ground to the north of Strathspey will limit views to the Proposed Development. As such, cultural landmarks such as distilleries and bridges along the valley floor will be unaffected. There will also be very limited visibility from other cultural landmarks in the study area including Castle Grant Garden and Designed Landscape, Revack Lodge and Huntly’s Cave (refer to Appendix wireline 5A2.3).

Barely perceptible scale of change and small geographical extents, resulting in a minor (not significant) effect.

Recreation: A landscape of opportunities

“Since Victorian times, the outstanding scenery of the area has been a draw to visitors. The diverse landscapes lend themselves to a wide range of pursuits and it is one of the foremost localities for outdoor recreation in Britain. Whilst some visitors seek out the physical challenge of an extreme environment in extreme conditions, others choose physical endeavour in a more organised and safer setting… the rounded summits and gentle slopes can turn treacherous in sudden changes of weather, and being at the mercy of the elements can be an added attraction and source of exhilaration... Active pursuits on the lower ground include

With reference to the study area, theoretical visibility of the Proposed Development is limited to localised areas from north facing upper hills slopes and summits on the containing hills to the north and south of Strathspey. Recreational pursuits in the area will largely be focused on hillwalking, stalking/ shooting and mountain biking. Whilst views of the surrounding landscape are more likely to be valued by hillwalkers it is unlikely that medium to long distance views of further wind farm development outside the CNP is likely to compromise this SLQ.



RES


5 - 5



Level of effect

water sports, cycling and horse-riding, together with the traditional sporting pursuits of deer-stalking, grouse shooting and fishing. There are also many who are content to enjoy gentler and less challenging pursuits, whether low level walking, bird-watching, exploring the past, or simply enjoying the scenery. However, all derive pleasure directly from what the landscape has to offer.”

Broad Farmed Straths “The main arteries of the Park are the wide straths. Forming natural transport corridors, they have provided access through the area from historic times until the present day. They possess large rivers which meander across the flat valley floor and the straths have been the centre of farming and settlement since prehistoric times. With their fields, crofts, farms and villages, they provide a sense of continuity and security amongst a landscape of hills and mountains. Their slopes contain pockets of native woodland, rough grazing, heather moor and plantation forest. Each strath is distinctive in its own way: wide Strathspey with its mountain backdrop, the narrower and more sinuous Strath Avon and Strathdon amongst gentler hills; and Royal Deeside with its characteristic pine forests and estates. The farm buildings often retain their stone-built, 19th century vernacular architecture, and are generally situated above the flood plains. Additionally, Victorian, granite shooting lodges are often associated with these glens and straths.”

There will be no direct effects on the landscape features of Strathspey. Rising ground to the north of Strathspey will limit views to the Proposed Development. There will be some limited and long-distance visibility of turbine blades as the A939 passes over the lower south-western flank of the Hills of Cromdale, around Lynemore (refer to Appendix Wireline 5A2.2). This will represent a fleeting sequential view from the higher ground to the south of the valley. As road users drop into the valley, the Proposed Development will be screened by the rising landform to the north. Visibility from the wider valley floor and lower valley side of Strathspey will be very limited, and as such effects on the perceptual qualities of the broad farmed strath will be limited.


Extensive moorland, linking the farmland, woodland and high tops.

“Vast stretches of moorland characterise the Park, and it is probably the best place in the world to experience the distinctive browns and purples of swathes of heather. In late summer, the heather in full bloom is symbolic of the Scottish Highlands. It dominates the middle range hills, ascends the higher slopes and in places descends to the floor of the straths. The matrix of heather unifies the landscape elements of the whole Park, occurring throughout and linking the farmland, woodlands and the high tops. The expansive, open moors engender the exhilaration of wide open spaces and distant views, tinged at the same time with a sense of exposure to the elements.”

There will be no direct effects on the extensive moorland areas of the CNP. The Proposed Development is located in an area of moorland outside the CNP, and this landcover is characteristic and widespread across the transitional landscape between the hills and mountains on the northern edge of the CNP and the wooded valleys, forested areas and farm lowlands further south near the Moray Firth. In this transitional landscape outside the CNP, wind farms are a more common occurrence.


Dark Skies “At night, even the complete absence of colour, a pitch black sky bespeckled only with the light of the stars, is a distinctive feature as dark skies become increasingly rare in Britain.”

The effects of aviation lighting within the Proposed Development on dark skies within the CNP will be limited due to the presence of existing forms of artificial light visible from the northern edge of the CNP, as well as the distance of 8 km between the Proposed Development and the CNP. Further detail is provided in Appendix 5.4 Aviation Lighting Night-Time Assessment. Existing forms of artificial light within views looking to the north-west from the CNP include orange street lighting within Grantown-On-Spey and other settlement within Strathspey, communication masts, rigs within the Moray Firth and vehicles


RES


5 - 6




Level of effect

travelling along key transport routes including the A95 and A939, as illustrated in the night-time photomontage produced for Viewpoint 19 – Creagan a Chaise (Figure 5.2.19). Aviation lighting within the Proposed Development will therefore sit within a context of existing visible artificial light. Darker views looking southwards back into the CNP will remain unaltered.

Step 4 - Summary 5.9 In summary, none of the SLQ considered in this assessment are judged to be subject to effects

of greater significance than minor. Visibility of the Proposed Development will be localised to upper northern facing hill flanks and summits on the enclosing hills to the north and south of Strathspey. The northern boundary of the CNP runs along the tops of a series of ridges and hill summits, which in themselves screen views to the north. The rising landform on the northern edge of the CNP within the study area (Carn Bad na Caorach, Carn na Loine and Tom Mor) will screen views from lower lying ground within Strathspey. From the somewhat limited areas with potential visibility of the Proposed Development across the study area, operational wind farms to the north and outside the CNP have already altered the large scale and panoramic views. In many of these views, Paul’s Hill Wind Farm will continue to be the closest proximity wind farm. In conclusion, the Proposed Development is unlikely to compromise the SLQ of the CNP.

View Horizon

SNH2014 CYL Bearings522.03mm VDist

90° = 820mm Image width

SNH2014 CYL Bearings522.03mm VDist90° = 820mm Image width

S W N 270 280 290 300 310 320 330 340 350 000 010 020 030 040 050 060 070 080 090 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 310 320 330 340 350 000 010 020 030 040 050 060 070 080 090 W N E E

Wind Farm Developments key(by status):

Proposed scheme OperationalUnder constructionConsented

ScopingAppeal/PLI

90° (cylindrical projection)522 mm841 x 297 mm (half A1)820 x 260 mm

310400E 824200N711 m 255°21.38 km

OS reference:AOD:Direction of view:Nearest turbine:

Horizontal field of view:Principal distance:Paper size:Correct printed image size:

© C

row

n co

pyrig

ht a

nd d

atab

ase

right

s 20

20 O

rdna

nce

Surv

ey d

ata

Lice

nce

num

ber:

<010

0031

673>

Figure: 5A2.1aViewpoint 19: Creagan a’ Chaise

Cairn Duhie Wind Farm

Wireline drawing

View Horizon




S W N 270 280 290 300 310 320 330 340 350 000 010 020 030 040 050 060 070 080 090 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 310 320 330 340 350 000 010 020 030 040 050 060 070 080 090 W N E E



ScopingAppeal/PLI


310400E 824200N711 m 345°21.38 km



© C

row

n co

pyrig

ht a

nd d

atab

ase

right

s 20

20 O

rdna

nce

Surv

ey d

ata

Lice

nce

num

ber:

<010

0031

673>

Figure: 5A2.1bViewpoint 19: Creagan a’ Chaise


Wireline drawing

View Horizon




S W N 270 280 290 300 310 320 330 340 350 000 010 020 030 040 050 060 070 080 090 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 310 320 330 340 350 000 010 020 030 040 050 060 070 080 090 W N E E



ScopingAppeal/PLI


306471E 823404N338 m 340°20.14 km



© C

row

n co

pyrig

ht a

nd d

atab

ase

right

s 20

20 O

rdna

nce

Surv

ey d

ata

Lice

nce

num

ber:

<010

0031

673>

Figure: 5A2.2Viewpoint 20: A939 near Lynemore


Wireline drawing

View Horizon




S W N 270 280 290 300 310 320 330 340 350 000 010 020 030 040 050 060 070 080 090 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 310 320 330 340 350 000 010 020 030 040 050 060 070 080 090 W N E E



ScopingAppeal/PLI


304965E 836251N386 m 340°8.71 km



© C

row

n co

pyrig

ht a

nd d

atab

ase

right

s 20

20 O

rdna

nce

Surv

ey d

ata

Lice

nce

num

ber:

<010

0031

673>

Figure: 5A2.3Viewpoint 21: Hill track near Sgor Gaoithe, north of Huntly’s Cave


Wireline drawing

Appendix 5.3 Residential Visual Amenity Assessment (RVAA)


Environmental Impact Assessment Report Appendix 5.3: Residential Visual Amenity Assessment (RVAA) 5 - 1

Appendix 5.3: Residential Visual Amenity Assessment (RVAA) Introduction

5.1 This residential visual amenity assessment (RVAA) sets out the effects on residential visual amenity, as experienced by residents of properties within a defined study area around the Cairn Duhie Wind Farm site. The RVAA complements the assessment of visual effects from publicly accessible vantage points, set out in Chapter 5: Landscape and Visual Amenity.

5.2 The Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 3rd edition (GLVIA3)1 provide guidance on the circumstances when it may be necessary to consider the effects on views and visual amenity from a private residence: ‘Effects of development on private property are frequently dealt with mainly through ‘residential amenity assessment’. These are separate from LVIA although visual effects assessment may sometimes be carried out as part of a residential amenity assessment, in which case this will supplement and form part of the normal LVIA for a project.’ (GLVIA3, Page 107, Para. 6.17).

5.3 In 2019 the Landscape Institute published the Residential Visual Amenity Assessment (RVAA) Technical Guidance Note 2/19. Paragraph 2.1 onwards of this guidance states:

“The purpose of RVAA is to provide an informed, well-reasoned answer to the question: ‘is the effect of the development on Residential Visual Amenity of such nature and / or magnitude that it potentially affects ‘living conditions’ or ‘Residential Amenity’? In this guidance this is referred to as the Residential Visual Amenity Threshold.

