Direct landscape impacts on the landscape

Direct landscape impacts on the landscape – for example loss of landscape features or change in the character of the site itself resulting from ground disturbances, construction activity, lighting and presence of new features including but not limited to; access tracks, turbines, anemometry masts, substation, and cabling.

Note that while there may be limited instances where onshore wind turbines are proposed for siting on National Trust properties, there may still be direct impacts on the significance of a property where turbines are located in the ‘setting’. Understanding significance of the assets and the extent and nature of the setting is critical in order to make this judgement.

Indirect impacts on the landscape character of the surrounding area and setting of NT properties

Indirect impacts on the landscape character of the surrounding area and setting of NT properties – for example change in the character of adjacent landscapes and change in sense of place important to the property.

The character of surrounding landscapes may contribute to the significance of the property. Note that direct impacts may occur where changes in the setting affect the significance of the property.

Direct impacts on views, daytime and night-time

Direct impacts on views, daytime and night-time – for example changes in views to and from NT properties and NT key views and vistas as a result of the introduction of tall moving structure(s) and construction activities into the landscape.

Cumulative impacts of one wind energy development in combination with other existing or proposed wind energy developments

Cumulative impacts of one wind energy development in combination with other existing or proposed wind energy developments (and other development types) on landscape character and views (including combined visibility from a single viewpoint and sequential effects on routes within the setting and context of NT properties).

Direct landscape impacts on the landscape

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA). Effects on the special qualities, sensitivities and significance of the landscape/property, considering the landscape value provided to NT properties and to their setting. This should include night time effects

Analysis to be based on desk study, baseline assessment of site, field survey and photography.

Use existing documents including Statement of Significance, Management Plans and other landscape evidence including Landscape Character Assessment. Consult landscape sensitivity/capacity studies where available to advise on the suitability of a selected site (while noting that they cannot be relied on in a regulatory capacity, and should only be used as a guide).

Indirect impacts on the landscape character of the surrounding area and setting of NT properties

Effects on the character and quality of the surrounding landscape and of the value provided to NT properties and their setting. Analysis to be based on desk study, baseline assessment of the surrounding landscape, field study and photography.

Consideration of the significance of NT properties in proximity to the site and the contribution of surrounding landscape character to significance and vice versa.

Use existing documents including Statement of Significance, Management Plans and other landscape evidence including Landscape Character Assessment.

Direct impacts on views, daytime and night-time

Effects on views, considering size/scale, geographical extent, and duration of the effect. Analysis to be based on desk study, Zones of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV), wirelines and photomontages of agreed viewpoints, field study and photography.

Potential receptors to assess include; visitors/tourists to NT properties including those travelling on routes to/from NT properties, residential receptors living within NT properties, recreational receptors on long distance walking or cycling routes within or in proximity to NT properties. For some properties receptors may also include those people using other buildings or businesses on NT land.

Night-time visualisations may be provided in certain circumstances, for example in proximity to areas of dark night skies or where otherwise requested by the NT. Any potential lighting schemes should seek to minimise visual effects on nearby receptors.

Cumulative impacts of one wind energy development in combination with other existing or proposed wind energy developments

Cumulative effects on views, considering size/scale, geographical extent, and duration of the effect. Analysis to be based on CZTV, wirelines and photomontages of agreed viewpoints, field study and photography.

Capacity of the landscape to absorb new wind farm development.

Direct landscape impacts on the landscape

The initial site selection and layout should consider the capacity of the landscape to absorb wind farm development, taking into account landscape scale and character. Selected sites should carefully consider proximity to sensitive landscapes, including from NT properties and settlements. Consideration should be given to the significance of the property including key views and vistas, and the contribution of the setting to significance, as outlined in NT documents.

Minimise the extent of disturbance to the ground and removal of existing vegetation. A landscape management plan should be developed jointly with an established landscape professional (and should be agreed upon with consultees, including NT where relevant). The management plan should be in effect for the duration of the development.

Undertake landscape restoration works at the end of the construction period, ensuring any new planting or interventions are in character with the site and surrounding context, and enhance (or do not detract) from the significance of the property, in accordance with NT principles and associated management plans.

Indirect impacts on the landscape character of the surrounding area and setting of NT properties

Ensure careful design of turbine layout, considering impacts on views within, and in proximity to, the surrounding area and to the setting of NT properties.

Micrositing of turbines to avoid visibility of turbines within key views.

Choice of appropriate turbine height, considering the scale and character of the surrounding landscape. Turbines should not appear overwhelming within the landscape.

Direct impacts on views, daytime and night-time

Ensure careful design of turbine layout, minimising impact on views to and from NT properties, and considering scale within the landscape.

Micrositing of turbines to avoid key views.

Achieve as consistent a height and spacing as feasible (in light of other constraints), to achieve a well-balanced composition overall.

Ensure no turbine is too dominant or overwhelming in the main view from a property, such that it could result in unacceptable living conditions.

Design tracks, to utilise existing tracks where possible and keep them away from highly visible slopes where possible.

Sensitively design borrow pits to minimise visibility.

Incorporate off-site screen planting in key locations, using species appropriate for the context and in-line with NT guidance. Ensure mitigation planting does not change/interrupt important views.

Use appropriate colour coating for tower, nacelle and turbine blades.

Nacelle lights to be controlled by visibility sensors in order to reduce the intensity of the lights to approximately 10% of the minimum peak intensity in times of clear meteorological conditions (where visibility exceeds 5 km), which will substantially reduce the perceptibility of the proposed nacelle lights.

Follow an agreed ‘Construction Method Statement’ and ‘Construction Environmental Management Plan’.

Cumulative impacts of one wind energy development in combination with other existing or proposed wind energy developments

Ensure careful design of turbine layout, considering stacking effects in combination with other existing or proposed windfarms.

Consider scale and number of turbines in relation to other existing schemes.

All impacts

For non – EIA development:

Appraisal of impact of proposal on landscape character and visual amenity.

For EIA developments:

LVIA chapter within Environmental Statement as set out in the Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment Third Edition (GLVIA3). Assessment of impacts on visual receptors to be agreed in consultation with NT. Key viewpoints to be agreed with Council, Natural England and Trust (where appropriate) at EIA Scoping stage.

Residential Visual Amenity Assessment (RVAA) – Assessment of impact from residential properties within 2km of development (to establish if turbines breach ‘residential visual amenity threshold’).

Night-time lighting assessment where necessary (in addition to LVIA). Night time lighting to consider effect on overall character (e.g. in remote landscapes, dark sky reserves) as well as visual receptors.

