Route Corridor Selection Report and PEI

Route Corridor Selection Report
Route Corridor Selection Report and

Preliminary Environmental Information
Brechfa Forest Connection Project

December 2013
Route Corridor Selection Report and Preliminary Environmental Information
Document Details
Document prepared by RSK Environment Ltd.
The Old School, Stillhouse Lane, Bristol, BS3 4EB.
1
Contents
1 Introduction 12
1.1 Background to this Route Corridor Selection Report 12
1.2 WPD’s obligations 13
1.3 Proposed wind farms and the identified connection point 13
1.4 The Application Process 15
1.5 The Route Selection Process 15
1.6 Structure of this Route Corridor Selection Report 17
2 The Proposed Scheme 18
2.1 Overview of the South Wales Area 18
2.2 Background to the Proposals 19
2.3 Outline Design and Construction of the Proposed Scheme 22
3 Approach and Methodology 25
3.1 Commitments and Principles 25
3.2 Holford Rules 26
3.3 National Grid Guidance 28
3.4 Route Selection Methodology 29
4 Stage 1: Constraints Review 35
4.1 Area of Search 35
4.2 Summary of Data 41
4.3 Constraints Review 44
4.4 Landscape and Visual Dynamics 45
4.5 Ecology 52
2
4.6 Heritage 55
4.7 Land Use/Planning 57
4.8 Site Reconnaissance 62
5 Stage 2a: Identification of Route Corridor Options 63
5.1 Introduction to Stage 2a 63
5.2 Route Corridor Workshop 63
5.3 Key Considerations 67
5.4 Identification of Preliminary Route Corridors 68
5.5 Refinement of Preliminary Route Corridors 70
5.6 Outcomes of Site Visit 71
5.7 Route Corridor Categorisation 74
5.8 Least Constrained Route Corridor Options 75
5.9 Alternative Route Corridor Options 81
5.10 Dismissed Corridor Options 82
5.11 Adoption of the EE route as the Preferred Connection Point 86
5.12 Comparative Review 87
5.13 Refinement of Preliminary Route Corridors 90
5.14 Informal Consultation on Preliminary Route Corridors 99
5.15 Revisiting the West of Carmarthen Corridor 104
5.16 Development of a Northern Corridor 107
6 Stage 2b: Selection of the Preferred Route Corridor 112
6.1 Introduction to Stage 2b 112
6.2 Deliberative Workshops 113
6.3 Further Consultation 114
3
6.4 Further Site visits 115
6.5 Route Corridor Options Environmental Appraisal – first stage 116
6.6 Route Corridor Options Environmental Appraisal – second stage 128
6.7 Consultation Responses 129
6.8 WPD’s Wider Regulatory Obligations 133
6.9 The selected Preferred Route Corridor 144
7 Stage 3a: Identification of Route Alignment Options 146
7.1 The Next Step 146
8 Stage 3b: Selection of the Preferred Route Alignment 147
8.1 Future Steps 147
Appendix 1 WPD’s Schedule 9 Statement
Appendix 2 Figures previously included within the first interim route corridor
selection report
Appendix 3 Route Corridor Options Appraisal Matrices
Figures
1 Overview of the Route Selection Process Flowchart
2 Route Corridor Options (first stage of Corridor appraisal)
3 Revised/updated Constraint Mapping
4 The Preferred Route Corridor (including both E1 and widened E2)
4
BLANK PAGE
5
Glossary of Terms
Term Description
Alternatives Different design, layout and technological possibilities considered
during project development that have potential to fulfil the project
objectives.
Ancient Woodland Woodland that has existed continuously since at least AD 1600.
Annex I Project See ‘Schedule 1 Project’.
Annex II Project See ‘Schedule 2 Project’.
AOD Above Ordnance Datum
Appropriate The process whereby projects, either alone or in combination, are
Assessment considered to see if it can be ascertained that they will not
adversely affect the integrity of a European Site.
Assessment A process by which information about effects of a proposed plan,
project or intervention is collected, assessed and used to inform
decision-making.
Baseline Conditions The environment as it appears (or would appear) immediately
prior to the implementation of the project together with any known
or foreseeable future changes that will take place before
completion of the project.
Baseline Studies Work done to determine and describe the environmental
conditions against which any future changes can be measured or
predicted and assessed.
Biodiversity The variety of life forms, the different plants, animals and
microorganisms, the genes they contain and the eco-systems
they form.
Catchment A drainage/basin area within which precipitation drains into a
river system and eventually into the sea.
Committed Development projects that are either under construction or which
Development have valid planning permissions/consents.
Competent Authority The authority which determines the application for a consent,
permission, licence or other authorisation to proceed with a
development.
Construction Phase The period during which the building or assembling of
infrastructure is undertaken.
Controlled Waters Surface waters, ground waters and coastal waters to which UK
pollution legislation applies.
Culvert A pipe or box-type conduit through which water is carried under a
structure.
Cumulative Impact Impacts that result from incremental changes caused by other
past, present or reasonably foreseeable actions together with the
project.
A cumulative impact may arise as the result of: a) the combined
impact of a number of different environmental topic-specific
impacts from a single environmental impact assessment project
6
on a single receptor/ resource; and b) the combined impact of a