The Residential Visual Amenity Threshold remains a constant irrespective of the type and nature of the development being assessed in the RVAA. However, the factors which might contribute to the threshold being reached, or the way in which these are expressed, may be different for different types of development (for example, one might use terms such as ‘overwhelming/overbearing’ for tall structures, or ‘overly intrusive’ for a development overlooking a garden or principal room). Determining whether the threshold has been reached requires informed professional judgement.”

5.4 The RVAA is intended to assist the decision maker in forming a judgement as to the effect of the wind farm on the visual component of residential amenity experienced by identified residential receptors (people in and around their homes). It should be noted that this assessment does not consider, or provide information on, other components of residential amenity such as noise, dust or shadow flicker. These aspects are not within the remit of a RVAA.

1 Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment, Third edition (GLVIA3), Landscape Institute and Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment, 2013

5.5 In addition to following the guidance set out in the Landscape Institute’s note, this assessment has been developed based on experience and current practice, which is informed by the decisions made following public inquiries into wind energy proposals in Scotland and elsewhere in the UK. The radius of the study area is influenced by factors such as local landscape characteristics, settlement pattern and land use, and turbine height. Current practice suggests that consideration of residential properties within a study area of approximately 2 km radius from the nearest turbine is appropriate, although properties beyond this distance are sometimes also examined.

5.6 It is not uncommon to identify significant visual effects (in Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) terms) on views and visual amenity from local residential properties as a result of introducing a commercial scale wind energy development into any landscape. Findings of significant effects on views or visual amenity from a property do not automatically imply the need for further assessment. However, for properties likely to experience a high magnitude of visual change and which are in close proximity to a development, undertaking an RVAA may be appropriate.

5.7 For the purpose of this assessment, the potential change in views and visual amenity has been considered from all properties within 2 km of the proposed turbines, as shown on Figure 5A3.1. In some cases, properties which are in similar geographical locations and are likely to experience similar views have been grouped together. Where this is the case, it is explained in the tables at the end of this Appendix.

5.8 The methodology for the RVAA is set out below along with the scope of the assessment. The findings of the assessment are presented in tabular format and the assessment concludes with a summary of the findings.

Scope of the Study

5.9 The purpose of this RVAA is not to make a further assessment of significance in the context of the EIA Regulations, but to examine the potential for adverse effects on the visual component of residential amenity at properties within the RVAA study area.

5.10 The RVAA provides a description of the existing views from local residential properties, and the potential changes to views that are likely to result from the introduction of the wind farm into the landscape. There is potential for close-proximity views of low level infrastructure to be available and so, where appropriate, these have been considered. However, for the majority of properties, the RVAA focusses on the likely visual effects arising from the presence of wind turbines during the operational phase of the wind farm.




Appendix 5.3: Residential Visual Amenity Assessment (RVAA)

5.11 For properties experiencing a high magnitude of change (i.e. where a significant effect is likely), the RVAA concludes with a judgement as to the nature of change to residential visual amenity.

5.12 An overall judgement is made for each property or group of properties, considering the range of views that may be available from the property, its garden or curtilage and its driveway or approach road. For example, this may include a combination of:

• A ‘framed’ view from a living room window which might be changed to a high degree bythe proposal;

• A clearly used terrace from where no views are available of the proposal; and• Possible glimpsed views in winter from the access drive but which are screened during

summer months.

5.13 The range of available views is considered in making the overall judgement in terms of the potential effects on residential visual amenity, as experienced by the residents of the property.

Context to the Assessment

5.14 Potential adverse effects on residential amenity, also referred to as ‘living conditions’, have been a consideration in the determination of numerous applications for wind farm developments in Scotland and elsewhere in the UK. A number of appeal decisions have been reviewed to inform this assessment.

5.15 In 2009, at Enifer Downs2 (Kent), Inspector Lavender noted that ‘when turbines are present in such number, size and proximity that they represent an unpleasantly overwhelming and unavoidable presence in main views from a house or garden, there is every likelihood that the property concerned would come to be widely regarded as an unattractive and thus unsatisfactory (but not necessarily uninhabitable) place in which to live.’

5.16 Appendix 1 of the Residential Visual Amenity Assessment (RVAA) Technical Guidance Note 2/19 sets out further planning precedent in relation to residential visual amenity.

Methodology

5.17 The assessment process follows the guidance set out in the Residential Visual Amenity Assessment (RVAA) Technical Guidance Note 2/19, and can be summarised as follows:

• identification of properties to be considered (defining the study area);• preparation of wireframe visualisations, and collation of baseline information from maps

and aerial photographs to inform field survey;• field survey (to collate information in relation to existing views and visual amenity from

each property);

2 Paragraph 66 Land west of Enifer Downs Farm and east of Archers Court Road and Little Pineham Farm, Langdon, Appeal decision APP/X2220/A/08/2071880. 28th April 2009.

• assessment of the magnitude of change in visual amenity likely to be experienced atthe property, and judgement of significance; and

• for properties experiencing a high magnitude of change, a judgement of whether thepredicted change in views and visual amenity has the potential to adversely affectresidential visual amenity or breach the ‘Residential Visual Amenity Threshold’.

5.18 The following section sets out the methodology and the factors considered in describing the existing views from a property, the potential changes in views as a result of the presence of the proposal in the landscape, and a judgement as to the effect on in views and visual amenity on residential visual amenity.

Study Area

5.19 The assessment includes consideration of the changes in views and visual amenity from all properties within approximately 2 km of the proposed turbines.

5.20 Properties were identified using Ordnance Survey (OS) AddressBase Plus data. Properties were then verified using aerial imagery and observations made during field visits to the site and study area. Informed by the ZTV illustrated on Figure 5A3.1 and observations in the field, properties unlikely to experience any visibility of turbines were not included in the RVAA.

5.21 A total of 29 residential properties were considered in the assessment as listed in Appendix Table 2 below and shown on Figure 5A3.1. Properties were assessed individually or as groups. Properties were grouped and assessed collectively where they share a similar outlook, orientation and/or elevation, which are likely to result in similar views of the wind farm.

Collation of Baseline Information

5.22 OS maps, aerial imagery and Google Streetview were used for desktop research to assist with recording information such as the location of the residential elements of each property, the orientation of the property and the extent of its curtilage.

5.23 For the purposes of this RVAA, the visual amenity experienced at a property is made up of a combination of the type, nature, extent and quality of views that may be available from the property and its domestic curtilage (e.g. gardens and access drives).

5.24 In considering baseline visual amenity, the following has been examined:

• the nature and extent of the available existing views (including main/principal views)from the property and its garden, including the proximity and relationship of the propertyto surrounding landform, landcover and visual foci; and

• views experienced when approaching or departing from the property via its drivewayand/or access roads, if applicable.



Field Surveys

5.25 All field survey was undertaken from publicly accessible locations and no provision was made for accessing private property in advance of field surveys.

5.26 Field surveys were undertaken in March 2020 to determine the following baseline information:

• the orientation and likely views from each property (including principal/primary aspectsand direction of windows);

• layout and orientation of the external spaces and gardens associated with the propertycurtilage;

• access location, and likely views from private or shared driveways or access tracks asappropriate;

• the nature of existing views from the properties and their gardens, including the proximityand relationship of the properties to surrounding landform, landcover and visual foci andthe scenic quality of views; and

• potential screening provided by local variations in topography, the built environment andvegetation/tree cover within the surrounding landscape.

Preparation of Accompanying Visualisations

5.27 Paragraph 4.21 of the Residential Visual Amenity Assessment (RVAA) Technical Guidance Note 2/19 states, with regard to visualisations:

“Preparation of suitable graphic and / or visual material such as ZTVs and wirelines may be appropriate for use during fieldwork and as an aid to assessment, in addition to aiding presentation of RVAA findings. Depending on the circumstances and consultation responses, and feedback from determining / competent authorities, the type and nature of visualisations may vary. In any event visualisations should be proportionate to the development proposal in question and appropriate to the project phase /assessment stage and considered in the context of relevant best practice guidance including LI Technical Guidance Note 02/178. Such visualisations may be shared with residents at the appropriate stage when documents become publicly available, or as agreed between the parties and their clients.”

5.28 On this basis, indicative wireline visualisations based on a bare ground3 digital terrain model were generated. They have been centred on the wind farm and illustrate a 90˚ included angle of view and 2m viewing height from each location. The wirelines are not necessarily representative of the primary outlook of the property and do not show features such as buildings and trees that may provide screening or filtering of views. It should therefore be noted that these indicative wireline visualisations represent a ‘maximum visibility scenario’ which may potentially be experienced from the property or its curtilage and this should be borne in mind when using the images.

3 A ‘bare ground’ computer generated terrain model does not take account of potential screening by the intervening built environment or vegetation.

5.29 The illustrative wireline visualisations show the proposed turbines only, with turbines numbered for ease of reference. The indicative wireline visualisations from representative viewpoints are shown in Appendix A, to this report.

Assessment of Potential Changes to Views and Visual Amenity

Sensitivity of Residential Receptors

5.30 GLVIA3 advocates an approach which considers the overall sensitivity of visual receptors (people) ‘in terms of both their susceptibility to change in views and visual amenity and also the value attached to particular views’ (GLVIA3, Page 113, Para. 6.31), whilst stating that visual receptors most susceptible to change are likely to include ‘residents at home’ (GLVIA3, Page 113, Para. 6.33).

5.31 Taking account of the purposes of this RVAA, and taking a precautionary approach, all people at their place of private residence are considered to be of high susceptibility and therefore also sensitivity/highly sensitive to changes in their views and visual amenity. As a consequence no individual assessment of sensitivity is outlined in the assessment which follows.

Magnitude of Change to Views and Visual Amenity

5.32 The change in views and visual amenity that will result from the proposal was considered with reference to the illustrative wireline visualisations discussed above. A judgement of the magnitude of visual change which will be experienced was made, and the change in views summarised, with reference, as appropriate, to the following factors which are set out in the (GLVIA3, Page 115, Para. 6.39-6.40):

• “scale of the change in the view with respect to the loss or addition of features in theview and changes in its composition, including the proportion of the view occupied bythe proposed development;

• degree of contrast or integration of any new features or changes in the landscape withthe existing or remaining landscape elements and characteristics in terms of form, scaleand mass, line, height, colour and texture;

• angle of view in relation to the main activity of the receptor;• distance of the viewpoint from the proposed development; and• extent of the area over which the changes would be visible.”