Cumulative Landscape and Visual Amenity Assessment – assessment of additional cumulative effects that would arise when adding the Development to a baseline containing consented but unbuilt wind farms, and those that are the subject of a valid planning application within the 33 km search area (these equate to ‘Tier 1’ projects as set out in the Planning Inspectorate Advice Note 17).

Site selection and design chapter within Environmental Statement. Setting out the rationale behind the site selection, design objectives, the design evolution in response to different sensitivities and constraints, and any potential mitigation strategies.

‘Construction Method Statement’ and ‘Construction Environmental Management Plan’ (CEMP) which should include arrangements for implementation of various aspects of the works. The statement should also set out restoration of landscape earthworks, soils and surface vegetation e.g. alongside tracks, around turbine bases, around borrow pits, and along cable routes once the construction phase is complete.

All impacts

Monitoring by Environmental Clerk of Works (ECoW) or other relevant landscape professionals to ensure restoration efforts are implemented as outlined in the CEMP. A landscape management plan should be agreed upon post-consent, providing further detail and guidance for the implementation and guidance of the CEMP. The landscape management plan should be in effect for the duration of the development, and appropriate monitoring is to be expected throughout along with any necessary remedial/additional works which will be identified and implemented.

Fencing to be maintained and in character with the surrounds. Signage to be clear and defined, particularly around any recreational assets and paths to be maintained. Any vegetation that is planted as part of the CEMP or other landscape management plan is to be monitored for health, and replaced where necessary.

Design Commission for Wales (2014) Designing Wind Farms in Wales.

The Planning Inspectorate (2019) Advice Note 17: Cumulative Effects Assessment Relevant to Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects.

Landscape Institute and the Institute of Environmental Assessment (2013) Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment. 3rd Edition.

Landscape Institute (2023) Notes and Clarifications on aspects of the 3rd Edition Guidelines on Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (GLVIA3).

Landscape Institute (2019) Residential Visual Amenity Assessment (RVAA) Technical Guidance Note 2/19.

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

Natural Resources Wales (undated) Using LANDMAP in Landscape and Visual Impact Assessments GN46.

NatureScot (2021) Assessing the cumulative landscape and visual impact of onshore wind energy developments.

Scottish Natural Heritage (2017) (now NatureScot) Siting and Designing Windfarms in the Landscape. Version 3a.

Scottish Natural Heritage (2017) Visual Representation of Wind Farms Guidance. Version 2.2.

Northern Ireland Environment Agency (2010) Wind Energy Development in Northern Ireland’s Landscapes.

Direct impact of wind farm construction and connection routes on loss and displacement of ecological receptors

Direct impact of wind farm construction and connection routes on loss/displacement of ecological receptors (e.g. habitat loss such as blanket bog and raised bog (peat) and/or loss of notable or protected plant or animal species, disturbance, fragmentation of habitat, foraging areas).

Indirect impacts of wind farm construction and connection routes on ecological receptors

Indirect impacts of wind farm construction and connection routes on ecological receptors (e.g. disturbance of habitats/species from impact of altered hydrological regime on wetland habitats etc). Peat: wind farm developments can have potential impact both on the ecology of peatland areas and the vital role they play in carbon storage. Given the inherent requirement for windy sites, wind farms (as opposed to individual wind turbines) are often proposed on, or in proximity to upland areas which may support habitats of national, European and international importance, including bogs, fens and heaths.‘Active’ blanket bog and ‘active’ raised bog are listed as ‘Priority Habitats’ under Annex 1 of the Habitats Regulations 1994, as habitats in danger of disappearance for which the European Union has particular responsibility regarding conservation. Some fen habitats are also in Annex 1 of the Habitats Directive, and all fen habitats and bog habitats are priority habitats in the UK BAP.

Direct and indirect impacts on ecological receptors

Direct and indirect impact of wind farm operation on ecological receptors e.g. disturbance of habitats and/ or species, bat collision.

Opportunities for habitat management and enhancement

Opportunities for habitat management and enhancement, including biodiversity net gain (BNG).

Direct impact of wind farm construction and connection routes on loss and displacement of ecological receptors

Extended Phase 1 (or UK Habitat Classification System) Habitat Survey.

National Vegetation Classification (NVC) survey (of habitats listed on Annex 1 of the EC Habitats Directive and UK Biodiversity Action Plan (UKBAP) Priority Habitats), accompanied by supporting vegetation quadrat information.
Records of any rare and scarce plant species.

Ecological Impact Assessment (EcIA): Initially, this can take the form of a Preliminary Ecological Appraisal (PEA). This is suitable for planning submission if no important ecological features/protected species are present. Where important features or protected species are present and may be impacted, then an Ecological Impact Assessment (EcIA) is required – this can be a separate assessment document, or a revised PEA with additional information of protected species survey methodology and results.

Protected Species surveys (where recommended in PEA). These can include: bats (activity surveys and emergence surveys – see operational impacts below); badger; otter; water vole; red squirrel; pine marten; reptiles; great crested newt; hazel dormouse; invertebrates; white clawed crayfish).

European Protected Species License may be required to carry out work that may affect European protected species.

Habitat Regulations Assessment (HRA) of the network of European Sites (Special Protection Areas (SPAs), Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) and international sites (RAMSARs). Screening report may be required where SPA, SAC or Ramsar sites are within local area and their features may be impacted. Sites within 10km should be screened: sites up to 20km may also be impacted e.g. if watercourse affected downstream, or if bats are an important SAC feature and their commuting/foraging areas may include the site. If Screening shows that a ‘likely significant effect’ cannot be excluded (in the absence of mitigation), then an Appropriate Assessment (AA) is required. Note: ecological mitigation cannot be taken into account at Screening stage – mitigation is addressed at AA stage.

Indirect impacts of wind farm construction and connection routes on ecological receptors

Peat Survey (if appropriate).

Protected species surveys listed above would also address indirect effects, e.g. any pollution impacts to downstream watercourses supporting otter and water vole.

Direct and indirect impacts on ecological receptors

The habitat and protected species surveys, ecological assessment and HRA listed above for wind farm construction would also address operation. In terms of operation, main non-avian impact would relate to bats. To ensure that bats are protected by minimising the risk of collision, an assessment of impact at a site requires a detailed appraisal of:

The level of activity of all bat species recorded at the site assessed both spatially and temporally.
The risk of turbine-related mortality for all bat species recorded at the site during bat activity surveys.
The effect on the species’ population status if predicted impacts are not mitigated.

