6.5. Noise
86. The full assessment of the impacts of noise and vibration is provided in Volume 1, Chapter 9 of the Onshore EIA Report.
87. A detailed assessment considered the construction and operational phase noise and vibration levels of the Proposed Development.
88. Background noise surveys were undertaken at noise monitoring locations at noise sensitive receptors within close proximity to the Proposed Development, and the data analysed to derive noise limits in accordance with relevant industry guidance.
89. The impacts assessed include increases in road traffic noise, vibration at sensitive receptors and noise at sensitive receptors.
90. The use of noise limits will ensure that the Proposed Development can operate within accepted levels of disturbance. The Proposed Development will commit to limiting operational noise from the onshore substation to a noise rating level (in accordance with relevant guidance) of no greater than 5 decibels (dB) above the representative background levels at any time at the noise sensitive receptors, or a noise rating level of 35dB (A) where background levels are low (in accordance with relevant guidance).
91. Mitigation measures, during both construction and operation, have been proposed. Mitigation during construction will be largely secured within the CEMP and with the provision of specific mitigation such as site boundary temporary barriers. Mitigation measures for operational noise from the substation will be developed through the detailed design post consent phase and may include such measures as enclosure of specific equipment.
92. Overall, it is concluded that following the implementation of secondary mitigation, there will be no likely significant residual effects arising from the Proposed Development during the construction, operational and maintenance or decommissioning phases.
93. It is concluded that following the implementation of mitigation measures, there will be no likely significant cumulative effects from the Proposed Development alongside other projects/plans. This conclusion includes consideration of the Branxton BESS Project, which was scoped out from further noise assessment in the CEA as the operational noise levels resulting from the Proposed Development would be significantly below existing background noise levels experienced at the relevant residential receptors (in accordance with relevant guidance). There are no potential effects identified within the intertidal area.
6.6. Cultural Heritage
94. The full assessment of the effects on cultural heritage assets is provided in Volume 1, Chapter 10 of the Onshore EIA Report, and is supplemented in the EIA Report Addendum.
95. Cultural Heritage refers to any element of the historic environment which has cultural significance. Both discrete features, and extensive landscapes defined by specific historic events can be defined as heritage assets. Designated assets include Scheduled Monuments, Listed Buildings, World Heritage Sites, Conservation Areas, Inventory Gardens and Designed Landscapes, Inventory Historic Battlefields, and Historic Marine Protected Areas. Other assets may also be locally designated through policies in the Local Development Plan. Cultural Heritage therefore includes all types of historic buildings and structures and archaeological sites.
96. The cultural heritage baseline was characterised via a desk-based assessment, site surveys, and consultation with Historic Environment Scotland and the East Lothian Council Archaeology Service.
97. The Cultural Heritage assessment identified that there are six designated assets and 45 non-designated heritage assets within the 100 m of the Proposed Development (the ‘Inner Study Area’). The archaeological potential varies across the Proposed Development site.
98. The Cultural Heritage assessment also found that there are 105 designated cultural heritage assets within 5 km of the proposed substation (the ‘Outer Study Area’), including two Properties in Care, 30 Scheduled Monuments, 67 Listed Buildings, two Inventory Gardens and Designed Landscapes, two Inventory Battlefields and two Conservation Areas.
99. A number of potential impacts on cultural heritage assets, associated with the construction phase of the Proposed Development, were identified. These included construction impacts on three known cultural heritage assets and potential direct impacts on previously unrecorded subsurface archaeological remains. With the proposed mitigation measures in place, most of these impacts result in residual effects of minor, adverse significance, which is not significant in EIA terms.
100. A number of potential impacts on cultural heritage assets, associated with the operational phase of the Proposed Development, have been identified. These include impacts on the settings of a number of cultural heritage assets within the Outer Study Area. No mitigation is possible to offset these impacts. While most of these impacts result in residual effects of minor adverse significance, there will remain residual effects of moderate adverse significance (significant in EIA terms) on two designated cultural heritage assets: Innerwick Conservation Area and ‘Crowhill, enclosure WNW of’ which is a Scheduled Monument.
101. Cumulative impacts from the construction of the Proposed Development in combination with developments in the surrounding area, including the Branxton BESS Project, have the potential for a significant adverse effect on previously unrecorded subsurface archaeology. With the proposed mitigation measures in place, it is predicted these cumulative impacts will result in effects of minor adverse significance (not significant in EIA terms).
102. Cumulative impacts from the operation of the Proposed Development in combination with developments in the surrounding area have been considered. A potential cumulative effect of minor significance on ‘Branxton, enclosure 350 m NNW of’, a Scheduled Monument, has been identified. No mitigation is possible to offset this impact, therefore there will remain a residual effect of minor adverse significance (not significant in EIA terms) on this heritage asset.