number of different projects within the vicinity (in combination
with the environmental impact assessment project) on a single
receptor/resource.
Decommissioning The period during which a development and its associated
processes are removed from active operation.
Design Event An event such as a rainstorm or flood of given magnitude and
probability (usually derived from previous records).
Discharge Consent Statutory document issued by the Environment Agency setting
limits and conditions on the discharge of an effluent into
controlled waters.
Do-Minimum Also known as the ‘Do-Nothing’ Scenario. The conditions that
Scenario would persist in the absence of the implementation of a
development.
Effect Term used to express the consequence of an impact (expressed
as the ‘significance of effect’), which is determined by correlating
the magnitude of the impact to the importance (or sensitivity) of
the receptor or resource in accordance with defined significance
criteria. For example, land clearing during construction results in
habitat loss (impact), the effect of which is the significance of the
habitat loss on the ecological resource.
EIA Directive Used to refer to EC Directive 85/337/EEC as amended by EC
Directive 97/11/EC and the Public Participation Directive
2003/35/EC.
EIA Regulations A collective term for the various statutory instruments through
which the EC Directives on Environmental Assessment have
been implemented in the UK.
Emission Standard The maximum amount or concentration of a pollutant allowed to
be emitted from a particular source.
Enhancement A measure that is over and above what is required to mitigate the
adverse effects of a project.
Environmental A method and a process by which information about
Assessment environmental effects is collected, assessed and used to inform
decision-making. Assessment processes include Strategic
Environmental Assessment, Assessment of Implications on
European Sites, and Environmental Impact Assessment.
Environmental A statutory process by which certain planned projects must be
Impact Assessment assessed before a formal decision to proceed can be made.
Involves the collection and consideration of environmental
information, which fulfils the assessment requirements of
Directive 85/337/EEC (as amended), including the publication of
an Environmental Statement.
Environmental The information that must be taken into account by the decision
Information maker (the Competent Authority) before granting any kind of
authorisation in any case where the EIA process applies. It
includes the environmental statement, including any further
information, any representations made by any body required by
7
the Regulations to be invited to make representations, and any