Opportunities for habitat management and enhancement

The PEA and EcIA should identify opportunities for habitat management and enhancement. These would be included in a Habitat Management Plan. From November 2023, a Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG) assessment will become mandatory in England and Northern Ireland – requiring almost all developments to deliver at least a 10% biodiversity net gain. In order to make the BNG calculation, a habitat condition assessment is required. This can be undertaken when the initial Phase 1 Habitat Survey (or UK Habitat survey) is undertaken measuring the extent of each habitat and assessing its condition status. In Wales, there is currently no BNG 10% target, however Welsh government policy encourages a Net Biodiversity Benefit (NBB) built around Ecosystem Resilience and a DECCA approach (diversity; extent; condition; connectivity; adaptability). Therefore, in Wales, early surveys and research should establish the baseline state of biodiversity and ecosystem resilience on site and in the local context, taking into account the site’s contribution to resilient ecological networks through its diversity, extent, connectivity and condition and the provision of ecosystem services and all development must aim to deliver a net benefit for biodiversity (and ecosystem resilience) from the baseline state (proportionate to the scale and nature of the development proposed). A consultation on changing the Welsh approach has just ended (31.05.23).

Direct impact of wind farm construction and connection routes on loss and displacement of ecological receptors

Micro-siting of wind farm features away from sensitive habitats/species using buffer protection zones as necessary. Review the Nature Scot guidance on ‘Bats and Onshore Wind Turbines – survey, assessment and mitigation’ (also adopted by Welsh government). It is recommended that a distance of 50m between turbine blade tip and nearest woodland (or other key habitat features such as wetlands etc.) is adequate mitigation in most, lower risk situations. Exceptionally, larger buffers may be appropriate, e.g. near major swarming and hibernation sites. The longevity of wind farms should also be taken into account and the maximum growth, or management, of woodland and other relevant habitat features considered in their planning. A 50m buffer distance should be applied as a basic standard mitigation measure for all bat species occurring at proposed wind farms, including all key-holed sites, which may present an increased risk of bat collisions. In practice, the 50m buffer should be applied universally, irrespective of whether curtailment is also considered necessary. Some higher risk species, notably the high-flying ones such as noctules and Leisler’s bats frequently fly in open areas however and this form of mitigation is unlikely to be effective for these. species specific mitigation measures e.g. retention of trees and buildings with bat roosts, retention of bat foraging and commuting corridors; siting development at least 30m from active badger setts; siting development away from ponds and watercourses that may support otter (100-200m buffer for breeding dens; 30m for non breeding holts or shelters) or water vole (10m zone around active burrows) and ensuring best practice pollution control measures; siting development away from great crested newt ponds or associated terrestrial habitat; ensuring sufficient reptile habitat on site to allow habitat manipulation under ecological supervision. Red squirrel, pine marten and hazel dormouse usually unaffected as turbines located in open areas away from woodland and trees, although access routes and compounds may affect trees/woodland.

Restoration of habitat edges adjacent to infrastructure, including peat (see below).

Containing works to minimise disturbance footprint.

Turbines can be sited to avoid impact to great crested newt ponds and associated terrestrial habitat. Exclusion fencing and translocation programme at construction areas may be required in certain situations for great crested newts and reptiles if adjacent suitable habitat is limited. However, where suitable contiguous habitat for reptiles and amphibians is widespread in the area, pre-construction mitigation can be included in a Construction Environment Management Plan (CEMP), for herptiles this is termed ‘habitat manipulation under ecological supervision’ where vegetation is cut down in stages over 24 hours to allow animals to escape into adjacent habitat. Sufficient habitat usually exists for reptiles on wind farm sites so that any impact on the population is usually negligible.

Species specific mitigation measures can be included in a CEMP (e.g. cover excavation works or provide escape ramps for mammals, implementation of speed limits onsite, timing of works to avoid sensitive species periods, avoid in-stream works during fish spawning season etc).

Indirect impacts of wind farm construction and connection routes on ecological receptors

Where peat-related habitats have been identified, best practice suggests
that efforts should be made to locate wind farm components (turbines, tracks, compounds etc) outside of peatland habitats where possible. Peat restoration: Where peat is excavated to construct wind turbines, a Peat Restoration or Management Plan can be produced so that excavated peat can be stored successfully (and watered) and used to restore peat habitat on site, e.g. tying in edges of exposed peat. A peat management plan can be implemented to successfully better manage existing peat on site e.g. through implementation of appropriate cattle grazing schemes and diversion of watercourses to re-wet areas.

Protect important peatland and ensure appropriate planting proposals where there is potential for any impact.

Protect water quality and quantity (e.g. prevention of pollution and sedimentation).

Maintain hydrological regimes.

Protect habitats used for foraging and shelter by fauna.

Direct and indirect impacts on ecological receptors

Operational impact can be mitigated by Ecological Mitigation and Habitat Management Plans, supplemented by Monitoring. Habitat Management Plans can better manage valuable habitats on site that perhaps previously were not subject to ecological management, e.g. though beneficial grazing regimes.

Opportunities for habitat management and enhancement

Habitat Management Plan and Biodiversity Net Gain assessment: Prepare habitat management plan to identify the opportunities for habitat enhancement and biodiversity net gain either on or off site. As above, Habitat Management Plans (HMPs) can better manage valuable habitats on site that perhaps previously were not subject to ecological management, e.g. through beneficial grazing regimes. HMPs can set out how new habitats will be created and how existing habitats will be enhanced in order to meet BNG targets (England and Northern Ireland) and NBB (Wales).

All impacts

For non EIA development:

Preliminary Ecological Appraisal.

For EIA development:

Ecological Impact Assessment (EcIA) in Ecology Chapter of Environmental Statement.

EcIA should contain details of Protected Species and Habitat/NVC/Peat Surveys where relevant.

Biodiversity Net Gain assessment note (England) or Net Biodiversity Benefit assessment (Wales).

Most developments should submit an Ecological Mitigation Plan and/or Habitat Management Plan, although these are often conditioned by the LPA.

Ecological Monitoring Programme.

Opportunities for habitat management and enhancement

Some wind farm planning consents will require monitoring of impacts on birds to enable the LPA/NE/NRW and others to keep a track of the overall impact on birds at a national level. Effective monitoring may require both pre-construction monitoring (to provide a baseline) and a programme of post-construction monitoring, to identify and quantify the impacts.

All other impacts

Post-construction monitoring for bats is normally only required at developments where the mitigation involves turbine curtailment. It should aim to assess changes in bat activity patterns and the efficacy of mitigation to inform any changes to curtailment. Monitoring should take place for at least 3 years after construction, but the effects of habitat modification and off-site enhancements on bat activity may require monitoring over a longer period.

