Camilty Wind Farm - Partnerships for Renewables
Camilty Wind Farm - Partnerships for Renewables Camilty Wind Farm - Partnerships for Renewables
Camilty Wind Farm 11.9 Cumulative Effects Potential Sources of Cumulative Effects 11.9.1 This section considers the assessment of cumulative effects on ecological receptors from the proposed wind farm in combination with effects from other proposed development projects within the surrounding area. This assessment has considered all development types with the potential to affect the VERs. 11.9.2 The search area for this assessment extends to 5 km from the proposed wind farm site for all VERs. This is considered to be sufficient in relation to the mean foraging ranges of badger and otter and the average commuting range for the bat species present on site. The assessment includes projects which are completed, under construction or approved (Figure 11.9). 11.9.3 There are three wind farms within 5 km of the site boundary which have been considered for all VERs: • Pearie Law Wind Farm (application) Located 3.6 km from the site boundary and consists of 6 turbines; • Harburnhead Wind Farm (appeal). Located 2.2 km from the site boundary with 22 turbines proposed; • Fauch Hill Wind Farm (appeal). Located 1.9 km from the site boundary with 23 turbines proposed. Potential Cumulative Effects on Designated Sites Craigengar SAC and SSSI, Cobbinshaw Moss SSS, Linhouse Valley SSSII and Cobbinshaw Water SSSI 11.9.4 The EIA for Harburnhead wind farm only considered Cobbinshaw Moss macrotope as a receptor. This includes the Cobbinshaw Moss SSSI and the whole peat mass in the area. A buffer of 130 m will be maintained between the infrastructure and the SSSI. This buffer is assessed as providing a margin of safety for the avoidance of any direct hydrological effects on the SSSI, and also minimises the risk of other minor potential effects such as dust deposition from tracks during construction. 11.9.5 The EIAs for Fauch Hill and Pearie Law did not consider the Craigengar SAC and SSSI, Cobbinshaw Moss SSSI, Linhouse Valley and Cobbinshaw Water SSSI as receptors as they are not within the same catchments. 11.9.6 It is concluded that the proposed Camilty development will not add cumulatively to the impacts on the Craigengar SAC and SSSI, Cobbinshaw Moss SSSI, Linhouse valley and Cobbinshaw Water SSSI. Potential Cumulative Effects on Habitats Coniferous Plantation Woodland 11.9.7 The EIAs for Harburnhead, Fauch Hill and Pearie law did not consider coniferous plantation woodland as a receptor. 11.9.8 It is concluded that the proposed Camilty development will not add cumulatively to the effects on this habitat within the surrounding area. March 2013 11-41 ES Chapter 11 Terrestrial Ecology Copyright Partnerships for Renewables Development Co. Ltd 2013 ©
Camilty Wind Farm Semi-improved Acid Grassland 11.9.9 The EIAs for Harburnhead and Pearie Law do not consider this habitat as a receptor. 11.9.10 The construction of Fauch Hill will include the permanent loss of 1 ha of acid grassland. A further 1.2 ha will be temporarily lost during construction but will be re-instated. It was concluded that the loss of this habitat will be adverse and certain, but that it will not result in a significant effect relative to biodiversity and nature conservation. 11.9.11 It is concluded that the proposed Camilty development will not add cumulatively to the effects on this habitat within the surrounding area due to the small area of this habitat to be lost. Marshy Grassland 11.9.12 The EIA for Fauch Hill wind farm indicated the permanent loss of 2.5ha of marshy grassland. A further 1.4 ha will be temporarily lost during construction but will be re-instated. It was concluded that the loss of this habitat will be adverse but that it will not result in a significant effect relative to biodiversity and nature conservation. 11.9.13 The EIA for Pearie Law considered the proposal would have no significant effect on marshy grassland following mitigation as a result of habitat loss. 11.9.14 The EIA for Harburnhead did not consider marshy grassland as a receptor. 11.9.15 It is concluded that the proposed Camilty development will not add cumulatively to the effects on this habitat within the surrounding area. Heath and Mire 11.9.16 The EIAs for Harburnhead and Fauch Hill do not consider heaths and mires as a receptor. 