representations duly made by any other person about the
environmental effects of the development.
Environmental A structured plan that outlines the mitigation, monitoring and
Management Plan management requirements arising from an Environmental Impact
Assessment.
Environmental A document produced in accordance with the EIA Directive as
Statement transposed into UK law by the EIA Regulations.
Estuary Downstream part of a river where it widens to enter the sea.
European Site Sites which make up the European ecological network (also
known as Natura 2000 sites). These include: Sites of Community
Importance (SCIs); Special Protection Areas (SPAs) and
potential SPAs (pSPAs); Special Areas of Conservation (SACs)
and candidate or possible SACs (cSACs or pSACs); and Ramsar
sites.
Evaluation The determination of the significance of effects. Evaluation
involves making judgements as to the value of the
receptor/resource that is being affected and the consequences of
the effect on the receptor/resource based on the magnitude of
the impact.
Existing See ‘Baseline Conditions’.
Environment
Habitats Regulations EC Council Directive 92/43/EEC, known as the Habitats
Directive, was transposed in the UK by the Habitats Regulations
1994 (as amended). The Habitats Regulations apply to UK land
and territorial waters and act to ensure biodiversity of natural
habitats and of wild flora and fauna through a range of measures
including designation of SAC’S.
Habitats Regulations The assessment of the impacts of implementing a plan or policy
Assessment on a European Site, the purpose being to consider the impacts of
a project against conservation objectives of the site and to
ascertain whether it would adversely affect the integrity of the
site.
Hydrodynamics The mechanical properties of fluids.
Impact Change that is caused by an action; for example, land clearing
(action) during construction which results in habitat loss (impact).
Invertebrates Animals without backbones.
Local Planning A local authority or council that is empowered by law to exercise
Authority planning functions for a particular area of the United Kingdom
(often the local Borough or District Council).
Mitigation Measures intended to avoid, reduce and compensate adverse
environmental effects.
Monitoring A continuing assessment of the performance of the project,
including mitigation measures. This determines if effects occur as
predicted or if operations remain within acceptable limits, and if
mitigation measures are as effective as predicted.
8
Nationally Large projects that support the economy and vital public services,
Significant including railways, large wind farms, power stations, reservoirs,
Infrastructure harbours, airports and sewage treatment works, as defined in the
Project Planning Act 2008.
Non-Statutory Organisations and bodies who are consulted on relevant planning
Consultee applications but are not prescribed under legislation.
Non-Technical Information for the non-specialist reader to enable them to
Summary understand the main predicted environmental effects of the
proposal without reference to the main Environmental Statement.
Operation The functioning of a project on completion of construction.
Pasture Grassland maintained primarily for and by grazing, and on which
grazing stock is kept for a large part of the year.
Phase 1 Habitat Recognised methodology used for collating information on the
Survey habitat structure of a particular site.
Photomontage The superimposing of an image onto a photograph for the
purpose of creating a realistic representation of proposed or
potential changes to a view.
Pollution Any increase of matter or energy to a level that is harmful to living
organisms of their environment (when it becomes a pollutant).
Preferred Option The chosen design option that most successfully achieves the
project objectives and becomes subject to further design and
assessment.
Programme A series of steps that have been identified by the applicant, or
series of projects that are linked by dependency.
Project One, or more, aspect of a programme or plan that has been
identified by the applicant and which usually involves a direct
physical intervention.
Project Objectives The objectives of the project, set by the applicant.
Proposed Scheme Also known as ‘Proposed Development’ - a plan or project which
the applicant or promoter seeks to implement.
Ramsar Areas designated by the UK Government under the International
Ramsar Convention (the Convention on Wetlands of International
Importance).
Receptor A defined individual environmental feature usually associated
with population, fauna and flora with the potential to be affected
by a project.
Resource A defined but generally collective environmental feature usually
associated with soil, water, air, climatic factors, landscape,
material assets, including the architectural and archaeological
heritage, that has potential to be affected by a project.
Roosting Site (birds) A place a bird will settle or rest, especially for the night.
Roosting Site (bats) A place where bats live (e.g. built structures and trees).
Runoff Precipitation that flows as surface water from a site, catchment or
region to the sea.
Schedule 1 Project Plans or projects which are listed in Annex I of the Directive, as
revised, and Schedule 1 of the Regulations, as revised.
9
Schedule 2 Project Plans or projects which are listed in Annex II of the Directive, as
revised, and Schedule 2 of the Regulations, as revised.
Scoping The process of identifying the issues to be addressed by the
environmental impact assessment process. It is a method of
ensuring that an assessment focuses on the important issues
and avoids those that are considered to be not significant.
Scoping Opinion An opinion provided by a competent authority that indicates the
issues an Environmental Impact Assessment of a proposed
development should consider.
Screening The formal process undertaken to determine whether it is
necessary to carry out a statutory Environmental Impact
Assessment and publish an Environmental Statement in
accordance with the EIA Regulations.
Semi-Natural A habitat, ecosystem, community, vegetation type or landscape
which has been modified by human activity but which consists
largely of native species and appears to have similar structure
and functioning to a natural type.
Significance See Significance of Effect.
Significance of A measure of the importance or gravity of the environmental
Effect effect, defined by either generic significance criteria, or criteria
specific to the environmental topic.
Significant An effect which is considered material to the decision-making
Environmental Effect process.
Sites of Special The main national conservation site protection measure in Britain
Scientific Interest designated under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981.
Special Area of International designation implemented under the Habitats
Conservation Regulations for the protection of habitats and (non bird) species.
Special Protection Sites designated under EU Directive (79/409/EEC) for the
Area conservation of wild birds.
Spring Tide Spring tides happen just after every full and new moon, when the
sun, moon and earth are in line.
Stakeholder An organisation or individual with a particular interest in the
project.
Statutory Consultee Organisations that the competent authority is required to consult
by virtue of the EIA Regulations.
Study Area The spatial area within which environmental effects are assessed
(i.e. extending a distance from the project footprint in which
significant environmental effects are anticipated to occur). This
may vary between the topic areas.
Threshold A specified level in grading effects (e.g. the order of significance).
Visual Amenity The value of a particular view or area in terms of what is seen.
Wildlife Corridor Linear habitats/landscape features such as hedgerows that may
increase connectivity by acting as routes between habitat
patches.
Worst Case A principle that is applied where environmental effects may vary
(e.g. due to seasonal variations) to ensure the most severe effect
is assessed.
10
BLANK PAGE
11
1 Introduction
1.1 Background to this Route Corridor Selection Report
1.1.1 RSK Environment Ltd (RSK) was commissioned by Western Power Distribution
(WPD) in April 2012 to provide environmental consultancy support services in
relation to the selection of a route alignment for a proposed overhead 132kV
electricity grid connection between three proposed wind farms at Brechfa Forest,
Carmarthenshire, and a suitable grid connection point near Llandyfaelog, south of
Carmarthen (the proposed scheme). The purpose of the proposed scheme is to
provide connectivity between the proposed wind farms and the existing electricity
distribution network. The three wind farms comprise: Brechfa Forest West
(consented), Bryn Llywelyn (proposed) and Brechfa Forest East (proposed).
1.1.2 During the early stages of the project WPD prepared a Strategic Optioneering
Report (SOR) to determine the most feasible and appropriate means and points of
grid connection. An interim route selection report was then made available as part
of the Stage 1 Consultation in June 2013 that identified the study area and Route
Corridor Options for the grid connection. WPD has now progressed the proposed
scheme further and, following appraisal of the Route Corridor Options by RSK on
environmental grounds and by WPD on engineering, technical and cost grounds, a
Preferred Route Corridor has been selected. This is a broad area of land through
which a number of route alignments are likely to be potentially appropriate and that
will be subject to further appraisal at the next stage of the project.
1.1.3 This Route Corridor Selection Report summarises the environmental appraisal
work and route selection processes undertaken to date, and allows statutory
bodies and other interested parties the opportunity to comment on the Preferred
Route Corridor chosen and other relevant matters which will subsequently inform
the identification of alignment options by WPD in late 2013/early 2014. This Route
Corridor Selection Report prepared by RSK on WPD’s behalf should be read
alongside the SOR and the Interim Consultation Report published at the same
12
time.
1.1.4 Following further consultation and appraisal, a preferred route alignment will be
selected by WPD in spring/summer 2014 and subject to detailed Environmental
Impact Assessment (EIA) to determine its effects on the receiving environment.
1.2 WPD’s obligations
1.2.1 WPD is the electricity distribution network operator for the South West, Midlands
and South Wales.
1.2.2 Under the statutory requirements of Section 9 of the Electricity Act 1989, the
company has a legal obligation to provide a means of connection for
developments requiring connection to the electricity distribution network, as well as
maintaining and upgrading the existing distribution network within their area of
responsibility.
1.2.3 As a holder of a distribution licence, WPD has a statutory duty to facilitate, develop
and maintain an efficient, co-ordinated and economical system of electricity
distribution. Essentially this requires that WPD identify potential electrical
connections that meet the technical requirements of the network and are
economical, and which on balance result where possible in the least disturbance
to the receiving natural and built environment and those who live and work within
it.
1.2.4 WPD is required to consider - and then balance - technical, economic, social and
environmental issues in the identification of a proposed route for a grid connection
for the wind farms.
1.3 Proposed wind farms and the identified connection point
1.3.1 The three proposed wind farms are located approximately 10km north-east of
Carmarthen and are set within and around the Brechfa Forest plantation.
1.3.2 The application for Brechfa Forest West Wind Farm was consented on
13
12 March 2013 by the Secretary of State following a recommendation for approval