Monitoring may also be required for habitats e.g. heathland or bog communities, habitat restoration schemes, peat restoration (may require dipwell monitoring).

Monitoring works through an Environmental Clerk of Works (ECoW).

Welsh Government (2009) WAG’s Technical Advice Note 5: Nature Conservation and Planning.

RSPB, WWF, English Nature and BWEA (2001) Wind Farm Development and Nature Conservation.

Nature Scot (undated) Advising on carbon-rich soils, deep peat and priority peatland habitat in development management.

CIEEM (2018) Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the UK and Ireland.

CIEEM (2018) Guidelines for Preliminary Ecological Appraisal.

UK Habitat Classification System.

Nature Scot (2021) Bats and onshore wind turbines: survey, assessment and mitigation.

DEFRA (2023) Collection of Documents regarding Biodiversity Net Gain in England.

CIEEM (2022) Welsh Government’s Approach to Net Benefits for Biodiversity and the DECCA Framework in the Terrestrial Planning System.

Welsh Government (2023) Targeted policy changes to Planning Policy Wales on net benefit biodiversity and ecosystem resilience.

Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs (2023) Priority Habitat Guides.

Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs (2023) Habitat and Species Action Plans.

For Peat Mitigation – Rural Development Committee (2010) Future of the Uplands report

Disturbance to breeding birds

Disturbance to breeding birds due to construction activity

Displacement

Direct or indirect habitat loss due to wind farm operation – if birds avoid the wind farm and its surrounding area due to turbine construction and operation. Displacement may also include barrier effects in which birds are deterred from using normal routes to feeding or roosting grounds.

Collision risk

Birds colliding with the turbine blades during operation.

All impacts

Distribution and Abundance Bird Surveys (surveys to record numbers and distribution of breeding, wintering and migrant birds using the site) and Vantage Point (VP) Surveys (a series of watches from a fixed location to quantify the flight activity of birds at a proposed development site, which provides data to estimate the collision risk).

Target species surveys (if appropriate: e.g. raptors; nightjar, black grouse).

Disturbance to breeding birds

Undertake vegetation and ground clearance outside the breeding season (March-August) in combination with habitat re-creation elsewhere within the development site.

Displacement

Undertake habitat re-creation elsewhere within the development site.

Collison risk

Microsite turbines to avoid areas of high flight activity.

All impacts

For non EIA development:

Preliminary Ornithological Appraisal.

For EIA development:

Ornithological Impact Assessment – set out in Ornithology Chapter in Environmental Statement – to contain details of bird survey methodology, surveyors and results and collision risk modelling. The Environmental Statement should set out the consequences for the integrity of the species population in terms of its size, trend, distribution (where known) and the area of suitable habitat.

The assessment should identify whether the impact is likely to adversely affect the conservation status of the species, by preventing a recovering species from reaching favourable conservation status, at a national or international level; or changing a species’ status from favourable to unfavourable; or for a species that is already in decline, the assessment should focus on whether the proposal would undermine the potential for halting its decline and allowing it to recover to favourable conservation status. A HRA will be required by developments that may impact an SPA.

All impacts

Monitor works during breeding season by Environmental Clerk of Works (ECoW).

Nature Scot (March 2017 Version 2) Wind Farm Impacts on Birds. (Also adopted for Wales.)

Scottish Natural Heritage (2009) Guidance on Methods for Monitoring Bird Populations at Onshore Wind Farms.

DCLG (2005) Planning Policy Statement 9 Biodiversity and Geological Conservation.

EC Council Directive on the Conservation of Wild Birds (Directive 79/409/EEC).

Scottish Natural Heritage (2005) Survey Methods for Assessing the Impacts of Onshore Wind farms on Bird Communities.

Langston R.H.W and Pullan J.D. (2003) Wind farms and Birds: An analysis of the effects of wind farms on birds, and guidance on environmental assessment criteria and site selection issues.

BirdLife International on behalf of the Berne Convention.

Physical impacts (loss or truncation)

Physical impacts (loss or truncation) to above-ground heritage assets (buildings, landscape components) and buried heritage assets (archaeological deposits and features, including undiscovered archaeology and paleoenvironmental remains).

Harm to the significance of assets arising from change in their setting

Harm (negative impact) to the significance of assets arising from change in their setting (e.g. interruption of visual, functional, symbolic or historic relationships; effects as a consequence of noise, vibration).

NB. Effects as a consequence of setting change are direct, as they directly affect the heritage significance of the asset.

Harm to historic landscape character

Harm to historic landscape character

All impacts

Understanding of significance of assets potentially affected is vital prior to determining impacts/potential impacts. Historic environment desk-based assessment (HEA), in line with associated CIfA Standard and Guidance, informing ES chapter or as a standalone supporting document for the application (non-EIA cases) or other appropriate document (e.g. in Wales a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) following associated Cadw guidance is to be produced in the scenario that the application directly affects (i.e. is in) a historic asset).

HEA/HIA to include walkover survey of construction footprint and micrositing allowance, and prospection for assets potentially affected within the redline boundary. Designated assets to be assessed for sensitivity to the proposed change within the ZTV, along with non-designated assets of high importance. The potential for views of the development in combination with assets also need to be considered with the assistance of the ZTV.
Depending on the nature and location of the site, local authority archaeologists may require pre-consent evaluation field work (non-intrusive such as geophysical survey or intrusive trial trenches) to fully understand significance of assets subject to potential direct physical effects, fulfil information requirements for determination and provide the basis for an appropriate mitigation strategy (including redesign of proposals where assets are to be preserved in situ). This work is to be undertaken in line with relevant guidance (e.g. CIfA, HE).

Assessment methodology is to be in line with 2021 ‘Principles of Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment in the UK’, as industry-standard guidance developed and promoted by the relevant professional institutes for the historic environment and EIS. It is to meet relevant Historic England or Cadw guidance. Assessment of heritage significance should be transparently articulated (i.e. in line with Historic England or Cadw ‘Conservation Principles’, or equivalent heritage values set out in national planning polices (e.g. NPPF)). The assessment is to use a transparent articulation of impacts and effects, making it clear what effects are significant effects in EIA terms and why, to enable consistent judgement across topics. In England, these are to be expressed in terms of whether and what level of harm arises so the tests in NPPF can be applied by the decision maker.

Clear evidence of the design process and solutions explored to avoid/minimise effects are to be provided in the ES and DAS.