11.9.17 The EIA for Pearie Law considered the proposal would have no significant effect on heaths or mires following mitigation as a result of habitat loss. 11.9.18 It is concluded that the proposed Camilty development will not add cumulatively to the effects on this habitat within the surrounding area. Watercourses 11.9.19 The EIA for Harburnhead does not consider any watercourses as ecological receptors. 11.9.20 The construction of Fauch Hill will involve the crossing of two watercourses, Crosswood Burn and Shear Burn which also run through the Camilty site. Construction of the watercourse crossings and of turbine footings, lay-down areas and sections of access track, which are located relatively close to existing watercourses could potentially result in the release of sediments associated with earthworks into the watercourses. There would also be the potential risk that oils, or fuels associated with construction plant and materials including concrete/cement could be accidentally released into watercourses. It was concluded that the construction after mitigation will not have a significant effect on the quality or nature conservation value of watercourses within the site or downstream of the site. 11.9.21 Vein Syke watercourse runs through Pearie Law wind farm, it lies in the same catchment area to the one at Camilty but drains further downstream. Vein Syke has a low ecological value as it is overgrazed and cattle poached but provides potential bat commuting habitat and links to Calderwood SSSI. It was concluded that after mitigation the construction will not have a significant effect on the quality or nature conservation value of watercourses within the site or downstream of the site. March 2013 11-42 ES Chapter 11 Terrestrial Ecology Copyright Partnerships for Renewables Development Co. Ltd 2013 ©
- Page 290 and 291: Camilty Wind Farm 10.5.106 HB numbe
- Page 292 and 293: Camilty Wind Farm Table 10.5 Summar
- Page 294 and 295: Camilty Wind Farm included in Appen
- Page 296 and 297: Camilty Wind Farm Table 10.6 Summar
- Page 298 and 299: Camilty Wind Farm Receptor Effect D
- Page 300 and 301: Camilty Wind Farm 11 Terrestrial Ec
- Page 302 and 303: Camilty Wind Farm 11.2 Methodology
- Page 304 and 305: Camilty Wind Farm Consultee Date of
- Page 306 and 307: Camilty Wind Farm Bat Species 11.2.
- Page 308 and 309: Camilty Wind Farm Index (HSI) devel
- Page 310 and 311: Camilty Wind Farm Conservation Sens
- Page 312 and 313: Camilty Wind Farm Table 11.6 Design
- Page 314 and 315: Camilty Wind Farm 11.3.8 There were
- Page 316 and 317: Camilty Wind Farm 11.3.16 Marshy gr
- Page 318 and 319: Camilty Wind Farm NVC Code NVC Type
- Page 320 and 321: Camilty Wind Farm was also detected
- Page 322 and 323: Camilty Wind Farm remaining 38% wer
- Page 324 and 325: Camilty Wind Farm Badger Legal Prot
- Page 326 and 327: Camilty Wind Farm current landuse i
- Page 328 and 329: Camilty Wind Farm Valued Ecological
- Page 330 and 331: Camilty Wind Farm 11.6.8 Bat activi
- Page 332 and 333: Camilty Wind Farm Table 11.16 Areas
- Page 334 and 335: Camilty Wind Farm Table 11.18 Poten
- Page 336 and 337: Camilty Wind Farm Table 11.20 Poten
- Page 338 and 339: Camilty Wind Farm Siltbusters or eq
- Page 342 and 343: Camilty Wind Farm 11.9.22 It is con
- Page 344 and 345: Camilty Wind Farm Table 11.22 Summa
- Page 346 and 347: Camilty Wind Farm Receptor Effect D
- Page 348 and 349: Camilty Wind Farm Receptor Effect D
- Page 350 and 351: Camilty Wind Farm Receptor Effect D
- Page 352 and 353: Camilty Wind Farm • NBN Gateway W
- Page 354 and 355: Camilty Wind Farm 12.2 Methodology
- Page 356 and 357: Camilty Wind Farm activity, particu
- Page 358 and 359: Camilty Wind Farm 12.2.10 In additi
- Page 360 and 361: Camilty Wind Farm Flight Activity S
- Page 362 and 363: Camilty Wind Farm (ii) For a sample
- Page 364 and 365: Camilty Wind Farm 12.2.40 The Town
- Page 366 and 367: Camilty Wind Farm Level of Effect S
- Page 368 and 369: Camilty Wind Farm Table 12.8 Desk-b
- Page 370 and 371: Camilty Wind Farm Table 12.10 Fligh
- Page 372 and 373: Camilty Wind Farm 12.3.19 All speci
- Page 374 and 375: Camilty Wind Farm Table 12.13 Speci
- Page 376 and 377: Camilty Wind Farm Collision Risk Mo