by the Planning Inspectorate (PINS). This development will comprise the
construction and operation of 28 wind turbines of up to 145m tip height by RWE
npower renewables Limited (RWE).
1.3.3 Brechfa Forest East Wind Farm is currently being progressed by RWE through the
Town and Country Planning Act 1990. The development comprises a proposal to
construct and operate a 12 turbine scheme.
1.3.4 The 21 turbine Bryn Llywelyn Wind Farm proposal is being progressed by
Renewable Energy Systems UK & Ireland Limited (RES) through the Town and
Country Planning Act 1990. This application was refused by Carmarthenshire
County Council, and RES have subsequently appealed this decision.
1.3.5 All three proposed wind farms incorporate associated operational infrastructure,
each including a dedicated substation within the overall development, to allow
generated electricity to be transferred to a dedicated means of connection to the
existing distribution network.
1.3.6 The proposed connection point comprises an existing overhead line which runs
from an existing substation at Swansea (Swansea North 132kV) and terminates
north of Llandyfaelog. An existing section of this overhead line will be utilised, with
some refurbishment and reconfiguration to the overall existing line to Swansea
required.
1.3.7 As part of its strategic review of options, WPD has reviewed the suitability of this
existing line against other alternatives, and has concluded that connection into this
existing infrastructure would be technically feasible and preferable in economic
and engineering terms to a direct connection into the Swansea North Substation.
This review is documented in the Strategic Options Report (SOR).
1.3.8 Figure 1 (Appendix 2 - figures included within the first interim route selection
report) depicts the location of the three wind farms, the proposed connection point
near Llandyfaelog, and WPD’S existing distribution network within the South
14
Wales area.
1.4 The Application Process
1.4.1 The proposed scheme constitutes a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project

(NSIP) under the Planning Act 2008 (as amended). WPD will be required to submit
an application for a Development Consent Order (DCO) to PINS to obtain approval
for construction of the proposed scheme. The DCO will include the Environmental
Statement which will report the findings and outcomes of the EIA process.
1.4.2 Construction of the proposed scheme is dependent on the granting of consent for
one or more of the three wind farms at Brechfa Forest. The proposals have been
developed on the assumption that each development will require some form of
connection to the electricity network. If only one wind farm is progressed, there
still remains a need for a 132kV wooden pole trident line.
1.4.3 At the time of compiling this Route Corridor Selection Report, one of the three
proposed wind farms has been granted formal consent to proceed; this now
creates a confirmed need for the proposed scheme.
1.5 The Route Selection Process
1.5.1 The development of a grid connection project of this type requires a transparent
and inclusive process of data collection; consultation; route corridor option
identification and appraisal; and selection of the preferred route alignment (the
final proposed scheme). The route selection process involves three key stages.
 Stage 1: Primary Constraints Review – definition of an appropriate study

area within which environmental, engineering and technical data of differing
importance can be collected, reviewed and interrogated by the project team to
determine potential constraints and opportunities;
 Stage 2: Identification of Route Corridor Options and Selection of a

Preferred Route Corridor – evaluation of identified environmental constraints
and opportunities within the adopted study area to identify potential route
15
corridor options in pursuit of selection of a preferred route corridor;
 Stage 3: Identification of Route Alignment Options and selection of a

Preferred Route Alignment – a review of the Preferred Route Corridor and
development of engineering options, leading to the identification of a preferred
route alignment which will be subject to detailed scrutiny and focused EIA as
part of any application submission to PINS.
1.5.2 The stages of corridor selection are different to the consultation stages. Figure 1
shows how these two set of stages relate to one another.
1.5.3 Consultation is acknowledged to form a key part of the route selection process at
all stages. Accordingly, opportunities for stakeholder engagement are
incorporated into each stage of the process to facilitate data collection and
incorporation of the views of statutory bodies and other interested parties. The
three-stage approach ensures that stakeholders gradually move from being a
source of information into a more central role as the project progresses through
the key decision gates and development milestones.
1.5.4 Given the very large study area at the early stages of the project, an important
aspect of the environmental input to the route selection process has been to
increase the range of environmental topics considered at each stage, and to
increase the level of detailed understanding of the constraints associated with
each topic as the process moved from broad study area through agreed corridors
to detailed potential alignments. Agreeing the level of environmental constraint
information to be factored into each stage of the decision making process was an
important aspect of the consultations carried out with statutory consultees at each
stage.
1.5.5 The outcome of Stages 1 and 2 of the process (up to the selection of a Preferred
Route Corridor) is recorded in this Route Corridor Selection Report, which sets out
the various data sources, consultation activities, methodologies and approaches
that have informed the selection of the Preferred Route Corridor for the proposed
scheme.
16
1.6 Structure of this Route Corridor Selection Report
1.6.1 This Route Corridor Selection Report is structured as follows.
 Section 1 – Introduction;
 Section 2 - The Proposed Scheme;
 Section 3 - Approach and Methodology;
 Section 4 - Stage 1: Primary Constraints Review;
 Section 5 - Stage 2a: Identification of Route Corridor Options;
 Section 6 - Stage 2b: Selection of the Preferred Route Corridor;
 Section 7 – Stage 3a: Identification of Route Alignment Options;
 Section 8 – Stage 3b: Selection of the Preferred Route Alignment.
17
2 The Proposed Scheme
2.1 Overview of the South Wales Area
2.1.1 The area associated with the proposed wind farms and surrounding environs
captures a proportion of the county of Carmarthenshire and the western fringes of
the Brecon Beacons National Park.
2.1.2 Forces of change have shaped the landscape over time from physical and human
influences, resulting in a land use pattern dominated by plantation forestry and
agriculture, interspersed with isolated settlements, villages and small towns.
2.1.3 Settlements are linked by a complex network of rural roads and lanes as well as
major transport corridors such as the A40, A485 and A48 connecting Carmarthen
to wider towns.
2.1.4 The area exhibits incised valleys along several watercourses such as the River
Cothi running south from the Brechfa locality to the broader, more visually
exposed valley of the River Towy which flows westwards towards Carmarthen.
2.1.5 Several areas cater for informal recreation, these being associated with the many
kilometres of river valleys, tracks, footpaths and bridleways.
2.1.6 Topography is highly variable, demonstrated by the many complex landforms and
steep gradients topped by exposed elevated areas of moorland. Many localised
high points around Brechfa exceed heights of 300m AOD, dropping significantly in
the low lying river valley floors to around 30m AOD.
2.1.7 Climatic and weather conditions affect the general perception and experience of
the area, with the existing Alltwalis Wind Farm east of the A485 exerting a notable
man-made influence in the landscape and visual environment. Other human
influences comprise railway corridors connecting major towns and a network of
existing overhead transmission and distribution towers and local distribution lines
which traverse the landscape.
18
2.2 Background to the Proposals
Indicative Route
2.2.1 An initial review of a possible overhead connection was undertaken by WPD

during the preparation of the DCO application for the Brechfa Forest West Wind
Farm by RWE, in order to demonstrate to the former Infrastructure Planning
Commission (now PINS) that a grid connection was feasible and achievable from
this particular development.
2.2.2 Line Survey Transmission Consultancy Limited (LSTC) were commissioned by