All impacts

Design wind farm (turbines, tracks, substation location(s), construction compounds, lay-down space, borrow-pits and ancillary off-site construction works (e.g. access improvements) to avoid physical impacts on identified heritage assets. Design wind farm layout to avoid impacts and preserve features in situ wherever possible. Layout is to be informed by the use of ZTVs and appropriate visualisations (wireframes, and photomontages for the final ES) to enable design to minimise effects to heritage assets arising from change in their setting.

Where assessment suggests that archaeological potential is high, mitigation strategy is to be informed by field evaluation – geophysical survey (where ground conditions allow and such survey is warranted by the level of likely archaeological potential) and/or trial trenching, in line with an approved WSI.

Where physical impacts to non-designated assets cannot be avoided, preservation by record can be acceptable, but must be undertaken in line with a Written Scheme of Investigation (WSI), approved by the LPA archaeological adviser, and by appropriately qualified and accredited archaeological professionals. The programme of fieldwork is to be secured by condition, and the necessary funding from the developer for analysis of excavation outcomes, analysis of environmental samples, finds etc., deposition of archive material and processed finds, and publication in a periodical commensurate with the significance of the evidence recovered, must be secured by legal agreement.

Where significant archaeological, built heritage or historic landscape complexities are involved in the delivery of the project, the Applicant is to undertake to provide an Archaeological Clerk of Works (ACoW) or Historic Environment Clerk of Works to monitor ground-breaking work in sensitive areas, advise on mitigation requirements and deal effectively with any previously unrecognised assets identified during construction.
(NB. Physical effects to scheduled monuments would require separate Scheduled Monument Consent. This is very unlikely to be granted for this type of project, as direct physical effects to a scheduled monument would generally be considered a ‘showstopper’ and lead to a scheme redesign to avoid such an effect.)

Mitigation generally is not possible for effects due to setting change, beyond the embedded mitigation of the design process. Suggestions of screening etc. generally also harmful and could be worse than the scheme itself.

All impacts

For non EIA development:

Input on effects to historic assets prepared by historic environment specialist in Design and Access Statement.

Appropriate historic environment reports explaining baseline and effects to assets (e.g. HEA (incl. setting assessment), geophysical survey report, trial trenching report, geoarchaeological assessment, historic buildings assessment, HIA, WSI).

For EIA development:

– Input on effects to historic assets prepared by historic environment specialist in Design and Access Statement.

– ES Historic Environment chapter.

– Appropriate supporting technical appendices (e.g. HEA (incl. setting assessment), geophysical survey report, trial trenching report, geoarchaeological assessment, historic buildings assessment, HIA, WSI).

All impacts

Monitoring by relevant curatorial authority (e.g. LPA archaeological advisor, conservation officer; HE/Cadw officer, HED ) to ensure agreed mitigation works are being undertaken in line with the approved WSI and archaeological excavation license if required (for works in Northern Ireland). This process may take several years where archaeological investigation is required as any specialist analyses and post-excavation works must be concluded before reporting can be completed and published, at which point the monitor certify that they have been completed in line with the WSI.

Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA) (2020) Standard and Guidance for historic environment desk-based assessment.

IEMA, IHBC & CIfA (2021) Principles of Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment in the UK.

CIfA (2020) Standard and guidance for archaeological geophysical survey.

CIfA (2020) Standard and guidance for archaeological field evaluation.

Historic England (2015) Managing Significance in Decision-Taking in the Historic Environment: Good Practice Advice in Planning Note 2.

Historic England (2021) Commercial Renewable Energy Development and the Historic Environment in Historic England Advice Note 15.

Historic England (2017) The Setting of Heritage Assets: Historic Environment: Good Practice Advice in Planning Note 3.

Historic England (2019) Statements of Heritage Significance: Analysing Significance in Heritage Assets Historic England Advice Note 12.

Cadw (2017) Heritage Impact Assessment in Wales.

Cadw, Countryside Council for Wales & ICOMOS (2007) Guide to Good Practice on Using the Register of Landscapes of Historic Interest in Wales in the Planning and Development Process Second Edition.

Cadw (2017) Setting of Historic Assets in Wales.

Welsh Government (2017) Technical Advice Note 24: The Historic Environment.

Department for Communities (2018) Guidance on Setting and the Historic Environment for Northern Ireland

Department for Communities (2019) Guidance on making changes to Listed Buildings: Making a better application for listed building consent for Northern Ireland

Department for Infrastructure (2019) Best Practice Guidance to PPS 23 ‘Assessing Enabling Development for the Conservation of Significant Places

Department for Infrastructure (2019) Wind Energy Development in Northern Ireland Landscapes SPG

Department of the Environment (2009) Best Practice Guidance to Planning Policy Statement 18 ‘Renewable Energy’

Shadow flicker at houses within close proximity to wind turbines. This is only likely to occur in a building located within a distance of ten times the rotor diameter of a wind turbine and within 130 degrees either side of north.

Shadow Flicker Assessment in accordance with guidance and using the Resoft Windfarm Shadow Flicker Module. The module determines the theoretical occurrence of shadow flicker with certain parameters. This model calculates the number of days per year, maximum hours per day giving a total number of hours per year that assessed properties can be expected to experience the effects of shadow flicker. The model will also determine which turbines will be the source of shadow flicker effects and at which time of day.

Careful site design (location) to avoid creation of flicker (e.g. to South of buildings given dominant south-westerly winds).

Curtailment/ shutdown turbines during periods of flicker.

Screen shadow flicker impacts by using blinds (for the windows within the houses) or planting (i.e. trees or hedges).

A shadow flicker assessment is required if an impact is likely to occur. For EIA development, this would be set out in the Environmental Statement.

Shadow flicker is not normally monitored post consent unless issues arise.

American Clean Power (2021) Wind Turbines and Shadow Flicker: Facts and Proven Mitigation Strategies.

Department of Energy and Climate Change (2011) Update of UK Shadow Flicker Evidence Base.

BWEA (1991) A Case of Shadow Flicker/Flashing: Assessment and Solution.

Northern Ireland Department for the Environment (2009) Best Practice Guidance to PPS18: Renewable Energy.

Risk to local watercourses, water bodies, groundwater, private and public water supplies

Risk to local watercourses/ water bodies/ groundwater/ private and public water supplies (e.g. from pollution, erosion, sedimentation, impediments to flow, reduction of woodland).

Potential flood risk posed by development

Potential flood risk posed by development by being closer than 50m from any watercourses.

Increase in surface water runoff

Increase in surface water runoff as a result of development footprint (mainly due to the landforms changing and there being less permeable surfaces in the Site).