5.33 The following additional factors are specific to the type of development proposed:

• the type and nature of the available view (e.g. panoramic, framed);• the (relative) size and proximity of turbines;• the number, extent and composition of turbines visible (and presence of screening);• the position of turbines in views from the property e.g. whether in the principal/primary

outlook from the property;





• the proportion of the skyline occupied by the turbines;• the direction (including the aspect) of the view affected; and• the density and spacing of turbines and their overall composition in the view.

5.34 For each property or group of properties, the evaluation consists of:

• a description of the property and of its location and context;• a description of the likely existing available views and visual amenity from the property

and its domestic curtilage, including gardens and private or shared access drives; and• a description of the likely effect on views and visual amenity resulting from the proposal,

as well as other existing and proposed schemes included in the study area and likely toinfluence the decision making process.

5.35 The detailed information for each property or group of properties concludes with a judgement with respect to the visual component of residential amenity and if the ‘Residential Visual Amenity Threshold’ is breached. It is intended that this judgement may assist the decision maker in coming to the wider planning judgement on overall residential amenity, when considered within the context of other components (e.g. noise, shadow flicker, dust and vibration etc.).

5.36 Informed by the preparatory desk work and supported by maps and wireframes, an assessment was undertaken during field surveys of the magnitude of the likely change in visual amenity that may result from the introduction of the proposal into the local landscape and the view(s) from each property or property group.

5.37 Magnitude of visual change is expressed on a relative scale, as set out in Appendix Table 1 below, which highlights the differences between the types of change experienced in views from residential properties examined as part of this RVAA. The existing and proposed view from each property is described, and the likely relative magnitude of change (high, medium, low, barely perceptible) arising from the proposal is determined. The nature of existing and predicted views (open, enclosed, panoramic, focused, framed etc.) affects the relative magnitude of change and is taken on board in reaching that judgement. The RVAA does not seek to establish one or more ‘main views’ from each property, but looks at the range of views likely to be available from the house and its curtilage, and considers potential effects on all of these.

Table 1: Magnitude of change in views and visual amenity

Magnitude of change in visual amenity

Description

High The Proposed Development will be a key/defining element in the view.

Medium The Proposed Development will be clearly discernible but will not be a key/defining element of the view.

Low The Proposed Development will be visible and will form a minor element of the view.

Barely Perceptible The Proposed Development may go unnoticed as a minor element of the view, or is not visible.

5.38 The RVAA concludes with a judgement as to the potential effect on residential visual amenity, for properties experiencing a high magnitude of change.

5.39 For properties experiencing a medium or lower magnitude of change, it considered that there is no potential that living conditions will be affected, and this final stage is therefore not undertaken.

Study Findings

5.40 The table below (Appendix Table 2) lists all of the properties assessed as part of this study. For each, it contains a reference number (which correlates to those included on Figure 5A3.1), the property name (as informed by OS AddressBase Plus data) and details of location. Computer modelling has been used to provide details of distance, viewing direction and to help inform an understanding of the potential visibility of the Proposed Development. This potential visibility is further illustrated from representative indicative wireline visualisations in Appendix A.

5.41 Following site survey and analysis of illustrative wirelines, notes were prepared about the details of each of the properties and the potential magnitude of change which will be experienced. Where the magnitude of change is judged to be medium or lower commentary on these findings is provided in Table 2 below, and these receptors are not carried forward into the detailed Residential Visual Amenity Assessment.

Conclusion

5.42 The majority of residential receptors considered in this assessment will experience a high magnitude of change in the view from certain locations within their property and/or from the associated outdoor areas. When combined with the high sensitivity of the residential receptor, there is the potential for these residential receptors to experience a significant visual effect. However, none of these receptors will be subject to effects on residential visual amenity which are judged to breach the Residential Visual Amenity Threshold.

5.43 It is concluded that the potential relationship between residential properties in proximity to the proposed Cairn Duhie Wind Farm is not unusual when compared and calibrated with other existing and consented wind farm developments within Scotland and throughout the UK.

Assessment of Effects on Residential Visual Amenity

5.44 This section sets out the detailed assessment of effects on views and visual amenity for each individual property or group of properties detailed in Appendix Table 2 and shown on Figure 5A3.1. The assessment should be read in conjunction with the accompanying indicative wireline visualisations (refer to Appendix A).



Table 2: Properties Considered in Assessment

Ref Name Grid Ref Approximate Distance to nearest turbine (km from the property)

Magnitude of Change

P1 Little Aitnoch 296892, 840817

1.2 High – considered further in assessment.

P2 Kerrow Farmhouse 299626, 841900


P3 Braemoray Lodge 299789, 842836

1.3 High (where woodland allows more open views) - considered further in assessment.

P4 Muckle Lyne 297924, 845290

1.3 Low – whilst views are available from sections of access track to the north of the property, views from the property itself are screened by woodland to the immediate south. Not considered further.

P5 Little Lyne 297391, 845305


P6 Achnabechan Farm 295788, 843733


P7 Tomnarroch 296158, 844553

1.5 Low – woodland between this property and the site, either side of the A939, will largely screen views towards proposed turbines. Not considered further.

P8 Property Group 1: Leonach Cottage

296232, 844818

1.6 Low – properties in the village of Ferness are on the fringes of the ZTV and coniferous forestry to the east of the A939 will largely screen views of the proposed turbines (refer to Viewpoint 4 (Ferness) in the main LVIA, Figure 5.2.4). Not considered further.

P9 Property Group 1: 6 Glenferness 296241, 844835

1.6

P10 Property Group 1: Birch Cottage 296250, 844856

1.6

P11 Property Group 1: Sturrock 296261, 844881

1.6

P12 Property Group 1: Rose Cottage 296273, 844916

1.6

P13 Property Group 1: Smiddy House 296261, 844907

1.6

P14 The White House 300059, 843252


P15 Property Group 1: The Old Schoolhouse

296295, 844957

1.6 Low – properties in the village of Ferness are on the fringes of the


Magnitude of Change

P16 Property Group 1: The Old Post Office House

296282, 844939

1.6 ZTV and coniferous forestry to the east of the A939 will largely screen views of the proposed turbines (refer to Viewpoint 4 (Ferness) in the main LVIA, Figure 5.2.4). Not considered further.

P17 Property Group 1: Bungalow 296312, 844991

1.6

P18 New Inn 296376, 845080

1.6 Low/ barely perceptible – on fringes of ZTV and coniferous forestry to immediate south-east of property will screen views towards proposed turbines. Not considered further.

P19 Unknown 295658, 843882

1.7 Low – woodland to the east of the B9007 will screen views to the east towards the proposed turbines. Not considered further.

P20 Property Group 2: Drumore Cottage

295442, 843576

1.8 Low/ barely perceptible – deciduous woodland to immediate east of properties and coniferous woodland on rising ground to east of B9007 will screen views towards proposed turbines. Not considered further.

P21 Property Group 2: 1 Drumore Cottage

295443, 843617

1.8

P22 Property Group 2: 2 Drumore Cottage

295448, 843633

1.8

P23 The Mount 297902, 845725

1.8 Low – property set in woodland north of Stripe of Muckle Lynne watercourse. Woodland is likely to largely screen views to south towards proposed turbines. Not considered further.

P24 Culfearn 300008, 843810


P25 Factors Cottage 295765, 844470

1.8 Low – set in woodland. Not considered further.

P26 Head Foresters House 296356, 845373

1.9 Low/ barely perceptible - woodland to immediate south-east of property will screen views towards proposed turbines. Not considered further.

P27 Airdrie Mill 297564, 845883

2.0 Low – on fringes of ZTV. Localised rising ground with tree cover above will screen views towards proposed turbines to south. Not considered further.






Magnitude of Change

P28 Score 297275, 845877

2.0 Low – Localised rising ground with tree cover above will screen views towards proposed turbines to south. Not considered further.

P29 Aitnoch Farmhouse 298159, 839665

2.1 High – just beyond 2 km and with open views to north towards proposed turbines. Considered further in assessment.



Table 3: Property P1

Property P1

Property name Little Aitnoch

OS grid reference 296892, 840817

Direction of view to the Proposed Development North-east

Distance to nearest turbine and turbine no.

(from the property)

1.2 km T2

Potential No. of turbines visible Hubs visible 16

Blade tips visible 16

Description of property, location and context:

• Two storey historic farmhouse with outbuildings to the south-west, approached by a track off a minorroad to the south-east.

• Slightly elevated position in relation to the surrounding landscape (approximately 280 m AOD).

• Windows mainly on south-east elevation, but with smaller number of small windows on north-east gableend.

• Private gardens located to north and east, with some shrub planting but generally open.

• Pasture to the north and west, scrub woodland to the south and more distant west. Minor road to thesouth-east.

Description of existing views and visual amenity:

The primary outlook of the property appears to be south-east from the front of the property, overlooking the Drynachan, Lochindorb and Dava Moor SLA. There are also open views to the north-east in the direction of the site from the gable end of the property and its garden, with shrub planting in the garden providing some filtering of views particularly in summer months. Views of the site are across rolling pasture with moorland slopes rising beyond, broken up by deciduous woodland and occasional conifer plantations.

Little Aitnoch with primary outlook facing south-east and views to the north-east from the gable end of the property and garden.

View from minor road leading to Little Aitnoch looking north-east towards the site.

Description of likely effect on views and visual amenity as a result of the Proposed Development:

The wind farm will occupy views to the north-east, from the gable end of the property and from its small private garden. The hubs and blades of up to 16 turbines will be visible across the skyline, on moorland slopes beyond pasture and deciduous woodland at a distance of 1.2 km. The turbines will be visible at a similar

elevation to the property, with the rising landform of Cairn Duhie providing some low-level screening of turbines bases to the east of the site. Access tracks on the south-western flank of Cairn Duhie will also be apparent. Garden vegetation will provide some screening, particularly in summer.

From the minor road that leads to Little Aitnoch facing north-eastwards, some upper turbine tips of the Hill of Glaschyle are visible beyond the horizon behind the Proposed Development. Tom nan Clach is theoretically visible on the distant skyline to the south-west, however it is likely to be screened by scrub woodland to the west.