WPD in 2009 to undertake a reconnaissance survey into the feasibility of routeing
a 132kV wooden pole line from the wind farm substation to the existing Swansea
North Substation, located some 35km south-east.
2.2.3 A combination of desk-based and site based surveys were undertaken to

determine a high-level conceptual route (the indicative route) for the connection,
the alignment of which sought to achieve a degree of compatibility with existing
terrain, landform, land cover, environmental designations, utility infrastructure, and
settlement patterns.
2.2.4 The indicative route is depicted on Figure 2 (Appendix 2 - figures included within
the first interim route selection report), the preliminary details of which were
subsequently set out within the DCO application documentation for the Brechfa
Forest West Wind Farm1, acknowledging that any connection would be the subject
of a separate DCO application to PINS to obtain development consent to proceed.
2.2.5 Given the requirement to provide a means of electrical connection to the Brechfa
Forest West, Brechfa Forest East and Bryn Llywelyn wind farms, WPD elected to
re-evaluate the feasibility of overhead routeing by undertaking a wider strategic
review of potential options, building on the high-level findings of the 2009 LSTC

1
Full details of the indicative route are contained in Appendix 3.3 of the Brechfa Forest West Wind Farm Environmental
Statement (October 2011) (RWE npower renewables Ltd). Within this document, the indicative route is referred to as the
‘potential grid connection route’.
19
study.
Strategic Option Review
2.2.6 In meeting its licence obligations, WPD seeks to find an acceptable overhead line
solution for all proposed electrical distribution connections of 132kV capacity and
below. Generally, overhead distribution lines are more economical and less
disruptive to construct than their underground counterparts, and prove easier to
maintain and repair in the long term by offering improved access and quicker
repair times. WPD has a licence obligation to offer developers an economical
connection option.
2.2.7 Only in instances where there are exceptional environmental constraints are
underground cables considered as a justified alternative by WPD. Such
constraints are commonly associated with urban developed areas where space
availability and proximity issues arise and in certain rural environments where
overhead infrastructure is identified as having the potential to lead to unacceptable
(where unacceptable means planning consent cannot be granted) effects upon
receptors such as the receiving landscape, historical assets or ecological
receptors for example.
2.2.8 A strategic options review was commenced by WPD in early 2012, which involved
the identification and appraisal of high-level feasible options across a wide
geographical area that could potentially achieve the project objectives.
2.2.9 As part of this review, consideration was given to different technologies such as
the full or partial use of underground cabling, the full details of which are set out in
a Strategic Optioneering Report (May 2013) for the proposed scheme, and
supporting reports.
2.2.10 In consultation with the respective wind farm developers, a strategic decision was
made that the proposed grid connection should principally be achieved through
the installation of an overhead 132kV single circuit connection supported on
wooden H pole structures.
20
2.2.11 WPD’s primary system design engineers identified the Swansea North Substation
as the substation nearest to the wind farms that could receive the level of electrical
load generated before sending it back out onto the distribution network. The early
stage of the route corridor study work undertaken by the project team was
focussed on the need to provide a new connection from the wind farms directly to
Swansea North Substation.
2.2.12 As part of its strategic review, WPD appraised potential methods of connecting
into the Swansea North Substation; this involved technical evaluation of the
suitability of the existing overhead connections, and the viability of installing new
distribution infrastructure.
2.2.13 Continued evaluation led to the identification of existing sections of the 132kV
network that had capacity to transfer the electrical load to Swansea North meaning
that the point of connection could be to existing overhead lines closer to the wind
farms. A feasible connection point was identified in the Llandyfaelog locality. This
comprised an existing section of overhead distribution line – the “EE route” –
which terminates in a field approximately 10km south of Carmarthen but which
provides an existing overhead connection to the Swansea North Substation via the
“W”, “C” and “V” routes shown on Figure 1 (Appendix 2 - figures included within
the first interim route selection report).
2.2.14 Following detailed review, WPD concluded that the EE route connection point near
Llandyfaelog offered significant benefits over routeing directly into the Swansea
North Substation in terms of utilising existing distribution infrastructure and
reducing the overall length of new line and potential impacts of the proposed
scheme.
2.2.15 The strategic options review concluded that this option would achieve a better,
more appropriate balance between WPD’s technical, economic and environmental
obligations. It was also considered that an overhead option between the three
wind farms and the existing Llandyfaelog connection point would enable WPD to fit
with the objectives of National Planning Policy by enabling the export of renewable
21
energy.
2.2.16 Notwithstanding this, WPD acknowledged as part of its strategic review that the
adoption of an overhead solution could potentially raise conflicts with the
protection of amenity and other valued assets, given the receiving environment
contains a diverse composite of interests such as designated landscapes and
dispersed local communities.
2.2.17 Accordingly, the review concluded that consideration may potentially need to be
given to the undergrounding of some sections of the overhead connection in
locations where such conflicts may emerge, as part of the later stages of option
appraisal and evaluation.
2.3 Outline Design and Construction of the Proposed Scheme
2.3.1 The SOR concluded that the objectives of the proposed scheme will be best
realised through the installation of a new section of 132kV single circuit overhead
distribution line, positioned on wooden poles.
2.3.2 The overhead line will transmit a single 3-phase circuit from the proposed wind
farms and connect into the existing terminated network near Llandyfaelog. The
strategic review of this existing section of the network identified a need for some
refurbishment and reconfiguration to the overall existing line to Swansea North
Substation.
2.3.3 A fibre optic cable will also be installed as part of the circuit; this will either be
wrapped around one of the phase wires or under-strung to provide a means of
communication along its route. The cable will be used to transmit data along its
length in relation to operation of the line, including fault detection during operation.
2.3.4 It is envisaged the wooden poles will be installed to achieve an average height
above ground of around 15 metres, with the possibility of extending (to a maximum
of 20 metres) or reducing this to meet statutory clearance criteria or to address
physical constraints such as steep gradients.
22
2.3.5 Where a change in direction (or angle) of the overhead line is necessary, the poles
would be reinforced with stays to counteract the pull of the line. A variant on the
H pole, the “4 pole” structure, would be used at interface locations where a section
or sections of the line are undergrounded to accommodate the cable terminations.
Additional support structures may also be required at interface locations along the
line route. These details will be determined during survey at the route alignment
stage.
2.3.6 The wooden poles will allow a maximum achievable span of 120m; however the
span distance will vary depending on existing topographical conditions and the
need to accommodate technical and/or environmental constraints such as other
related electrical distribution infrastructure that may exist along the final preferred
alignment.
2.3.7 Span lengths may also be influenced by the type and size of conductors (overhead
wires) to be used. Conductors will be installed in a horizontal flat formation at the
top of each pole, with lightening protection fitted where necessary.
2.3.8 It is envisaged that construction plant, machinery and 4x4 vehicles will be used to
deliver, assemble and erect the individual wooden poles. This would, for example,
include a ‘hymac’ excavator or JCB, 4x4 ‘Hiab’ lorry, tractor & winches , 4x4
vehicles (Land Rovers or similar), and elevated platforms. Temporary fencing will
be used to secure working areas from livestock and members of the public.
2.3.9 Installation of the wooden poles will require excavation of a foundation pit within
which each structure can be set vertically and braced. Excavated earth is then
used as backfill material.
2.3.10 Following installation of a number of pole sections, stringing will be undertaken to