103. No infrastructure will be placed in the intertidal area as the cables will be installed using trenchless technology (e.g. HDD). Therefore no potential effects are identified within the intertidal area.
6.7. Geology, Hydrology, Soils and Flood Risk
104. The full assessment of the effects on geology, hydrology, soils and flood risk is provided in Volume 1, Chapter 11 of the Onshore EIA Report. An updated Flood Risk Assessment originally prepared as a Technical Appendix to Chapter 11 of the Onshore EIA Report is provided in the EIA Report Addendum.
105. Geology, hydrology, soils, and flood risk considers the physical structure of the earth, ground conditions and water environment in relation to the Proposed Development. This assessment considers a study area of up to 1 km from the site boundary to allow potential effects on downstream receptors to be identified.
106. The study area comprises six surface water catchments as defined by SEPA’s Baseline Confluence Nested Catchments. Of the six catchments, four are partially located within the site. The watercourses and waterbodies within the Proposed Development site, and the nearby Thorntonloch Beach Bathing Waters, have been classified by SEPA under the Water Framework Directive, and are considered to range from moderate to excellent quality status. No private or public water supplies have been identified within the study area and one licenced water abstraction is located within the study area at Skateraw. All potential sources of flooding within the study area have been assessed and shown to be between ‘no risk’ to ‘low risk’ to the Proposed Development (with mitigation applied in some instances).
107. The bedrock and superficial geology underlying the study area has been identified, assessed, and is considered to present no risk to development. The Barns Ness Coast SSSI and Thorntonloch Local Geodiversity Site are located at the coastline at Skateraw, with direct impacts avoided through the use of trenchless technology at landfall. The study area is predominantly agriculture land, with impacts on top and sub-soils considered within the assessment. An area of potentially contaminated land due to the presence of PFA has been identified within the Skateraw Borrow Pit.
108. A number of potential impacts on sensitive receptors, associated with the construction, operational and maintenance, and decommissioning phases of the Proposed Development, were identified. The receptors considered included hydrology, hydrogeology, flood risk, contaminated land, statutory geological designated sites, and soils, with potential impacts including run-off and pollution changing water quality, increased flood risk, and compaction and erosion of soils.
109. Mitigation proposed includes site design, and implementation of the CEMP, water quality monitoring plan, operational drainage strategy, and decommissioning plan.
110. With the proposed mitigation measures in place, impacts on hydrology, geology, soils and flood risk during construction, operation, and decommissioning result in effects of negligible to minor adverse significance and therefore not significant in EIA terms. This outcome remains unaffected by the updates made to the Flood Risk Assessment included in the EIA Report Addendum.
111. Cumulative effects in relation to geology, hydrology, soils and flood risk from the Branxton BESS Project were not considered as part of the CEA. The location of the Branxton BESS Project and the implementation of drainage strategies means that opportunity for significant adverse impacts would not occur. Cumulative effects from the nearby SPEN Branxton Grid Substation and the Eastern Link Project Converter Station developments would be of minor or negligible adverse significance (not significant in EIA terms) upon hydrology, flood risk, statutory geologically designated sites and soil sensitive receptors.
112. With the implementation of the trenchless technology at landfall, impacts within the intertidal area are assessed to be of negligible to minor adverse significance (not significant in EIA terms).
6.8. Traffic and Transport
113. Volume 1, Chapter 12 of the Onshore EIA Report assesses the effects of the Proposed Development on access, traffic and transport during the construction phase. Traffic volumes during operation will be very low, therefore have been scoped out of detailed assessment. A Transport Assessment is provided in EIA Volume 4, Appendix 12.1 which reviews the impact of transport related matters associated with the Proposed Development.
114. Each of the individual elements of the Proposed Development will be accessed via a dedicated access point, as detailed in the Transport Assessment. The study area for traffic and transport assessment includes roads within the local road network in and around Innerwick and Thorntonloch, including the U209, the C121, the C122 and the C124, as well as along the A1 trunk road between Easter Pinkerton and Bilsdean and Skateraw Road. To obtain traffic flows to establish a baseline, Automatic Traffic Count surveys were undertaken on local roads within the study area. Baseline traffic flows along the A1 trunk road were obtained from Transport Scotland’s traffic flow database.
115. The construction phase trip estimates have been based upon first principle estimates of traffic movements to and from the site, having established the likely volumes of construction materials, resources, and components.