See LVIA Viewpoint 1 (Little Aitnoch) for representative views and the representative wireline in Appendix A to this report.

Conclusion with respect to the Proposed Development

The magnitude of change of the visual amenity of this property is high. The Proposed Development will be visible from the north-eastern gable of the property and its garden, with garden vegetation providing some filtering of views. At a distance of 1.2 km and in this context, the Proposed Development will not appear overwhelming or oppressive. The primary outlook of the property will not be affected and views in other directions will be available. The Proposed Development is unlikely to breach the residential visual amenity threshold.






Property P2

Property name Kerrow Farmhouse


Direction of view to the Proposed Development West


(from the property)

1.3 T5




• Two storey historic farmhouse with outbuildings to the south-east, approached by a track c. 750 m inlength off the A940 to the east.

• Situated lower than the A940, in a small valley, above the Dorback Burn (240 m AOD).

• Windows on all elevations.

• Private gardens mainly located to the south and east, but also with a strip to the rear (west), with sometree and shrub planting.

• Surrounded by pasture to the south, moorland to the north and deciduous woodland along the DorbackBurn to the west.


The primary outlook of the property is west and east. Views to the west are across the lower lying burn towards Cairn Duhie, with young conifer woodland visible on the lower slopes of Cairn Duhie beyond the wooded burn. Views east from the front of the property look towards Knock of Braemoray above the A940. There are also views from the gardens and curtilage of the property, with deciduous trees surrounding the property and along the burn filtering views towards the site. Views are also available from the access track which descends towards the property from the A940.

View looking west over Kerrow with site beyond, from the A940.

View from rear of property looking west towards Cairn Duhie.


The Proposed Development will be visible from the primary outlook at the rear (west) of the property and its gardens and access track. The turbines will occupy views to the west, on the slopes of Cairn Duhie. The hubs and blades of up to 16 turbines will be visible across the skyline, with woodland along the Dorback Burn

providing some filtering and partial separation in views (more so during the summer months). New access tracks on the eastern flank of Cairn Duhie will be apparent.

Tom nan Clach is theoretically visible on the distant horizon to the south-west, but likely to be screened by woodland along the Dorback Burn.

See LVIA Viewpoint 5 (A940 above Kerrow) and the representative wireline in Appendix A to this report.


The magnitude of change of the visual amenity of this property is high. The Proposed Development is potentially visible from the primary outlook west from the property, its gardens and access track. Woodland along the Dorback Burn filters views from the property and small rear garden area. Views from other aspects are available and from the primary outlook east will remain unaltered (towards Knock of Braemoray). In this context, and at 1.3 km distant, the Proposed Development will not appear overwhelming or oppressive. The Proposed Development is unlikely to breach the residential visual amenity threshold. As woodland planting between the site and the property matures it will increasingly help to screen views.




Property P3

Property name Braemoray Lodge




(from the property)

1.3 km T9




• Single storey wooden lodge.

• The lodge is approached by a track c. 350 m in length which drops down from the A940 to the west.

• Situated lower than the A940, in a small, wooded valley, above the Dorback Burn (230 m AOD).

• Surrounded by woodland, including deciduous woodland along the Dorback Burn to the west, andconiferous forestry to the east below the A940.


The primary outlook of the property is to the south and east. The is an outdoor seating veranda to the south of the property with views orientated to the south. Woodland surrounding the lodge provides some screening and filtering of views. An outbuilding to the west of the property also provides some screening of views to the west (towards the site) from the property itself. Filtered views are also likely to be available from the access track which descends towards the property from the A940, through forest.


The wind farm will potentially occupy views to the west from its grounds. The hubs of up to 16 hubs and blades are potentially visible across the skyline, but likely to be filtered or screened by woodland along the Dorback Burn and surrounding the property to the west. The most open views are likely to be available from the western extents of the access track, as views open up due to the clearing in the woodland in which the property sits. From the property itself, woodland and outbuildings to the west are likely to largely screen views. Views orientated to the south from the veranda will largely remain unaltered, as woodland in the foreground will screen views to the west.

No other wind farms are visible from this location.

See the representative wireline in Appendix A to this report noting that this does not take account of the screening potential from vegetation.

View looking west towards eastern façade of property, from western end of access track on approach to property.

View south from veranda on southern side of property. Vegetation to the west of the property largely screens views west towards the site.


The magnitude of change of the visual amenity of this property is high, assuming that woodland does not filter views, although in practice some screening is likely. From the property itself, woodland and outbuildings to the west are likely to largely screen views. The Proposed Development is likely to be visible from the grounds of the property, including the western extents of the access tracks where views open out. In this context and given the 1.3 km distance to the turbines, the Proposed Development will not appear overwhelming or oppressive. The Proposed Development is unlikely to breach the residential visual amenity threshold.






Property P5

Property name Little Lyne


Direction of view to the Proposed Development South


(from the property)

1.4 km T15




• 1.5 storey property, with farm buildings to the west, approached by a farm track from the B9007 to thenorth, c. 500 m in length.

• Situated level with or lower than the site, at approximately 200 m AOD, in a localised dip below NewInn Wood.

• Windows mostly on north-west and south-east elevations.

• Private gardens appear to be mainly to the south with some tree and shrub planting

• Surrounded by pasture, with coniferous forestry to the west and south-west.


The primary outlook of this property is assumed to be north-west and south-east. Views to the south-east look across pasture, the stripe of Little Lyne and coniferous forestry towards Knock of Braemoray. Garden trees provide some filtering of views, but views towards the site are available across pasture and felled forestry. Open views are available from the long access track on the approach to the property.

View looking south towards Little Lyne, with the northern end

of the site beyond, forming the horizon.


The Proposed Development will be visible from the primary outlook south-east of this property and its south facing garden, as well as from the access track in views to the south. The hubs and blades of up to 16 turbines

will be visible across the skyline, with foreground garden trees filtering but not fully screening views. The proposed substation, to the north of the site, is also likely to be visible in filtered views from the property.

Berry Burn is theoretically visible from this location but likely to be screened by forestry. Hill of Glaschyle is also theoretically visible from this property, however forestry screens available views.

See the representative wireline in Appendix A to this report.


The magnitude of change of the visual amenity of this property is high. The Proposed Development is potentially visible from the primary outlook south-east of the property, its south facing garden and on approach to the property from its access track. Garden vegetation will provide some filtering of views south from the property and garden. Open primary views to the north-west remain unaltered from the front of the property. At a distance of 1.4 km, the Proposed Development will not appear overwhelming or oppressive. The Proposed Development is unlikely to breach the residential visual amenity threshold.




Property P6

Property name Achnabechan Farm


Direction of view to the Proposed Development South-east


(from the property)

1.5 km T11




• Two storey dwelling, located off the B9007 along a farm track c. 100 m in length, and with farmbuildings approximately 100 m to the east.

• Located off the B9007, at 210 m AOD.

• Windows on all elevations.

• Small private gardens surrounding the property with courtyard area to west.

• Surrounded by arable fields and pasture, with forestry immediately to the west.


The primary outlook of this property appears to be south-east, in the direction of the site, where open views are available across pasture and past farm buildings towards forestry and deciduous woodland along the Tomnarroch Burn, with moorland hills beyond. The 275 kV transmission line which crosses the northern part of the site is visible. Views are also likely to be available from the small south and east facing gardens and access track to the farm buildings east of the property. Woodland to the west of the property is likely to screen views from the access track on the approach to the property itself.

Achnabechan farmhouse with primary outlook facing south-east towards the site.

View from access track adjacent to property with views south-east towards the site between farm buildings and forestry.


The Proposed Development will be visible from the primary outlook of this property and its south-east facing gardens, as well as from the access track to the farm buildings to the south-east. The turbines will occupy views

to the south-east. The hubs and blades of up to 16 turbines will be visible across the skyline, beyond the farm buildings in the middle distance. New access tracks on the north-western flank of Cairn Duhie may also be apparent.

The tips of Berry Burn are theoretically visible from this location beyond the site. Tom nan Clach and the tips of Hill of Glaschyle are also theoretically visible but likely to be screened by forestry to the south and north-east, respectively.



The magnitude of change of the visual amenity of this property is high. The Proposed Development is potentially visible from the primary outlook of the property, its garden and part of the access track at a distance of 1.5 km from the property. The Proposed Development is set back from the immediate context of the property, behind its associated farm buildings, and open views to the north are available from the side of the property. In this context the Proposed Development will not appear overwhelming or oppressive. The Proposed Development is unlikely to breach the residential visual amenity threshold.






Property P14

Property name The White House




(from the property)

1.6 km T9




• Two storey dwelling, on the west side of the A940.

• Situated to the west of the A940, at a slightly lower elevation (approximately 250 m AOD).

• Windows mainly on the eastern and western elevation.

• Private gardens mainly to the east and west, driveway to the east.

• Forestry to the south of the property, A940 to the east, more open to the north and west with scattereddeciduous tree planting.


The primary outlook of this elevated property is east towards the A940, with close range views of the lower forested slopes of Knock of Braemoray. Views towards the site are available from the rear of the property including the rear garden. Views are generally to the west and north-west with scattered deciduous providing some filtering of views. Woodland to the south of the property screens views to the south-west. The 275 kV transmission line which crosses the northern part of the site is visible from rear views to the west. Views are also available from the small driveway to the property.

Primary views from the White House facing eastwards with open moorland of site apparent beyond.

View from rear of property looking west towards the Cairn Duhie site.


The Proposed Development will occupy views to the west, across the skyline on the slopes mainly north and north-east of Cairn Duhie. The hubs and blades of up to 16 turbines will be theoretically visible. New access tracks on the north-eastern flank of Cairn Duhie will also be apparent. Coniferous forestry to the south of the property may screen views of the southern part of the site. Deciduous trees in the foreground will provide some partial filtering of views.

Tom nan Clach is theoretically visible on the distant horizon to the south-west, but likely to be screened by forestry.



The magnitude of change of the visual amenity of this property is high. The Proposed Development is potentially visible from the rear of the property and its garden and driveway at a distance of 1.6 km. Adjacent coniferous forestry will screen turbines in the southern part of the site and views from the front (east) and sides of the property will not be affected. In this context, the Proposed Development will not appear overwhelming or oppressive. The Proposed Development is unlikely to breach the residential visual amenity threshold.