All impacts

The following desk and field surveys may be required:

Review of geology, hydrogeology and soil of the site and sub-catchment.

Identification of designated and protected areas within the drainage pathways of site.

Identification of watercourses within site and within a 300m radius of site, in addition to existing and potential watercourse crossings, artificial and/or natural drainage pathways.

Review of quality and condition of the watercourses within site and sub-catchments.

Review of flow characteristics of the catchments draining to/from site, as any reduction in baseflows or a change in the magnitude and frequency of flood peaks in the watercourses as a result of the development can be important issues with regards to flood risk, water supplies and aquatic ecology.

Identification of location and nature of public and PWS abstractions within site and sub-catchments, recognised by local authorities and statutory bodies.

Peat survey (where appropriate) to characterise the depth and variability of peat deposits across site.

Risk to local watercourses, water bodies, groundwater, private and public water supplies

A CEMP (Construction Environmental Management Plan) should be put in place to minimise potential impacts.

Water quality and flow monitoring prior to development to provide a qualitative and quantitative baseline.

Pre-construction ground investigation work should also be taken to inform the detailed foundation and infrastructure design.

Targeted monitoring and assessment of groundwater levels and flows beneath the site. This will be a key part of the design of the infrastructure and the selection of materials for use during the construction process.

Implement good pollution prevention practices based on Natural Resources Wales’ guidelines and CIRIA documents.

Potential flood risk posed by development

Minimise area of impermeable surface.

Reinstate vegetation where possible.

Provide storage and attenuation using Sustainable Drainage techniques (SuDs). This should prevent the receiving water environment being adversely affected by drainage and runoff from the proposed development site.

Use appropriate culverts and drains to match existing hydrological regimes.

Construction should take place during low flow times.

Increase in surface water runoff

Incorporate attenuation ponds into the scheme design in line with Sustainable Drainage techniques (SuDs).

All impacts

For EIA development:

A Geology, Hydrology and Hydrogeology Chapter will be required in the Environmental Statement.

Additional assessments that may be required to inform the Chapter include:

– Flood Consequences Assessment.
– Watercourse Crossing Assessment.
– Private Water Supply Assessment.
– Outline Drainage Strategy.
– Outline Pollution Prevention Management Plan.
– Groundwater Dependent Terrestrial Ecosystem Assessment.
– Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP).
– Water Framework Directive Assessment.
– Ground Water Dependent Terrestrial Ecosystem Assessment.
– Habitat Management Plan (See ecology section).

All impacts

There may be a need for water quality monitoring and groundwater monitoring post consent, with surveys and site assessments to make sure the conditions do not change too much over the lifetime of the project.

If a diversion or replacement of a PWS (public water supply) or pipework is required ongoing monitoring will be needed to ensure suitable continuation and quality of supply.

Northern Ireland Environment Agency (2015) Wind farms and groundwater impacts A guide to EIA and Planning considerations.

HM Government (2021) Understanding effective flood and coastal erosion risk governance in England and Wales.

ADAS (1993) The Design of Field Drainage Pipe Systems, Report No.345.

Centre for Ecology and Hydrology (2006) Flood Estimation Handbook CD-ROM V2.0.

Welsh Government (2021) Technical Advice Note 15: Development, Flood Risk and Coastal Erosion.

CIRIA (2002) Control of Water Pollution from Construction Sites – Guide to Good Practice on Site.

Welsh Government (2004, updated 2021) Technical Advice Note (TAN) 15 ‘Development and Flood Risk’.

CIRIA (2015) The Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) Manual C753.

Construction Industry Research and Information Association (CIRIA) (2001) C532: ‘Control of Water Pollution from Construction Sites – Guidance for Consultants and Contractors’.

Welsh Government (2019) SuDS Statutory Guidance.

Welsh Government (2018) Statutory standards for sustainable drainage systems – designing, constructing, operating and maintaining surface water drainage systems.

Environment Agency (2017) Protect Groundwater and Prevent Groundwater Pollution.

Environment Agency (2017) Groundwater Protection Technical Guidance.

Guidance for Pollution Prevention (covers the whole of the UK).

Peat landslide risk

Peat landslide risk.

Loss of peat and/ or compaction and contamination effects

Loss of peat and/ or compaction and contamination effects.

Peat landslide risk

Peat slide survey will need to be undertaken to understand the risk of this hazard.

Loss of peat and/ or compaction and contamination effects

Peat depth surveys will be needed to understand the volume of peat on site. Deep peat has been classified as anything greater than 50 cm by Welsh Government – although this is under review and NRW are due to publish further guidance. In England deep peat is classified as anything greater than 40 cm. Deep peat should generally be avoided.

All impacts

Avoid deep peat and areas of peat landslide risk.

If peat can be, it should be reused/ reinstated to prevent the loss of the habitat. Peat Management Plan should be prepared. (further information above under Ecology section)

A CEMP (Construction Environmental Management Plan) should be put in place to minimise potential impacts.

All impacts

For EIA development:

Assessment of impacts on peat in Environmental Statement. May also require:

-Peat Landslide Hazard and Risk Assessment (PHLRA).
-Outline Peat Management Plan (PMP).

All impacts

Monitoring may be required on site after the construction phase, particularly in relation to peat reinstatement. This may be monitored by the Environmental Clerk of Works (ECoW).

Natural Resource Wales (2022) Woodlands and Peat.

Forestry Commission (2022) New trees and peat guidance.

CCW (2010) Assessing the impact of windfarm developments on peatlands in Wales.

Increase in noise levels at nearby sensitive receptors during construction and decommissioning

Increase in noise levels at nearby sensitive receptors during construction and decommissioning (e.g. from construction/decommissioning activity – construction of access tracks, piling etc.) and from construction traffic on the roads.

Increase in noise levels at nearby sensitive receptors during operation

Increase in noise levels at sensitive receptors during operation (e.g. from aerodynamic noise of wind turbine blades): During operation, wind farms have the potential to create noise effects through both aerodynamic noise and mechanical noise. Aerodynamic noise is caused by the interaction of the turbine blades with the air. Mechanically generated noise is caused by the operation of internal components, such as, the gearbox and generator, which are housed within the nacelle of the turbine. However, the level of mechanical noise radiated from current technology wind turbines is generally engineered to a low level.

All impacts

An assessment of construction noise should be undertaken in accordance with British Standard (BS 5228-1) which provides guidance on a range of considerations relating to construction noise including the legislative framework, general control measures, example methods for estimating construction noise levels and example criteria which may be considered when assessing the significance of any effects. Similarly, part 2 (BS 5228-2) provides general guidance on legislation, prediction, control and assessment criteria for construction vibration.