116. The Proposed Development would lead to a temporary increase in traffic volumes on the study road network during the construction phase. Traffic volumes would decrease considerably outside the peak period of construction. The maximum traffic impact associated with construction is predicted to occur in Month 14 of the programme, when an additional 669 trips (522 Cars & Lights and 147 heavy goods vehicles) are included to the network.
117. During the peak construction phase, traffic movements are expected to increase by over 30% along the road leading to Skateraw and the U209 (north of Barnes Ness Terrace), with total flow impacts predicted to increase by 179.6% and 157.6%, respectively. While the increases in flows are statistically significant, they are generally caused by relatively low total flows along this road link which will see an additional 321 and 222 daily journeys during peak construction along these road links, respectively. With the proposed mitigation measures in place, (including a Construction Traffic Routeing Management Plan) the impacts along these links will result in effects of slight adverse significance (not significant in EIA terms).
118. No road capacity issues are expected on any of the roads within the study area due to the additional construction traffic movements associated with the Proposed Development as background traffic movements are low, the links are of a reasonable standard and appropriate mitigation is proposed.
119. Cumulative impacts associated with the construction traffic of the consented Crystal Rig IV Wind Farm, Branxton Grid Substation, and the Eastern Link Project result in effects of negligible significance (not significant in EIA terms) upon transport related receptors within the traffic and transport study area following the application of mitigation measures such as an overarching Traffic Management and Monitoring Plan.
120. As noted in the EIA Report Addendum, if the construction phases of the Proposed Development and the Branxton BESS Project overlap, it is reasonable to expect the respective Traffic Management Plans would ensure that unacceptable adverse effects from construction traffic on nearby sensitive receptors would be avoided. The potential for any cumulative traffic impact during construction would be limited to the A1, a high capacity trunk road.
121. No effects are anticipated within the intertidal area.
6.9. Socio-Economics
122. The full assessment of the effect on socio-economics is provided in Volume 1, Chapter 13 of the Onshore EIA Report, and is supplemented in the EIA Report Addendum.
123. Socio-economics considers the local economies in the areas most likely to be affected by the Proposed Development. This assessment considers a socio-economics local study area based on the local authority areas in closest proximity to the onshore substation and export cabling – East Lothian, Scottish Borders, Midlothian, and the City of Edinburgh. These will be important locations used to support the construction, operation and maintenance, and decommissioning activities related to the onshore components of the Proposed Development. This assessment also considers a national study area based on Scotland as a whole.
124. The offshore wind sector is identified as a high priority industry within national strategic planning policies. Capitalising on opportunities within the broader renewable energy sector is a priority within local strategic planning policies. This reflects the opportunities the offshore wind and renewables sectors provide for supporting economic development and growth, and providing jobs and incomes for Scottish residents.
125. Prior to Covid-19, in 2019 there were 460,000 people employed in the socio-economics local study area (ONS, 2022), and total economic output – measured by Gross Value Added (GVA) – was £30.1 bn (ONS, 2019). In 2019 there were 2.6 m people employed in Scotland (ONS, 2022), and total economic output – measured by GVA – was £147 bn (ONS, 2019). Measuring the offshore wind sector is challenging, however detailed research by the Fraser of Allander Institute estimates there were 4,700 full time equivalent (FTE) jobs and £447 m in GVA supported by the offshore wind sector in Scotland in 2019. It is currently a small sector when compared to the whole economy, but one with the potential to grow – research by Skills Development Scotland indicates the sector could support 20,000 jobs by 2031.
126. Looking towards the future, the available data shows relatively weak performance of the Scottish economy anticipated in the medium term, with a declining working age population and falling levels of total employment. The offshore wind sector is identified as a key growth opportunity but is reliant on investments being secured, such as the Proposed Development. Without such investments the scale of growth in the offshore wind sector as forecast will not be realised.
127. A number of potential impacts on socio-economics activities associated with the construction, operation and maintenance, and decommissioning phases of the Proposed Development have been identified. These include supporting employment and GVA across the socio-economics local study area and Scotland. Impacts are assessed to be beneficial in nature. The Applicant is also committed to a range of activities seeking to enhance beneficial impacts.
128. Impacts on employment associated with the construction phase of the Proposed Development are assessed to be of moderate to major beneficial significance at the socio-economics local study area level (significant in EIA terms). Impacts on GVA associated with the construction phase of the Proposed Development are assessed to be of minor to moderate beneficial significance at the socio-economics local study area level (not significant in EIA terms). Impacts on employment and GVA associated with the operation and maintenance and decommissioning phases of the Proposed Development are assessed to be of negligible beneficial significance at the socio-economics local study area level (not significant in EIA terms).