Property P24

Property name Culfearn


Direction of view to the Proposed Development South-west


(from the property)

1.8 km T9




• Single storey property, with farm buildings to the north, approached by a track through forestry fromthe A940, c 400 m in length.

• Situated lower than the A940 to the east, at approximately 250 m AOD, above the Dorback Burn.

• Main aspect appears to be east facing, with windows on the western elevation.

• Private gardens appear to be mainly to the west.

• Surrounded by pasture, some arable, forestry and deciduous woodland along the Dorback Burn.


Whilst the main aspect appears to be east facing, views west towards the site (from the property and garden) look across the wooded Dorback Burn to the rising moorland and forested slopes beyond, including Cairn Duhie. Views south and east may also be available, with views north likely to be partially screened by the adjacent farm buildings. Views are also likely to be available from the access track.


The Proposed Development will occupy views to the south-west, across the skyline on the slopes of Cairn Duhie. The hubs and blades of up to 16 turbines will be theoretically visible. Views may be filtered by woodland along the Dorback Burn and the garden of the property.

Tom nan Clach is theoretically visible on the distant horizon to the south-west, but likely to be screened by woodland along the Dorback Burn.



The magnitude of change of the visual amenity of this property is high. The Proposed Development is potentially visible from the west facing aspect of the property and its west facing garden at a distance of 1.8 km. Views in other directions are available and woodland along the Dorback Burn is likely to filter views in the direction of the site. In this context, the Proposed Development will not appear overwhelming or oppressive. The Proposed Development is unlikely to breach the residential visual amenity threshold.






Property P29

Property name Aitnoch Farmhouse


Direction of view to the Proposed Development North


(from the property)

2.1 km T1




• Single storey farmhouse with outbuildings to the west, approached by a short track off the A939 to thesouth.

• Slightly elevated position in relation to the land to the north (280-290m AOD).

• Mostly north and south facing windows.

• Private gardens mainly to east and south of the property.

• Some shrub planting to south, but little vegetation to provide screening in views to the north.

• Surrounded by pasture, with moorland beyond the A939 to the south and west, and woodland to thenorth and east beyond areas of pasture.


The primary outlook of the property appears to be south, with fewer windows on the northern elevation. Views from the rear are open and longer distance looking over pasture and deciduous woodland, with the moorland slopes of Cairn Duhie rising beyond. There are also open, distant views to the east towards the Knock of Braemoray, with rising landform shortening views to the west and south. Open views from the garden are also available. Glimpsed views through the buildings are available from the access track. Turbines within Berry Burn and Hill of Glaschyle Wind Farms will be apparent in longer distance views to the north-east.

View looking south-east from the A939 towards western façade and rear of Aitnoch Farmhouse.

View looking north from the A939 towards the site.


The wind farm will occupy views to the north, from the rear of the property and from its rear garden and grounds. The hubs and blades of up to 16 turbines will be visible across the skyline, on the lower slopes of Cairn Duhie. New access tracks on the southern flank of Cairn Duhie, will also be apparent. The turbines will be visible at a similar elevation to the property, with turbine bases in the north of the site partially screened by

landform. Views will be open, with little vegetation to provide screening. Views towards Knock of Braemoray will not be affected and principal views to the south, from the property, will be unaffected.

See LVIA Viewpoint 6 (A939 West of Aitnoch) and the representative wireline in Appendix A to this report.


The magnitude of change of the visual amenity of this property is high. The Proposed Development will be visible from the rear of the property and its grounds at a distance of 2.1 km and beyond its more immediate setting of pasture and woodland. Principal views from the front of the property, to the south, will not be affected. In this context the Proposed Development will not appear overwhelming or oppressive. The Proposed Development is unlikely to breach the residential visual amenity threshold.



Appendix A – Illustrative 90-degree wireframes (from properties taken forward for detailed assessment)





Little Aitnoch

Kerrow Farmhouse



Kerrow Farmhouse





Braemoray Lodge



Little Lyne





Achnabechan Farm



The White House





Culfearn



Aitnoch Farmhouse

THIS DRAWING IS THE PROPERTY OF RENEWABLE ENERGYSYSTEMS LTD. AND NO REPRODUCTION MAY BE MADE IN

WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT PERMISSION

LAYOUT DWG T-LAYOUT NO.

DRAWING NUMBER

)

)

)))))))))

)

)

)))

)

)

)

))

Ò

Ò

ÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒ

Ò

Ò

ÒÒÒ

Ò

Ò

Ò

ÒÒ

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Ò

Ò

Ò

Ò

Ò

Ò

Ò

Ò

!A!A

!A

!A!A

!A!A

!A!A

!A

!A !A

!A !A

!A!A

P1

P2

P3

P4P5

P6

P7

P14

P19

P20

P21

P22

P23

P24

P25

P26

P27P28

P29

12

3

45

67

8 910

11 12

13 14

15 16

FIGURE 5A3.1

FIG5A-3-1_10896_r0_Residential_ZTV_A3L

PSC0cnd08802914-RES-LAY-DR-TE-008

EIA REPORT AND APPLICATION FOR CONSENT 2021

1:25,000SCALE - @ A3

© CROWN COPYRIGHT, ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 2021 LICENCE NUMBER 0100031673.

CAIRN DUHIEWIND FARM

RESIDENTIAL VISUALAMENITY ASSESSMENT STUDY

AREA WITH BLADE TIPHEIGHT (149.9M) ZONE OFTHEORETICAL VISIBILITY

Data source: RES, LUC

Site boundary2km study area from outer turbines

Theoretical visibility1-4 Turbines visible5-8 Turbines visible9-12 Turbines visible13-16 Turbines visible

Residential visual amenity assessment

)Ò Properties taken forward fordetailed assessment

)Ò Properties not taken forward fordetailed assessment

Notes: The ZTV is calculated to turbine tip height (149.9m) from a viewing height of 2m above ground level. The terrain model assumes bare ground and is derived from OS Terrain 50 height data (obtained from Ordnance Survey in July 2019). Earth curvature and atmospheric refraction have been taken into account. The ZTV was calculated using ArcMap 10.5.1 software.

))

)

)

))

)

)

)

)

ÒÒ

Ò

Ò

ÒÒ

Ò

Ò

Ò

Ò

P8

P9

P10

P11

P12

P13

P15

P16

P17

P18

Properties P1: Little AitnochP2: Kerrow FarmhouseP3: Braemoray LodgeP4: Muckle LyneP5: Little LyneP6: Achnabechan FarmP7: TomnarrochP8: Leonach CottageP9: 6 GlenfernessP10: Birch CottageP11: SturrockP12: Rose CottageP13: Smiddy HouseP14: The White HouseP15: The Old SchoolhouseP16: The Old Post Office HouseP17: BungalowP18: New InnP19: UnknownP20: Drumore CottageP21: 1 Drumore CottageP22: 2 Drumore CottageP23: The MountP24: CulfearnP25: Factors CottageP26: Head Foresters HouseP27: Airdrie MillP28: ScoreP29: Aitnoch Farmhouse

Appendix 5.4 Aviation Lighting Night-Time Assessment


Environmental Impact Assessment Report Appendix 5.4: Aviation Lighting Night-Time Assessment 5 - 1

Appendix 5.4: Aviation Lighting Night-Time Assessment Introduction

5.1 In the interests of aviation safety, structures of ≥ 150 m, including wind turbines, require steady red visible aviation lighting, as set out by the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA). The Proposed Development comprises sixteen turbines at tip height of 149.9 m and thus does not trigger any statutory requirement for visible aviation lighting by the CAA. However, installation of visible aviation lighting has been requested for the Proposed Development by the Military of Defence (MOD) and the Highland and Islands Airports Limited (HIAL).

5.2 The introduction of visible aviation lighting in rural locations, where there are fewer sources of artificial lighting, and where darkness or dark skies are an integral and valued aspect of the landscape, may lead to potentially significant landscape and visual effects. This appendix includes an assessment of the effects of visible aviation lighting on landscape and visual receptors across the Study Area.

5.3 The requirement for visible aviation lighting is an emerging consideration for the wind energy sector, and consequently the approach to the assessment of likely environmental effects which may arise is evolving.

5.4 This technical appendix briefly sets out the background to the requirements for visible aviation lighting, followed by an assessment of landscape and visual effects arising for representative receptors within the Study Area. Receptors considered in the assessment are identified based on the Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) presented in Chapter 5: Landscape and Visual and the appendix should be read with reference to the main assessment and the accompanying visualisations presented in Volumes 2 and 3 (to NatureScot and The Highland Council standards respectively) of the EIA-Report, along with Appendix 5.1: LVIA and Visualisation Methodology.

Requirement for Aviation Lighting

5.5 Aviation stakeholder requirements for visible aviation lighting are outlined below.

MOD Lighting Requirements

5.6 The Proposed Development is located within Low Flying Area 14, one of twenty areas across the UK that is used by the MOD to carry out essential military low flying training. Within these areas, military aircraft are permitted to fly down to a minimum height of 76.2 m above terrain features. MOD Obstruction Lighting Guidance1 states that ‘The proliferation of wind turbines

1 Royal Airforce, Ministry of Defense (November 2014) MOD Obstruction Lighting Guidance

across the UK has caused the MOD concern with regard to military night flying training, which is conducted at heights where wind turbines present a significant hazard. Whilst acknowledging that there is no statutory requirement, MOD considers that there is an absolute requirement for the lighting of such large vertical obstructions to enhance the probability of the obstruction being acquired visually by the crew, and therefore mitigating the unacceptable risk of controlled flight into terrain.’ The MOD has therefore highlighted concerns that the Proposed Development will cause a potential obstruction hazard to military training activities, and request that the Proposed Development is installed with MOD accredited aviation safety lighting.

5.7 To address this impact, the MOD require ‘that the development be fitted with MOD accredited aviation safety lighting. The cardinal turbines should be fitted with 25 candela omni-directional red visible and infrared combi lighting with an optimised flash pattern of 60 flashes per minute of 200ms to 500ms duration at the highest practicable point and 25 candela omni-directional red lighting or infrared lighting with an optimised flash pattern of 60 flashes per minute of 200ms to 500ms duration at the highest practicable point on remainder of the perimeter turbines’2.