- Page 378 and 379: Camilty Wind Farm • Goshawk; •
- Page 380 and 381: Camilty Wind Farm Species Recorded
- Page 382 and 383: Camilty Wind Farm Species Recorded
- Page 384 and 385: Camilty Wind Farm Species Recorded
- Page 386 and 387: Camilty Wind Farm Species Recorded
- Page 388 and 389: Camilty Wind Farm sites for the sam
<strong>Camilty</strong> <strong>Wind</strong> <strong>Farm</strong><br />
Semi-improved Acid Grassland<br />
11.9.9 The EIAs <strong>for</strong> Harburnhead and Pearie Law do not consider this habitat as a receptor.<br />
11.9.10 The construction of Fauch Hill will include the permanent loss of 1 ha of acid grassland. A<br />
further 1.2 ha will be temporarily lost during construction but will be re-instated. It was<br />
concluded that the loss of this habitat will be adverse and certain, but that it will not result in<br />
a significant effect relative to biodiversity and nature conservation.<br />
11.9.11 It is concluded that the proposed <strong>Camilty</strong> development will not add cumulatively to the effects<br />
on this habitat within the surrounding area due to the small area of this habitat to be lost.<br />
Marshy Grassland<br />
11.9.12 The EIA <strong>for</strong> Fauch Hill wind farm indicated the permanent loss of 2.5ha of marshy grassland.<br />
A further 1.4 ha will be temporarily lost during construction but will be re-instated. It was<br />
concluded that the loss of this habitat will be adverse but that it will not result in a significant<br />
effect relative to biodiversity and nature conservation.<br />
11.9.13 The EIA <strong>for</strong> Pearie Law considered the proposal would have no significant effect on marshy<br />
grassland following mitigation as a result of habitat loss.<br />
11.9.14 The EIA <strong>for</strong> Harburnhead did not consider marshy grassland as a receptor.<br />
11.9.15 It is concluded that the proposed <strong>Camilty</strong> development will not add cumulatively to the effects<br />
on this habitat within the surrounding area.<br />
Heath and Mire<br />
11.9.16 The EIAs <strong>for</strong> Harburnhead and Fauch Hill do not consider heaths and mires as a receptor.<br />
11.9.17 The EIA <strong>for</strong> Pearie Law considered the proposal would have no significant effect on heaths<br />
or mires following mitigation as a result of habitat loss.<br />
11.9.18 It is concluded that the proposed <strong>Camilty</strong> development will not add cumulatively to the effects<br />
on this habitat within the surrounding area.<br />
Watercourses<br />
11.9.19 The EIA <strong>for</strong> Harburnhead does not consider any watercourses as ecological receptors.<br />
11.9.20 The construction of Fauch Hill will involve the crossing of two watercourses, Crosswood Burn<br />
and Shear Burn which also run through the <strong>Camilty</strong> site. Construction of the watercourse<br />
crossings and of turbine footings, lay-down areas and sections of access track, which are<br />
located relatively close to existing watercourses could potentially result in the release of<br />
sediments associated with earthworks into the watercourses. There would also be the<br />
potential risk that oils, or fuels associated with construction plant and materials including<br />
concrete/cement could be accidentally released into watercourses. It was concluded that the<br />
construction after mitigation will not have a significant effect on the quality or nature<br />
conservation value of watercourses within the site or downstream of the site.<br />
11.9.21 Vein Syke watercourse runs through Pearie Law wind farm, it lies in the same catchment<br />
area to the one at <strong>Camilty</strong> but drains further downstream. Vein Syke has a low ecological<br />
value as it is overgrazed and cattle poached but provides potential bat commuting habitat<br />
and links to Calderwood SSSI. It was concluded that after mitigation the construction will not<br />
have a significant effect on the quality or nature conservation value of watercourses within<br />
the site or downstream of the site.<br />
March 2013 11-42 ES Chapter 11<br />
Terrestrial Ecology<br />
Copyright <strong>Partnerships</strong> <strong>for</strong> <strong>Renewables</strong> Development Co. Ltd 2013 ©