129. At the Scotland level, impacts on employment associated with the construction phase of the Proposed Development are assessed to be of minor to moderate beneficial significance (not significant in EIA terms) under the Baseline scenario and of moderate to major beneficial significance under the Enhanced scenario. Impacts on GVA associated with the construction phase of the Proposed Development are assessed to be of minor to moderate beneficial significance (not significant in EIA terms). Impacts on both employment and GVA associated with the operation and maintenance and decommissioning phases of the Proposed Development are assessed to be of negligible beneficial significance (not significant in EIA terms).
130. The Proposed Development will support existing employment through contracts placed with existing enterprises and support new employment and GVA output enabling the expansion of the offshore wind sector in Scotland, which is a high policy priority.
131. Cumulative impacts from other projects related to offshore wind farm developments including the Branxton BESS Project were found to result in additional beneficial effects. Cumulative changes are assessed to enhance beneficial effects over and above those assessed for the Proposed Development in isolation.
6.10. Land use, Tourism and REcreation
132. The full assessment of the effects on land use, tourism and recreation is provided in Volume 1, Chapter 11 of the Onshore EIA Report, and is supplemented in the EIA Report Addendum.
133. The land use, tourism and recreation assessment has been informed by desk studies, site specific surveys, and consultation with stakeholders. The land use study area is predominantly composed of a patchwork of largely arable agricultural fields, with localised areas of industry, and small areas of woodland and forestry. The majority of the land is defined as Class 2 or Class 3.1 prime agricultural land. The tourism and recreation assessment identified visitor attractions, recreational sites and routes, beaches, and tourism accommodations across the study area. This included Thorntonloch beach, Skateraw harbour, the John Muir Way Link path, National Cycle Route 76, and 28 tourist accommodation receptors, including hotels, bed and breakfasts, and caravan parks.
134. The assessment considered direct impacts to changes in land use as a result of the footprint of the Proposed Development. It also considered direct impacts on tourism and recreation receptors (disruption to routes) and indirect impacts (i.e., visibility of the Proposed Development or increased traffic levels impacting visitor experiences), which will result in changes in visitor numbers.
135. Mitigation measures will include an access management plan to implement path diversions and signage for core paths within the site, temporary screening during construction, a construction traffic management plan, and restoration of land use following construction.
136. The construction of the Proposed Development will result in a maximum temporary land take of 42.58 ha and a permanent land take of 16.53 ha. The majority the permanent land take will be a result of the onshore substation. These are assessed to be of negligible to minor adverse significance and not significant in EIA terms.
137. Following implementation of mitigation measures, the assessment concluded that residual impacts on identified tourism and recreation receptors during construction and operation ranged from negligible to minor adverse significance, (not significant in EIA terms).
138. Cumulative impacts from identified cumulative developments, including the addition of the Branxton BESS Project, would be of negligible to minor adverse significance (not significant in EIA terms) upon land use, tourism, and recreation receptors.
139. No infrastructure will be placed in the intertidal area as the cables will be installed using trenchless technology (e.g. HDD). Therefore, there will be no adverse effects on the intertidal area.
7. Conclusion
140. This Non-Technical Summary of the Onshore EIA Report provides an overview of the EIA undertaken for the Proposed Development. Within Volume 4, Appendix 15.1 of the EIA Report a schedule of commitments can be found which details the environmental mitigation measures, summarised above, which the Applicant has committed to implement.
141. Volume 1, Chapter 15 of the EIA Report summarises the potential effects, the mitigation to be implemented and the resulting residual effects. It also provides a summary of the cumulative effects of the Proposed Development in combination with other proposed developments in the local area.
142. The final layout has been informed by a robust EIA and comprehensive design iteration process, considering potential environmental impacts and their effects, physical constraints, and health and safety considerations. The information used to inform the design iteration process included consultation responses received, baseline data and the impact assessment undertaken.
143. Consideration has been given to a range of design issues as well as various environmental, ecological, and technical requirements. Predicted environmental effects arising from the Proposed Development have been mitigated as far as possible, if not eliminated during the iterative design process. The inclusion of the Branxton BESS Project within the CEA and the additional work undertaken by the Applicant provided in the Onshore EIA Report Addendum has not changed the outcomes of the original assessment outlined in the Onshore EIA Report.
144. Overall, the Proposed Development is an appropriately designed, and sensibly located onshore grid infrastructure associated with the proposed Berwick Bank Wind Farm which is in line with policies in the local and strategic development plans and conforms to national policy. The Proposed Development, as essential infrastructure associated with the wider Berwick Bank Wind Farm, will provide a valuable contribution towards the ambitious national targets for electricity generation from renewable sources.