Proposed Aviation Lighting

5.8 Due to the MOD’s requirements for aviation lighting, the Proposed Development will be fitted with flashing 25 candela red lights on the nacelles of the cardinal turbines of the scheme (turbines 1, 7, 9 and 15). As outlined in Appendix 1 of the MOD Obstruction Lighting Guidance the full 25 candela brightness of these lights is only experienced at viewing angles above the horizontal (upwards overspill). Downwards overspill is to be minimised such that the red light intensity is no more than 10% of the intensity at 0% (2.5 candela). This has been taken into consideration in the preparation of supporting visualisations and Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) mapping.

5.9 In addition to this, each of the sixteen turbines within the Proposed Development will be fitted with infrared (IR) lighting. However, as infrared lighting is not visible to the human eye the effects of these are not considered within this assessment.

Potential Mitigation

5.10 There are a range of mitigation options such as external shielding devices, reduced lighting schemes and radar activated lighting. RES has, through pre application consultation with the MOD and HIAL, agreed a reduced lighting scheme which is considered in this assessment (25 candela visible lighting on the nacelle of four cardinal turbines).

2 Ministry of Defense, 23rd October 2020, Consultation Response Letter




Appendix 5.4: Aviation Lighting Night-Time Assessment

5.11 The final detail of the aviation lighting scheme and lighting specification will be further developed post-consent in conjunction with aviation stakeholders as part of an Aviation Lighting Plan.

Approach to Assessment of Lighting Effects

5.12 The assessment of lighting effects follows the same approach detailed in Appendix 5.1: LVIA Assessment Methodology. However, it is important to note that the assessment is not a technical lighting assessment based on a quantitative measurement of light levels, but rather the assessment relies on professional judgement of what the naked human eye can reasonably perceive in the context of the baseline situation, with regard to existing sources of artificial lighting.

5.13 GLVIA3 provides the following guidance on the assessment of lighting effects: ‘For some types of development the visual effects of lighting may be an issue. In these cases, it may be important to carry out night-time 'darkness' surveys of the existing conditions in order to assess the potential effects of lighting and these effects need to be taken into account in generating the 3D model of the scheme. Quantitative assessment of illumination levels, and incorporation into models relevant to visual effects assessment, will require input from lighting engineers, but the visual effects assessment will also need to include qualitative assessments of the effects of the predicted light levels on night-time visibility.’ (paragraph 6.12, page 103).

5.14 The assessment considers the potential effects associated with the use of 25 candela flashing nacelle lights. It is not possible to represent the effect of flashing lights in static photomontages. Furthermore, reflected glow across the immediate surfaces of the turbine blades and hub may be evident from locations within relatively close-proximity to the turbines under certain conditions, and depending on the orientation of the turbine blades.

5.15 When determining the magnitude of change associated with the Proposed Development, the methodology in Appendix 5.1 considers the duration of the change. For operational effects this is deemed to be long term over the 35 year life of the project. However, and with relevance to night-time effects, the frequency of the effect should also be considered. Aviation lighting will only be apparent during hours of darkness which changes with the seasons. As such in the summer months, effects associated with aviation lighting will reduce.

5.16 The night-time baseline against which the effects of the Proposed Development will be assessed, includes operational/ under construction wind farms only.

5.17 Proposed wind farms, including most notably Ourack at 180 m to tip, the closest proposed wind farm to the Proposed Development, and Clash Gour and Rothes Phase 3 which are both proposed at over 150 m to tip, are also likely to require aviation lighting should they be constructed. Whilst this scenario is not represented in the night-time visualisations this is acknowledged in the assessment text, where relevant.

3 SNH (February 2017) Visual Representation of Wind Farms Guidance. Version 2.2

5.18 The assessment of effects does not consider the potential implications of further mitigation options which may be feasibly adopted to reduce the extent, frequency and perceptibility of the necessary visible aviation lighting.

5.19 At the present time, the proposed manufacturer or precise model and specification of aviation light to be used is not known, therefore any potential further mitigation which may be embedded into the design of the proposed lights has not been considered in the assessment.

Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) Mapping

5.20 The hub height (91.4 m) Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) prepared as part of the LVIA, shown on Figure 5.1.3a, highlights the areas across the Study Area from which aviation lighting installed on the turbine hubs may be apparent. This ZTV does not take account of potential screening provided by vegetation or built form.

5.21 To illustrate the potential variability in lighting intensity in relation to vertical viewing angle, a lighting intensity ZTV is shown on Figure 5A4.1. This highlights areas above the horizontal where the 25 candela lights can potentially be seen at their full brightness and areas below the horizontal, where downwards overspill is to be minimised such that the red light intensity is no more than 10% of the intensity at 0% (2.5 candela).

5.22 As illustrated by the ZTV, visibility of the nacelle lights at their greatest intensity (or perceived brightness) would generally be limited to views experienced from elevated locations. This includes upland moorland areas mainly focused to the south of the study area, between the site and the northern boundary of the Cairngorms National Park (CNP) within 10km of the site. These areas are less likely to be frequented during the hours of darkness. Visibility of 25 candela lighting is likely to be difficult to perceive, at distances beyond 15km and from within the CNP. An assessment of effects on the dark sky qualities on the CNP is included in Appendix 5.2 and this assessment includes a night-time assessment from Creagan a’ Chaise.

5.23 Conversely, from lower lying settled valleys and coastal edges, which are the focus of most settlement and habitation across this part of Nairnshire, as well as locations in closest proximity to the turbines (within 5km), the lights will generally be perceived at substantially reduced intensity.

Visualisations

5.24 It is important to note that visualisations represent just one source of information that informs a landscape and visual impact assessment (LVIA). Visualisations have been produced for four representative assessment viewpoints, agreed through consultation with NatureScot (formerly known as Scottish Natural Heritage - SNH), CNPA, THC and Moray Council and presented in accordance with the industry standard guidance prescribed in SNH3 and Landscape Institute4

guidance. The methodology for the preparation of night-time photomontage visualisations is detailed at the end of Appendix 5.1.

4 Landscape Institute (September 2019) Technical Guidance Note 06/19 Visual Representation of Development Proposals



5.25 The NatureScot guidance states ‘The visualisation should use photographs taken in low light conditions, preferably when other artificial lighting (such as street lights and lights on buildings) are on, to show how the wind farm lighting will look compared to the existing baseline at night’… ‘We have found that approximately 30 minutes after sunset provides a reasonable balance between visibility of the landform and the apparent brightness of artificial lights, as both should be visible in the image.’ (paragraphs 174 – 177, page 35 and 36).

5.26 Baseline photography was undertaken in accordance with the guidance set out in NatureScot guidance for each of the four representative viewpoints. Photography was captured at dawn or dusk in clear atmospheric conditions and sought to capture the presence of existing baseline sources of artificial lighting (e.g. lighting associated with settlements, street lighting, and other artificial sources of light) present in the landscape as closely as is experienced by the naked eye as is feasible.

5.27 The representative visualisations (Figures 5.2.2, 5.2.5, 5.2.14 and 5.2.19) are presented in Volumes 2 and 3 as a combination of existing baseline photography and photomontages which aim to represent the appearance of the proposed visible aviation lighting at dawn and dusk during clear viewing conditions. As outlined previously, the full 25 candela brightness of the proposed aviation lighting is only experienced at viewing angles above the horizontal (upwards overspill). Downwards overspill is to be minimised such that the red-light intensity is no more than 10% of the intensity at 0% (2.5 candela). This has been taken into consideration in the preparation of supporting visualisations. It should also be noted that visualisations present the worst case scenario, with maximum intensity seen in clear weather conditions. As the viewing angle below the horizontal increases it is likely to further diminish the intensity of the lights experienced.

Effects on Landscape Character

5.28 Informed by Figure 5A4.1, the presence of visible aviation lighting positioned on the nacelles of the turbines will be perceptible largely from two broad groups of Landscape Character Types (LCT) within 25 km. These are upland areas and lower lying more settled areas including valleys and coastal fringes.

5.29 Upland areas with visibility include the Open Rolling Upland LCT (in which the Proposed Development is located); the Upland Moorland and Forestry LCT; the Upland Valleys – Moray & Nairn LCT; the Rolling Uplands – Inverness LCT; the Rolling Uplands - Cairngorms LCT; and the Smooth Rounded Hills – Cairngorms LCT. The latter two of these LCTs are located in the Cairngorms National Park (CNP), where dark skies are considered a Special Landscape Quality (SLQ) of the National Park. Although the remaining upland LCTs are not renowned for their dark sky qualities, it is noted that there are limited artificial light sources within these landscapes. Light sources tend to be limited to small property clusters, scattered properties and communication masts. Lights within, and light glow from settlements in the more settled surrounding valleys including, but not limited, to Ferness and Relugas, is limited. However,

light spill from the larger settlement of Grantown-On-Spey to the south, is apparent from certain locations within these LCTs. Moving lights from vehicles on key transport routes within the Study Area, namely the A939 which is a tourist route providing access to and from the CNP, as well as the A940, also contribute to artificial light sources visible within and from parts of this broad grouping of LCTs.

5.30 Based on these findings the night-time baseline susceptibility of this broad grouping of upland LCTs is judged to be medium-high. Two of the LCTs are located within the CNP and are associated with the CNPs dark skies SLQ, however given that none of the remaining LCTs are recognised as dark sky parks, or well renowned for having dark the associated night-time landscape value is judged to be medium-high. As such the overall night-time landscape sensitivity is judged to be medium-high.

5.31 The proposed aviation lighting will introduce further artificial lighting into these upland landscapes. Figure 5A4.1 (and Figure 5.1.4a from the main LVIA) highlights that within closest proximity, from the Open Rolling Upland LCT, the majority of apparent brightness of the nacelle aviation lighting will be reduced to 2.5 candela, due to the viewing angle being below 0°. Local hill slopes facing the site including the slopes of Hill of Aitnoch and the Knock of Braemoray, will experience a brightness of 25 candela due to the higher elevation of these slopes and a viewing angle above 0°. From these more elevated positions other artificial light sources in the wider landscape setting will also be apparent. This includes views of distant lights on telecommunications masts to the west and light spill from marine infrastructure in the Moray Firth.