Operational noise should be assessed in accordance with ETSU-R-97. Good practice in the application of the ETSU-R-97 methodology is set out in Institute of Acoustics Good Practice Guide to the Application of ETSU-R-97 (IOA GPG). This includes guidance on the assessment of cumulative operational noise impacts from wind farms.

Increase in noise levels at nearby sensitive receptors during construction and decommissioning

Restrict working hours during construction/decommissioning.

Adopt good practice measures for reducing noise in line with British Standards guidance, such as blade modifications which reduce noise effects.

Also practice good practice management measures relating to control of construction noise and vibration.

Increase in noise levels at nearby sensitive receptors during operation

Ensure chosen wind farm layout and predicted operational noise levels fall within established limits of ETSU-R-97.

Operate turbines in noise curtailment mode where necessary if thresholds are exceeded.

All impacts

For EIA development:

A noise and vibration chapter would be included within an ES and set out if the development accords with the relevance guidance.

For Non EIA development:

A Noise Technical Report would typically be prepared.

All impacts

It is likely that any proposed development that is granted planning permission will have noise conditions attached to the consent. Operational noise monitoring is required if there are any complaints received by the operator directly or the relevant local planning authority.

Energy Technology Support Unit’s The Assessment and Rating of Noise from Wind farms – ETSU-R-97 (1996).

The British Standards (2014) Code of practice for noise and vibration control on construction and Open Sites, Part 1 Noise and Part 2 Vibration.

BWEA (2005) Low Frequency Noise and Wind Turbines.

IOA (2013) The IOA Good Practice Guide (IOA GPG).

British Standard (BS) 5228 (2014).

British Standards (BS) 4142 (2019).

Calculation of Road Traffic Noise (CRTN) (1988).

Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) (2020).

A Good Practice Guide to the Application of ETSU-R-97 for the Assessment and Rating of Wind Turbine Noise (May 2013).

Onsite dust emission

Occurrence of onsite dust emissions during construction of the proposed development.

Emissions from constriction and operation vehicles

Emissions from construction and operation vehicles, travelling to, from and around the site.

All impacts

Air Quality Assessment (if necessary) and inclusion of air quality matters in the Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) (if necessary).

Air Quality is often scoped out of EIA developments as significant environmental effects are unlikely to occur.

Onsite dust emission

Implement best practice dust mitigation measures (e.g. Ensuring appropriate transport of materials (i.e. with vehicle loads enclosed), enclosure of stockpiles, restriction of vehicle speeds on site, use of wheel wash facilities etc.).

Emissions from constriction and operation vehicles

Switch off engines when not in use.

Minimise delivery movements.

Utilise electric vehicles where possible.

All impacts

For EIA development: For wind farm developments this is usually scoped out as it does not pose significant risks/ impacts.

All impacts

Not typically required.

The Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015

The majority of Local Planning Authorities throughout the UK have produced guidance on CEMPs.

Driver delay on local road network during construction

Driver delay on local road network during construction, especially from abnormal loads.

Increased vehicle movements on local roads during construction

Increased vehicle movements on local roads during construction due to construction workers travelling in and out of site.

Accidents and safety on local roads

Accidents and safety on local roads during construction.

All impacts

Transport and Traffic Impact Assessment – assessing the effect of construction traffic on the local road network.

Abnormal Local Assessment – to identify the route for transporting the turbine blades to site. In some cases this can involve – highways works, removal of street furniture etc.

All impacts

Traffic Management Plan in conjunction with local transport authority to determine most appropriate times and routes for HGV traffic and will include measures for vehicle sharing, avoidance of HGV deliveries during peak periods etc.

All impacts

For EIA development:

An Access, Traffic and Transport chapter within the ES would be required. This would typically include a Transport assessment (TA) as an appendix.

Additional assessments required may include:
– Abnormal Load Transport Management Plan.
– Construction Traffic Management Plan.

All impacts

Site entrance roads should be well maintained and monitored during the operational life of the proposed development.

Regular maintenance would be undertaken to keep the site access track drainage systems operational and ensure there are no run-off issues into the public road networks.

Adherence to the Traffic Management or Abnormal Local Management Plans.

Institute of Environmental Assessment (1993) Guidelines for the Environmental Assessment of Road Traffic.

The Highways Agency (2006) Design Manual for Roads and Bridge.

Institution of Highways and Transportation (1994) Guidelines for Traffic Impact Assessment.

Welsh Government (2017) Transport Appraisal Guidance (WelTAG).

Strategic Traffic Management Plan (STMP).

Welsh Government (2020) Pulling Together, Best Practice for Transporting Abnormal Loads in Wales.

Loss of peatland which is an important carbon store.

Assessment of potential loss of carbon store.

Avoid siting turbines in areas where there will be a high loss of peat.

Operation of wind farm will offset emissions after a payback period – see SNH guidance.

A Carbon Balance assessment should be provided using relevant guidance.

Environmental Clerk of Works monitoring during construction to ensure impacts on peat are minimised and any peat restoration plans are implemented.

Scottish Natural Heritage (2022) Carbon calculator for wind farms on Scottish peatlands: factsheet, Scottish Government.

Scottish Government’s/Nayak et al (2008) Guide to Calculating Carbon Savings from Wind Farms on Scottish Peatlands – A New Approach.

Disruption to civilian airspace and radar systems

Disruption to civilian airspace and radar systems.

Disruption to military airspace and radar

Disruption to military airspace and radar.

Interference with television, radio and mobile phone reception

Interference with television, radio and mobile phone reception due to presence of turbines.

All impacts

Aviation Risk Assessment – to determine the effect of the proposed wind
development on all aspects of aviation activity – military and civilian. May also require a lighting design and assessment (to minimise lighting requirements).

Telecommunications Impact Assessment – to determine if there are any telecommunication links that cross the site and if TV reception will be affected.

Disruption to civilian airspace and radar systems

Consult with Civil Aviation Authority (CAA), the CAA’s Directorate of Airspace Policy (DAP), and the National Air Traffic Services (NATS) and the MOD early in the design process.

Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) can provide these inputs during formal planning process for any wind site:
1. Identification of aviation stakeholders that would potentially be affected;
2. Reviewing the aviation section of the Environmental Statement for accuracy and completeness;
3. Consideration of regulatory requirements;
4. Consideration of whether all other aviation issues known to the CAA have been taken into account (including other potential developments).

Disruption to military airspace and radar

Consult with the Ministry of Defence (MoD Defence Estates) early in the design process and throughout the planning process and begin pre-application consultation with the MoD.