install the overhead wires to the poles. Drums of overhead wire will be set up, with
a winch tensioner used to assist pulling of the conductors from one end of the
section to the other.
2.3.11 The overhead crossing of road or railway corridors will be achieved through the
23
construction of a temporary scaffold tunnel, and potential obstacles such as

existing overhead lines will either be switched off, deviated or protected using
scaffolds.
2.3.12 Construction materials will be delivered to dedicated site storage or assembly

areas via the existing road network, and subsequently transferred to individual
pole sites by cross-country vehicles fitted with lifting apparatus. Tracked
excavators will be used during installation to reduce ground compaction and
damage, with any disturbed areas fully reinstated post construction.
2.3.13 Periodic inspection of the distribution line will be undertaken to identify any
damage or deterioration of the components, such that can occur from storm
events and lightning strikes.
2.3.14 The typical components of the proposed scheme are depicted on Figure 3
(Appendix 2 - figures included within the first interim route selection report).
2.3.15 The final details of a preferred connection method and associated alignment will
be established and confirmed as part of Stage 3 of the options appraisal process,
at which time detailed topographical ground condition surveys will be undertaken
to identify the positions and heights of each individual pole.
24
3 Approach and Methodology
3.1 Commitments and Principles
3.1.1 The approach to options identification and appraisal at both the route corridor
selection and route alignment selection stages of the process has been founded
on the following commitments, guiding principles and best practice.
 A commitment to progression of an appropriate technical solution that seeks to

limit disturbance to people and the receiving environment through avoidance
of areas of acknowledged high value, sensitivity and/or amenity wherever
possible;
 A commitment to ensure potential design solutions provide operational

efficiency and offer genuine economic value, in line with obligations set out
under the Electricity Act 1989;
 Retention of flexibility to allow controlled review and iteration to occur where

necessary;
 Effort expended during the process must be proportionate to the stage and
level of decision-making required;
 Consultation will underpin the decision making process throughout -

stakeholders will act as a source of essential data, a means of testing and
modifying the appraisal method, and will assist in the determination of
priorities;
 Consideration of the Holford Rules and National Grid guidelines (described

below) throughout the design-development and appraisal processes;
 Having due regard to WPD’s Schedule 9 statement (see Appendix 1);
 A clear need to balance and resolve possible conflicts between technical,

environmental and economic considerations by way of evidence based review,
25
criteria and consultation; and
 Reporting of conclusions at each stage in an open and transparent manner

that will inform the next stages of study, investigation and appraisal.
3.2 Holford Rules
3.2.1 The Holford Rules comprise a set of guidelines for overhead line routeing. The
Rules were prepared in 1959 by Lord Holford, the key principles of which focus on
the achievement of good visual integration and protection of areas of high amenity
value. The Rules are re-stated in paragraph 2.8.6 of National Policy Statement for
Electricity Networks Infrastructure (EN-5).
3.2.2 The Rules - with notes of clarification added by National Grid (in italics) - are as
follows.
 Rule 1: Avoid altogether, if possible, the major areas of highest amenity value,
by so planning the general route of the first line in the first place, even if the
total mileage is somewhat increased in consequence;
Investigate the possibility of alternative routes, avoiding if possible the areas of

the highest amenity value. The consideration of alternative routes must be an
integral feature of environmental statements. Areas of highest amenity value
are: Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty; National Parks; Heritage Coasts;
and World Heritage Sites.
 Rule 2: Avoid smaller areas of high amenity value, or scientific interests by

deviation; provided that this can be done without using too many angle towers
i.e. the more massive structures which are used when lines change direction;
Some areas (e.g. Site of Special Scientific Interest) may require special
consideration for potential effects on ecology (e.g. to their flora and fauna).
Where possible choose routes which minimise the effects on the setting of
areas of architectural, historic and archaeological interest including
Conservation Areas, Listed Buildings, Listed Parks and Gardens and Ancient
Monuments.
 Rule 3: Other things being equal, choose the most direct line, with no sharp
changes of direction and thus with fewer angle towers;
26
Where possible choose inconspicuous locations for angle towers, terminal