5.32 At greater distance from the Proposed Development, the aviation lighting will appear brighter due to the angle of the view, from surrounding hills including, but not limited to, Carn Kitty to the east and Carn Allt Laoigh to the south-west. Light sources in the wider surrounding landscape, including from transport routes or within and along the Moray Firth, are likely to be visible from many areas within these hills too.

5.33 Beyond 15km to the south, from the north-west facing slopes of the Hills of Cromdale Ridge, within the Smooth Rounded Hills – Cairngorms LCT, aviation lighting will also visible with an apparent brightness of 25 candela due to the angle of the view above the horizontal. Light sources in the wider surrounding landscape, more so to the north (outside the CNP) and in the direction of the site, will be apparent. This includes light spill from the settlement of Grantown-On-Spey to the north-west of the ridge. With increased distance, the aviation lighting will be harder to perceive, which will reduce the scale of landscape change.

5.34 Whilst it is acknowledged that from most upland landscapes the aviation lights are more likely to be seen at their full 25 candela intensity, this tends to be in the context of views of a wider landscape setting where other sources of artificial light are apparent and with increased viewing distance from the site. As such, the overall night-time magnitude of landscape change is therefore judged to be low, resulting in Minor (not significant) effects on upland LCTs within 25 km.





5.35 The other key broad group of LCTs within 25 km where aviation lighting may be apparent includes more settled lower lying valleys and lowland areas. Figure 5A4.1 highlights widespread visibility from the Narrow Wooded Valley – Moray & Nairn LCT to the west and north of the site. In this valley light sources associated with the settlements including, but not limited to, Ferness, Relugas and Logie, along with lights on vehicles moving along the A939, A940 and B9007 are apparent. The wooded character of the Narrow Wooded Valley – Moray & Nairn LCT means that many of these settlements and scattered properties are located within or surrounded by woodland and/or forestry which limits actual visibility towards the site.

5.36 There is also visibility from the Rolling Farmland and Forests – Moray and Nairn LCT and the Coastal Farmlands – Moray and Nairn LCT to the north of the site. In these LCTs, artificial light from settlements such as Littlemill, Forres and Nairn will be apparent as well as artificial lighting from the A96, and along and within the Moray Firth. This results in a night-time baseline susceptibility of medium. Whilst these are rural landscapes, none of these LCTs are particularly valued for their dark sky qualities. As such the overall night-time landscape sensitivity for this broad LCT group of settled lower lying valleys and lowland areas is judged to be medium-low.

5.37 The proposed aviation lighting will introduce further artificial lighting in views from these settled valley and lowland landscapes. Figure 5A4.1 highlights that due to the viewing angle, the brightness of the aviation lighting throughout these lower lying areas will be reduced to 2.5 candela. Theoretical visibility of aviation lighting along the north-eastern stretch of the Narrow Wooded Valley – Moray & Nairn LCT will be more intermittent or limited due to the intervening topography of the valley slopes. Additionally, the wooded character of the LCT is likely to reduce the actual visibility of aviation lighting in this area as surrounding woodland will screen some views east and south towards the site. Similarly, large areas of the Rolling Farmland and Forests – Moray and Nairn LCT and the Coastal Farmlands – Moray and Nairn LCT have limited theoretical visibility due to undulating topography. However, where there is theoretical visibility, large areas of woodland and forestry within these LCTs are likely to reduce the actual visibility of aviation lighting.

5.38 Due to the reduced intensity of aviation lighting that these lower lying landscapes will be subject to and landscape context, which includes lights from settlements, scattered properties and transport corridors, the overall night-time magnitude of landscape change to be low. The effects on settled valley and lowland LCTs within 15 km (and beyond) is therefore judged to in Minor (not significant).

Effects on Visual Amenity

Analysis of Theoretical visibility of Aviation Lighting

5.39 As illustrated by the ZTV in Figure 5A4.1, theoretical visibility of aviation lighting across the 40 km Study Area is more widespread across lower ground within 10 km of the site. Within these areas, the brightness of aviation lighting that is experienced will typically be 2.5 candela

due to a viewing angle being below 0°from areas of lower ground. With increasing distance from the site, there is a more intermittent pattern of theoretical visibility of aviation lighting, across areas of higher ground to the east, south and west on site-facing hill slopes within 15 km. From these upland areas the brightness of visible lighting will typically be 25 candela due to a viewing angle above 0°.

5.40 In the wider 40 km Study Area, the ZTV shows areas of widespread visibility of a brightness of 2.5 candela, from along the Moray coast and across the Moray Firth. However, actual visibility from these areas will be reduced due to distance and intervening vegetation and built form which is not into taken account by the ZTV. Beyond 15 km to the south, theoretical visibility is more intermittent, with small, scattered areas of theoretical visibility of a brightness of 25 candela lighting on north facing hill slopes across the upland plateau within the CNP. This includes visibility from the Hills of Cromdale Ridge.

Aviation Lighting Visibility from Assessment Viewpoints

5.41 Table 1 below details the predicted visibility of the proposed turbine lighting from each LVIA assessment viewpoint. The table also indicates the potential influence of coniferous forestry and woodland in further screening the theoretical visibility of turbine lighting from each viewpoint location, informed by the baseline photography and observations from fieldwork.

Table 1: Summary of Turbine Lighting Visibility

Summary of Turbine Aviation Lighting Visibility Nacelle lighting potentially visible (i.e. one 25 candela light)

• Turbine lighting potentially screened by forestry and woodland

Viewpoint T1 T7 T9 T15

VP1 - A939 South of Ferness Village • • • •

VP2 - Little Aitnoch • • • •

VP3 - Hill track to Loch Kirkcaldy • • • •

VP4 - Ferness •

VP5 - A940, above Kerrow • • • •

VP6 - A939, west of Aitnoch • • • •

VP7 - B9007, near Mount • • • •

VP8 - Ardclach Bell Tower • • • •

VP9 - Knock of Braemoray • • • •

VP10 - Cairn Glas Brae on the A939 • • •

VP11 - B9007, Old Military Road • • • •

VP12 - Drumguish Croft • • • •

VP13 - A940, Aucheorn • • • •

VP14 - A939 and Dava Way • • • •



VP15 - Carn nan Gabhar above Lochindorb

• • • •

VP16 - Carn Kitty • • •

VP17 - Carn Allt Laoigh • • •

VP18 - Carn a Ghille Chearr • • • •

VP19 – Creagan a’ Chaise • • • •

Representative Assessment Viewpoints

5.42 Whilst the potential visibility of aviation lighting is summarised for each of the LVIA assessment viewpoints (as set out in Table 1) the following assessment focuses on four representative viewpoints agreed through consultation with CNPA, NatureScot, THC and Moray Council.

5.43 The four assessment viewpoints represent views from residential properties located within 5 km of the Proposed Development; the Dava Way on the approach to/ from the CNP and the summit of Creagan a’ Chaise which is located in the CNP.

5.44 Aviation lighting is likely to be visible from closer proximity hills, including Knock of Braemoray. However, none of the hills within the more immediate landscape context are within the CNP where dark skies are a formally recognised special landscape quality or are well renowned for providing an appreciation of the night sky. Furthermore, at the summit of the Knock of Braemoray (and other local hills tops within immediate landscape context) it is less likely that recreational receptors would be present during the hours of darkness.

5.45 Night-time photomontage visualisations (Figures 5.2.2, 5.2.5, 5.2.14 and 5.2.19) have been produced for the following assessment viewpoints. Viewpoint 19 was not included in the LVIA as a day-time assessment viewpoint, but has been included as an additional location within the aviation lighting night-time assessment at the request of the CNPA:

• VP2 - Little Aitnoch• VP5 – A940 above Kerrow• VP14 – A939 and Dava Way• VP19 - Creagan a’ Chaise

5.46 Photomontage visualisations illustrating the visible aviation lighting at either 25 candela or 2.5 candela, depending on the perceived light intensity in relation to the relevant vertical elevation angle at which they are viewed, are presented from each of the viewpoints. The actual light intensity (candela) perceived at particular vertical elevations will vary dependant on the final selected specification of the aviation lights5 and weather conditions. The

5 Lighting intensities at angles below -1 degrees informed by the technical specification of a typical MIOL detailed in Lux Solar Medium Intensity Obstruction Light CAP 168 MIOL-C: Data Sheet, January 2018. (weblink: https://www.luxsolar.com/Uploads/Docs/luxsolar-data-seet-miol-c-cap168-l864-lxs_164.pdf)

methodology for the preparation of night-time visualisations is detailed in full in Appendix 5.1.

Table 2: Representative Assessment Viewpoints

Viewpoint Distance to nearest turbine (km)

Maximum approximate lighting intensity accounting for vertical angle

VP2 - Little Aitnoch 1.1 2.5 candela (below the horizontal)

VP5 - A940, above Kerrow 1.71 2.5 candela (below the horizontal)

VP14 - A939 and Dava Way 7.9 2.5 candela (below the horizontal)

VP19 - Creagan a’ Chaise 21.41 25 candela (above the horizontal)

5.47 An assessment of potential visual effects for each of the representative viewpoints is detailed in Table 3 to Table 6 below.

Table 3: Viewpoint 2 – Little Aitnoch

Viewpoint 2 – Little Aitnoch

Grid Reference (NGR) 297072, 840875 Figure Number 5.2.2

LCT Open Rolling Upland (291) LCT

Designated Landscape or Wild Land Area

At the edge of the Drynachan, Lochindorb and Dava Moors SLA

Direction of View North-east Distance to Nearest Turbine (km)

1.1

Number of turbines with nacelle lighting visible

4

Viewpoint location, existing night-time view and sensitivity

This viewpoint is located on a minor road to the south-west of the site, near a property called Little Aitnoch. The viewpoint is representative of views from the minor road and property. Similar views can be obtained from the A939 adjacent to the site.

In views to the north-east towards the site, the view is darker with no notable sources of artificial lighting. However, views of vehicle lights moving along the A939 will be intermittently apparent. The only other forms of artificial light visible from this viewpoint are in distant views to the north, including subdued artificial lighting from a communication mast and two sources of artificial light, immediately adjacent to one another, from rigs parked within the Moray Firth.

