it is apparently based on an incorrect understanding of the extent of the Cadw Registered Park & Garden at Stanage Park and its distance from the development in assessing the likely impacts of these developments on Stanage Park, it utilises an inappropriate methodology and ignores the specific and targeted guidance available its conclusions are based on an over-reliance of the use of ‘matrices’ as an analytical tool it relies on an inadequate and limiting interpretation of the concept of setting it fails properly to consider the cumulative effects of the two proposed developments on Stanage Park. 6.1.2. Neither the ASIDOHL 2 (2007) methodology used in Access ES Section 6 February version nor the methodology from the Design Manual of Roads and Bridges (2009) Vol. ll which replaced it in Section 6 April version is appropriate. The April version arrived at a decreased negative impact and this would seem to be the motivation for the revision. Appropriate guidance is published by CADW, English Heritage and GLIVA (2002 and 2013). 6.1.3 Trial Ray’s report (see below) also concludes that the effects on Stanage Park are much more serious than indicated in the Access ES. 6.1.4. The Developer advised (2.10.12 email M.Phillips of Dulas to G. Davis, Powys Planning) that 'this listed park and garden were addressed in the This is not true. The only reference to Reeves Hill WF application and EIA'. Stanage Park is in the Windfarm ES Vol. 2. 4.5.6.5, which says: 'There are two (registered parks and gardens) within a 10km radius. As views would not be seen from either of these two parks and gardens, no further assessment work has Windfarm ES Appendix 11. Effects on Cultural Heritage been undertaken'. 7.1.20 Table 4.2B Assessment of Indirect Effects on SAMs (sic) reproduced below contains an entry which misnames Stanage and appears to confuse the 'setting' of Stanage Park House, which is the Park itself, with the 'setting' of the Grade l listed Stanage Park, which is the rural countryside containing the wind farm site. The conclusion is that there is 'no impact. PGR Impact on views Impact on Setting Distance and Impact on Value direction of Feature from the site
it is apparently based on an incorrect understanding of the extent of the Cadw Registered Park & Garden at Stanage Park and its distance from the development in assessing the likely impacts of these developments on Stanage Park, it utilises an inappropriate methodology and ignores the specific and targeted guidance available its conclusions are based on an over-reliance of the use of ‘matrices’ as an analytical tool it relies on an inadequate and limiting interpretation of the concept of setting it fails properly to consider the cumulative effects of the two proposed developments on Stanage Park. 6.1.2. Neither the ASIDOHL 2 (2007) methodology used in Access ES Section 6 February version nor the methodology from the Design Manual of Roads and Bridges (2009) Vol. ll which replaced it in Section 6 April version is appropriate. The April version arrived at a decreased negative impact and this would seem to be the motivation for the revision. Appropriate guidance is published by CADW, English Heritage and GLIVA (2002 and 2013). 6.1.3 Ray’s report (see below) also concludes that the effects on Stanage Park are much more serious than indicated in the Access ES. 6.1.4. The Developer advised (2.10.12 email M.Phillips of Dulas to G. Davis, Powys Planning) that 'this listed park and garden were addressed in the Reeves Hill WF application and EIA'. This is not true. The only reference to Stanage Park is in the Windfarm ES Vol. 2. 4.5.6.5, which says: 'There are two (registered parks and gardens) within a 10km radius. As views would not be seen from either of these two parks and gardens, no further assessment work has been undertaken'. Windfarm ES Appendix 11. Effects on Cultural Heritage 7.1.20 Table 4.2B Assessment of Indirect Effects on SAMs (sic) reproduced below contains an entry which misnames Stanage and appears to confuse the 'setting' of Stanage Park House, which is the Park itself, with the 'setting' of the Grade l listed Stanage Park, which is the rural countryside containing the wind farm site. The conclusion is that there is 'no impact. PGR Distance and direction from the site Impact on views Impact on Setting Impact on Value of Feature Trial