CAA can facilitate discussions between MOD, CAA and the developer where there are both civil and military objections to turbines.

Interference with television, radio and mobile phone reception

Realign aerials to alternative transmitters, use digital receivers or other techniques available.

Design/microsite turbines to avoid impacts on telecommunication links.

Re-route telecommunication links.

All impacts

For EIA development:

An aviation chapter would be included within the ES.

Appendices that would be needed for this type of assessment:
– Aviation Lighting and Mitigation Report.
– Aviation Lighting Assessment.

A Telecommunications Impact Assessment should also be included with evidence provided that either no links will be affected or that appropriate mitigation will be put in place.

All impacts

No specific monitoring required.

Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, Telecommunications (2022) Security Code of Practice.

Ofcom (2009) Tall structures and their impact on broadcast and other wireless services.

BBC and Ofcom (2004) The Impact of Large Buildings and Structures (Including Wind farms) on Terrestrial Television Reception.

Ofcom Map of UK TV Transmitters

Ofcom wind farm clearance for fixed links

CAA (2016) CAP 764 – CAA Policy and Guidelines on Wind Turbines, CAA Latest Edition.

DTI (2002) Wind Energy and Aviation Interests – Interim Guidelines.

Spaven Consulting (2001) Wind Turbines and Radar: Operational Experience and Mitigation Measures.

Welsh Government (2002) Technical Advice Note 19: Telecommunications.

Civil Aviation Authority (2016) Policy and Guidance on Wind Turbines Version 6 CAP764 CAA

Civil Aviation Authority (2019) Licensing of Aerodromes, Version 11 CAP 168 CAA

Civil Aviation Authority (2019) ATS Safety Requirements Version 3 CAP 670 CAA

Civil Aviation Authority (2017) UK Flight Information Services, Ed 3 CAP 774 CAA

Civil Aviation Authority (2006) Safeguarding of Aerodromes Version 2 CAP774 CAA

Civil Aviation Authority (2010) Safe Operating Practices at Unlicensed Aerodromes Ed 1 CAP 783 CAA

Civil Aviation Authority (2017) Manual of Air Traffic Services Part 1 Ed 7.0 CAP 493 CAA

Civil Aviation Authority (2020) Parachuting Ed 5 CAP660 CAA

Ministry of Defence (2022) Military Aviation Authority Regulatory Article 2330 (Low Flying) MOD.

Civil Aviation Authority (2017) CAA Policy Statement: Lighting of Onshore Wind Turbine Generators in the United Kingdom with a maximum blade tip height at or in excess of 150 metres (m) Above Ground Level CAA.

Disruption to and/or loss of public footpaths due to access tracks or turbines

Disruption to and/or loss of public footpaths due to access tracks or turbines (during construction and/or operation).

Community costs and benefits of wind farm development

Community costs and benefits of wind farm development (e.g. Impact on employment and expenditure in local economy).

Impact on existing landuse activities

Impact on existing landuse activities (e.g. loss of grazing/ arable land) due to turbine foundations, access tracks etc.

Impact on tourism

Impact on tourism due to presence of turbines in the landscape.

Disruption to and/or loss of public footpaths due to access tracks or turbines

Outdoor access management plan.

Community costs and benefits of wind farm development

Assessment of economic benefits of the scheme during development, construction, operation and decommissioning.

Assessment of community benefits of the project. This could include the economic benefits of retained supply chain spend locally, employment and skills training opportunities, household support etc.

Impact on existing landuse activities

Assessment of impact on existing land uses of the site.

Impact on tourism

Assessment of potential impacts on tourism. This is however often scoped out of EIA assessments as there is no clear evidence that wind developments have a significant effect on tourism activity.

Disruption to and/or loss of public footpaths due to access tracks or turbines

Avoid closure and re-route of Public Rights of Way.

Ensure ‘topple over distance’ of 10% is utilised as a safe separation distance from buildings and the public.

Community costs and benefits of wind farm development

Securing direct financial contributions for the local community – e.g. via a community fund (Please note that any benefits that are offered are only a material consideration, if they are directly relevant to planning and the proposed development).

Wider (in-kind) benefits can be achieved from the way construction and development is carried out – e.g. employment of local people or simultaneous upgrades to infrastructure. Preference may be given to contractors in tendering processes who provide such plans. Consideration to the priorities of local communities for infrastructure must be given.

Shared ownership model taken on between community and developer to share financial benefits of the windfarm.

Maximise use of local labour, services and supplies.

Reduction in electricity costs for locals.

Impact on existing landuse activities

Minimise loss of farming land by limiting development footprint.

Impact on tourism

Maximise tourism opportunities – i.e. facilitate public access to site.

Ensure impact of divergence or closure of PRoW is kept to a minimum and opportunities are realised to improve access where possible.

Consider appropriate siting to limit visual impact on tourist sites i.e. NT land and properties.

All impacts

For EIA development:

A socio-economics chapter of the ES could be prepared if required. These are often included as stand alone reports separate from the ES.

Recreation and Access Management Plans.

Application to divert or extinguish public right of way (if relevant).

All impacts

It is not anticipated that monitoring measures would be required to address any socio-economic impacts.

Welsh Government (2016) Guidance for Local Authorities on Public Rights of Way.

BEIS (2021) Community Engagement and Benefits from Onshore Wind Developments Good Practice Guidance for England.

Welsh Government (2007) Wind Farm Development in Wales: Assessing the Community Benefits A research project for the Welsh Assembly Government.

Report to the Renewables Advisory Board (2009) Delivering community benefits from wind energy development: a toolkit.

Centre for Sustainable Energy (2005) Community benefits from wind power. A study of UK practice and comparison with leading European Countries. Report to the Renewables Advisory Board and the DTI.

NFU (2022) Energy wind energy guide.

Welsh Government (1997) Technical advice note 13: tourism.

Tom Mordue (2017) The impacts of onshore-windfarms on a UK rural tourism landscape: objective evidence, local opposition, and national politics.

DTI (2006) Renewable Energy Awareness and Attitudes Survey.

HM Treasury (2022) Green Book.

HM Treasury (2015) Aqua Book.

Welsh Government (2019) Energy Generation in Wales.

Renewable UK (2014) Onshore Wind: Economic Impacts in 2014.

BVG Associates (2017) Economic benefits from onshore wind farms.

BiGGAR Economics (2012) Onshore Wind: Direct & Wider Economic Impacts.

Vivid Economics (2019) Quantifying the benefits of onshore wind to the UK.