towers and sealing end compounds.
 Rule 4: Choose tree and hill backgrounds in preference to sky backgrounds

wherever possible; and when the line has to cross a ridge, secure this opaque
background as long as possible and cross obliquely when a dip in the ridge
provides an opportunity. Where it does not, cross directly, preferably between
belts of trees;
 Rule 5: Prefer moderately open valleys with woods where the apparent height
of towers will be reduced, and views of the line will be broken by trees;
Utilise background and foreground features to reduce the apparent height and
domination of towers from pan viewpoints. Minimise the exposure of numbers
of towers on prominent ridges and skylines. Where possible avoiding cutting
extensive swathes through woodland blocks and consider opportunities for
skirting edges of copses and woods. Protecting existing vegetation, including
woodland and hedgerows, and safeguard visual and ecological links with the
surrounding landscape.
 Rule 6: In country which is flat and sparsely planted, keep the high voltage
lines as far as possible independent of smaller lines, converging routes,
distribution poles and other masts, wires and cables, so as to avoid a
concentration or ‘wirescape’;
In all locations minimise confusing appearance. Arrange wherever practicable

that parallel or closely related routes are planned with tower types, spans and
conductors forming a coherent appearance; where routes need to diverge,
allow where practicable sufficient separation to limit the effects on properties
and features between the lines.
 Rule 7: Approach urban area through industrial zones, where they exist; and
when pleasant residential and recreational land intervenes between the
approach line and the substation, go carefully into the comparative costs of the
undergrounding, for lines other than those of the highest voltage;
When a line needs to pass through a development area, route it so as to

minimise as far as possible the effect on development. Alignments should be
chosen after consideration of effects on the amenity of existing development
and on proposals for new development. When siting substations take account
of the effects of the terminal towers and line connections that will need to be
27
made and take advantage of screening features such as ground form and
vegetation.
SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
Residential Areas: Avoid routeing close to residential areas as far as possible

on grounds of general amenity.
Designations of County, District and Local Value: Where possible choose

routes which minimise the effect on Special Landscape Areas, areas of Great
Landscape Value and other similar designations of County, District or Local
value.
Alternative Tower Designs: In additional to adopting appropriate routeing,

evaluate where appropriate the use of alternative tower designs now available
where these would be advantageous visually, and where the extra cost can be
justified.
3.2.3 The Holford Rules were a product of a particular time where protection of
landscape, ecology and heritage assets through formal designation was limited,
thereby allowing conflicts between overhead line developments and the receiving
environment to be more easily reconciled than is achievable today.
3.2.4 Since the formulation of the Holford Rules, formal requirements for EIA have been
gradually introduced through legislation and statute over the last 25 years.
Although the EIA process seeks to address wider environmental issues that
extend far beyond the original focus of the Rules, they are considered to remain a
useful tool in the selection, refinement and appraisal of overhead line routeing
projects and accordingly continue to form a key role in the design-development
process.
3.2.5 The core principles of the Holford Rules have been integrated into the National
Policy Statement for Electricity Networks Infrastructure (EN-5); this sets out
national policy position concerning certain types of overhead electrical
transmission and distribution projects in England and Wales.
3.3 National Grid Guidance
3.3.1 National Grid, the organisation responsible for the development and maintenance
of the strategic high-voltage transmission network and other energy connections,
28
has published the following guidance on itsapproach and principles concerning

installation of new overhead and underground transmission lines.
 Our approach to the design and routeing of new electricity transmission lines
(2012);
 Our approach to options appraisal (2012).
3.3.2 Both documents outline how National Grid identifies the most appropriate location
and technology for any new electricity connections, setting out how data is
collected, analysed and consulted upon in order to develop and appraise
alternatives in pursuit of solutions that best meet society’s needs. This guidance
was reviewed as part of the development of the route selection methodology.
3.4 Route Selection Methodology
Outline of the Approach
3.4.1 The scope and methodology underpinning the options appraisals and route
selection processes has been founded on the above commitments, principles and
guidelines. The detailed methodology followed has been refined at various stages
of the route selection process in response to project findings and consultation
responses.
3.4.2 An outline options appraisal methodology was first developed by RSK in

February 2012 to enable progression of the preliminary project activities, following
initial discussions with WPD regarding their development programme and
associated timescales for delivery of the proposed scheme. The original outline
options appraisal methodology was then subject to refinement during the
subsequent stages of the route selection process. This section of this Route
Corridor Selection Report therefore records the methods used to reach the current
stage in the route selection process and sets out the proposed approach to future
stages.
3.4.3 A staged approach was developed for: the identification of environmental
29
constraints and opportunities; identification and refinement of potential route

corridors; drafting of route alignment options; and selection of a preferred route
alignment for the proposed scheme.
3.4.4 The stages were presented in a manner that could be clearly understood by the
project team and consultees to ensure timescales, roles and expectations were
clear to all parties involved.
Stage 1
3.4.5 Stage 1 involved identification of “first tier” primary environmental constraints (i.e.
those of international and national significance) and “second tier” environmental
constraints (i.e. those of regional and local significance) associated primarily with
landscape, nature conservation, cultural heritage and land use/planning interests.
3.4.6 Data was sought from statutory consultees, the large majority of which being
readily available in digital form on the internet which could be easily gathered and
manipulated in this initial stage of the process.
3.4.7 The approach sought to engage relevant stakeholders early in the data collection
phase through formal letters requesting information and records pertinent to Stage
1, accompanied by a request for any other environmental criteria they felt
warranted consideration in the process.
3.4.8 Stage 1 Consultation set out to engage statutory consultees via meetings and
workshops in order to: review the appropriateness and completeness of data
gathered; establish a common understanding of environmental interests and their
inter-relationships; contribute to identification of site-specific and area based
sensitivities; and invite comment on the scope and methodology of work going
forwards.
3.4.9 The methodology established that adoption of GIS techniques was appropriate to
use during all stages of the appraisal, given that: considerable spatial extents
would likely require consideration; many statutory agencies and websites provide
GIS compatible data formats; and complex data and designation boundaries could
30
be presented and interrogated digitally in ‘heat map’ form to readily identify