Judgements: Susceptibility: high; Value; high, Sensitivity: high

Assessment of Night-time Visual Effects

Figure 5.2.5 illustrates the view of the Proposed Development at night with a maximum lighting brightness of 2.5 candela being visible from the four nacelle lights. Aviation lighting on each of the four turbines will be visible against dark skies above the horizon in views to the north-east. However, due to the viewing angle being below the horizontal, resulting in a visible brightness of 2.5 candela, the aviation lights will be barely perceptible in this view. The flashing nature of the lights may slightly





draw the eye to the nacelle lights. However, other sources of existing artificial light will be visible in views to the north from this location and will appear at a brighter intensity in comparison to the visible aviation lighting on the Proposed Development.

Overall the magnitude of visual change at night associated with aviation lighting will be low. Despite the high sensitivity of this viewpoint, the effects of aviation lighting will result in a minor (not significant) visual effect.

Table 4: Viewpoint 5 – A940 above Kerrow

Viewpoint 5 – A940 above Kerrow




None

Direction of View West Distance to Nearest Turbine (km)

1.71


4


This viewpoint is located at a lay-by on the A940 on the western slopes of the Knock of Braemoray, at a point where the view overlooks Kerrow Farm to the west. The viewpoint represents sequential oblique views from the road. Local residences including Kerrow and other nearby properties such as Braemoray Lodge and Culfearn have similar views, but are at lower elevations.

In views to the west towards the site, the outlook is dark however there is some subdued artificial lighting from the Kerrow property in close proximity below the viewpoint. To the north-west, beyond the site, there are long distance views of subdued lighting from communication masts and distant settlements on the northern side of the Moray Firth. In the same direction views of vehicle lights moving along the A939 will be intermittently apparent in the middle-distance. Vehicle lights moving past the viewpoint along the A940 will also be intermittently apparent.



Figure 5.2.5 illustrates the view of the Proposed Development at night with a maximum aviation lighting brightness of 2.5. Aviation lighting on each of the four turbines will be visible against dark skies above the horizon in views to the west from the A940. This will be seen in the context of artificial light sources in the foreground, middle and longer distance views. Whilst the proposed four aviation lights will flash, which may slightly draw the eye, due to the viewing angle the aviation lights will be barely perceptible in this view. Other limited sources of existing artificial light are brighter and more likely draw the eye.

Overall the magnitude of visual change at night associated with aviation lighting will be low. Despite the high sensitivity of this viewpoint, the effects of aviation lighting will result in a minor (not significant) visual effect.

Table 5: Viewpoint 14 – A939 and Dava Way

Viewpoint 14 – A939 and Dava Way




At the edge of the Drynachan, Lochindorb and Dava Moors SLA

Direction of View North-west Distance to Nearest Turbine (km)

7.9


4


This viewpoint is located on the Dava Way long-distance walking route, that runs along a disused railway line, and is at this point adjacent to the A939, a recognised tourist route. It is located approximately 2.3 km from where the A939 leaves the CNP and is used to represent views from the tourist route, and the Dava Way, as well from the edge of the CNP.

Views in all directions from this viewpoint are very dark with sources of artificial light limited to moving vehicle lights that will be intermittently apparent along the A939.



Figure 5.2.14 illustrates the view of the Proposed Development at night with a maximum aviation lighting brightness of 2.5. Whilst all four nacelle lights will theoretically be visible from this location, due to the increased viewing distance the aviation lighting will be difficult to perceive.

Overall, the magnitude of visual change at night associated with aviation lighting will be low. Despite the high sensitivity of this viewpoint, the effects of aviation lighting will result in a negligible (not significant) visual effect.

Table 6: Viewpoint 19 - Creagan a’ Chaise

Viewpoint 19 - Creagan a’ Chaise


LCT Smooth Rounded Hills – Cairngorms (123) LCT


Within the CNP

Direction of View North-west Distance to Nearest Turbine (km)

21.41


4


This viewpoint is located on the summit of Creagan a’ Chaise, located on the south-western end of the Hills of Cromdale ridge, in the CNP. The Hills of Cromdale are on the northern fringes of the CNP, and divide Strath Avon from Strathspey. This viewpoint was requested through consultation with the CNPA due, in part, to being within the Tomintoul and Glenlivet Dark Sky Park. The panoramic view offers views to the



Cairngorm Mountains to the south, Easter Ross and Ben Wyvis to the north-west, and the coastal landscapes of the Moray Firth to the north.

In views towards the site, there is subdued artificial lighting (mainly orange street-lights) from the settlement of Grantown-On-Spey and other scattered properties and smaller settlements along Strathspey visible in middle-distance views to the north and north-west. In the same direction, moving vehicle lights will also be intermittently apparent on the roads that run through Strathspey. In longer distance views to the north and north-west subdued artificial lighting can be seen on communications mast and marine infrastructure (parked oil rigs) in the Moray Firth. To the south, looking back into the CNP, views are much darker with visible artificial lighting limited to light from occasional low- lying scattered properties.



Figure 5.2.19 illustrates the view of the Proposed Development at night, which due to the viewpoint location being above the horizontal, will result in an aviation lighting brightness of 25 candela. From this viewpoint each turbine within the Proposed Development will be visible at a distance of approximately 21.6 km. Flashing aviation lighting on each of the four turbines will just be visible against a backdrop of the Moray Firth and northern shoreline. Despite the elevated viewing angle and visibility of the aviation lighting’s maximum brightness of 25 candela, the lighting will be barely visible due to the distance between the Proposed Development and the viewpoint. Additionally, the lights will be seen against a backdrop of existing brighter artificial light within the Moray Firth, and seen within the same view as the subdued orange street lights of Grantown-On-Spey, which are located at a closer proximity to the viewpoint.

It should also be noted that if proposed wind farms, including Ourack at 180 m to tip, are constructed this will introduce further source of artificial light between the viewpoint and the Proposed Development.

Overall, the magnitude of visual change at night associated with aviation lighting will be low. Despite the high sensitivity of this viewpoint, the effects of aviation lighting will result in a minor (not significant) visual effect.

Summary of Lighting Effects

5.48 No significant landscape or visual effects associated with aviation lighting are anticipated.

5.49 In terms of landscape effects, whilst it is acknowledged that from most upland landscapes the aviation lights will more likely be seen at their full 25 candela intensity, this tends to be in the context of views of a wider landscape setting where other sources of artificial light are apparent and with increased viewing distance from the site in which the aviation lights will be harder to perceive. From lower lying landscape types and due to the reduced intensity of aviation lighting (when experienced from below the horizontal) seen in landscapes where lights from settlements, scattered properties and transport corridors are part of the night

time experience, night time landscape effects associated with the Proposed Development will not be significant.

5.50 In terms of visual effects, no significant effects are anticipated from the representative viewpoints. From Viewpoint 2 – Little Aitnoch, Viewpoint 5 - A940 above Kerrow and Viewpoint 19 - Creagan a’ Chaise, minor (not significant) effects were found as aviation lighting will be barely perceptible. For Viewpoint 2 – Little Aitnoch and Viewpoint 5 - A940 above Kerrow, both of which represent closer proximity residential views, due to the viewing angle the aviation lights will be seen at a reduced intensity of 2.5 candela. From Viewpoint 19 - Creagan a’ Chaise, a minor effect was found due to the distance between the Proposed Development and the viewpoint, and the presence of existing artificial light in views towards the site. From Viewpoint 14 - A939 and Dava Way, a negligible (not significant) effect was found due to the viewing angle (aviation lights seen at a reduced intensity) and due to the viewing distance.

THIS DRAWING IS THE PROPERTY OF RENEWABLE ENERGYSYSTEMS LTD. AND NO REPRODUCTION MAY BE MADE IN

WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT PERMISSION

LAYOUT DWG T-LAYOUT NO.

DRAWING NUMBER

!! !! !!

!! !!

! !! !! !

.

..

.

.

.

..

.

.

..

.

..

.

.

.

...

.

1

2

3

4

5

6

78

9

10

11

12

13

1415

16

17

18

5km

10km

15km

20km

25km

30km

35km

40km

1920

21

FIGURE 5A4.1

FIG5A-4-1_10896_r0_Lighting_ZTV_A3L

PSC0cnd08802914-RES-LAY-DR-TE-008

EIA REPORT AND APPLICATION FOR CONSENT 2021

1:325,000SCALE - @ A3

CONTAINS ORDNANCE SURVEY DATA © CROWNCOPYRIGHT AND DATABASE RIGHT 2021

CAIRN DUHIEWIND FARM

VISIBLE AVIATION LIGHTINTENSITY ZONE OF

THEORETICAL VISIBILITY

Da ta source: R ES, LUC Sustra ns, SNH

! TurbineSite bounda ry5km interv a ls from outer turbines40km study a rea

. Viewpoint loca tionVertical angle of lighting from hub height (91.4m) and lighting intensity

25 Ca ndela ligh ting a b ove 0°2.5 Ca ndela ligh ting below 0°

Notes: The ZTV is ca lcula ted to turbine h ub h eigh t (91.4m ) from a viewing h eigh t of 2m a b ove ground level. Th e terra in m odel a ssum es b a re ground a nd is derived from OS Terra in 50 h eigh t da ta (ob ta ined from Ordna nce Survey in July 2019). Ea rth curv a ture a nd a tm osph eric refra ction h a ve been ta ken into a ccount. Th e ZTV wa s ca lcula ted using ArcMa p 10.5.1 softwa re.

Viewpoints1. A939 South of Ferness Villa ge2. Little Aitnoch3. Hill tra ck to Loch Kirkca ldy4. Ferness5. A940 a b ove Kerrow6. A939 west of Aitnoch7. B9007 nea r Mount8. Ardcla ch Bell Tower9. Knock of Bra em ora y10. Ca irn Gla s Bra e on th e A93911. B9007 Old Milita ry R oa d12. Drum guish Croft13. A940 Auch eorn14. A939 a nd Da v a Wa y15. Ca rn na n Ga b h a r a b ove Loch indorb16. Ca rn Kitty17. Ca rn Allt La oigh18. Ca rn a 'Gh ille Ch ea rr

Additional wireline locations19: Crea ga n a ’ Ch a ise20: A939 nea r Lynem ore21: Hill tra ck nea r Sgor Ga oith e, north of Huntly's Ca ve

Appendix 5.1 LVIA and ... - Cairn Duhie Wind Farm

Documents

Transcript of Appendix 5.1 LVIA and ... - Cairn Duhie Wind Farm