development constraints, opportunities, priorities and conflicts during Stage 2 of
the exercise.
Stage 2
3.4.10 The prime objective of Stage 2 was to develop a number of Route Corridor
Options that, where possible, avoided key environmental sensitivities and assets
of acknowledged importance and value. In common with Stage 1, the exercise
gave due regard to established routeing guidelines such as the Holford Rules and
National Grid guidelines.
3.4.11 Criteria and interests appropriate to Stage 2 were again reviewed and validated by
stakeholder consultation, extended to capture wider groups. The methodology
originally proposed identification of corridors based on nominal 500m width to
allow flexibility in route alignment identification and development at Stage 3.
Project specific requirements subsequently resulted in much wider corridors being
identified for many sections of the possible route.
3.4.12 The primary and secondary environmental constraint data associated primarily
with landscape, visual, ecology, cultural heritage and land use/planning interests
was reviewed and mapped in detail, along with the findings of site visits, to identify
potential route corridor options with the least constraints or greatest opportunity to
accommodate overhead route alignments. The methodology recognised that the
secondary constraints were more likely to provide a basis for refining options and
defining constraints of more local significance at Stage 2.
3.4.13 Site based reviews were undertaken jointly by project team members at Stage 2 to
facilitate comparison of sensitivities, and to set the ground for discussion of
priorities as the refinement of options proceeded. The approach also allowed for
engineering and operational constraints to begin to be fed into the process during
Stage 2.
3.4.14 Following the identification and agreement of a defined set of Route Corridor
31
Options (determined primarily with reference to landscape, ecology, cultural

heritage and land use/planning constraints) a wider range of topics were then
introduced into the environmental appraisal process used to identify the Preferred
Route Corridor. Although the appraisal does not necessarily explicitly consider
matters raised during workshops and other consultations, knowledge gained by
the assessment team through these consultation processes has informed the
appraisals. WPD’s consideration of its wider regulatory obligations were also
factored into the overall decision making process.
3.4.15 Consultation during Stage 2 served to inform the refinement and ultimately the
selection of the Preferred Route Corridor, with the outcomes of the process
recorded in Section 6 of this report.
Stage 3
3.4.16 This route corridor selection report records the Stage 2 process undertaken to
identify the Preferred Route Corridor. The key objective of Stage 3 will be to
identify and appraise Route Alignment Options within this Preferred Route Corridor
in order to select a Preferred Route Alignment (the final scheme).
3.4.17 Following identification of the Preferred Route Corridor, the chosen corridor will be
interrogated further in order to identify potential route alignments within different
sections of the overall corridor. These will be based on potential lines of ‘least
resistance’, balanced against factors such as feasibility of construction, operation
and cost, with thought given to routeing guidelines throughout.
3.4.18 Alternative route alignments within each section will then be subject to a
preliminary comparative exercise to establish which, if any, might be discounted
from further consideration. This stage will also involve consideration of factors
such as the relationship between the route alignments and
landowners/landholdings, and potential conflicts with existing utilities and
infrastructure (e.g. highways).
3.4.19 The alternatives will be independently reviewed and jointly considered by the
32
project team against environmental and engineering parameters. This review and
testing will take the form of a scoring or ranking system against criteria including
environmental sensitivity, deliverability and operational implications, leading to the
selection of a single Preferred Route Alignment which will be taken forward for
development and EIA.
3.4.20 Following consultation during Stage 1 of the project the stages of the appraisal
were refined and subdivided in the following manner.
 Stage 1a: Primary Environmental Constraints Review – involving

development of a study area and initial consultation with statutory agencies
and relevant local authorities to collect information on “first tier” issues (i.e.
those of international and national significance) and “second tier” issues (i.e.
those of regional and local significance), associated with landscape and visual
dynamics, nature conservation, cultural heritage and land use/planning
interests;
 Stage 1b: Primary Technical Constraints Review – involving a review of

existing and planned infrastructure within the defined study area that could
present a barrier or constraint to development;
 Stage 2a: Corridor Options Identification and Appraisal – involving a

combination of desk-based and site-based review to establish potential
corridors, or corridor combinations, between the three proposed wind farms
and the connection point(s). This stage references environmental information
and records gathered during Stages 1a and 1b (associated primarily with
landscape, nature conservation, cultural heritage and land use/planning
interests), engineering factors, and operational constraints;
 Stage 2b: Identification of the Preferred Route Corridor – involving

engagement with an extended stakeholder group via Stage 1 Consultation
comprising regional and local interest groups, and detailed appraisal and
comparison of the agreed Route Corridors Options to establish a preferred
option to take forward into Stage 3. The appraisal at Stage 2b (and beyond)
33
introduced a wider range of environmental considerations such as hydrology

and flood risk; geology, soils and ground conditions; noise and vibration;
socio-economics; electric and magnetic fields; air quality; and traffic and
transport.
 Stage 3a: Identification of Route Alignment Options – involving

development of potential route alignments within the Preferred Route
Corridors, leading to a high level appraisal of options.
 Stage 3b: Selection of Preferred Route Alignment - Established guidelines

and consultation with landowners, the public and other consultees will aid the
appraisal of options in pursuit of a preferred alignment, which will be subject to
formal EIA procedures.
3.4.21 It is acknowledged that the route selection method could evolve further as the
proposed scheme progresses through more detailed stakeholder consultation,
testing and appraisal. This route corridor selection report provides information up
to and including selection of the Preferred Route corridor at the end of Stage 2b.
In due course the alignment appraisal and decision-making process at Stage 3 will
be fully documented and reported in a comparable manner to that completed for
Stages 1 and 2 within the first and subsequent route selection reports.
34
4 Stage 1: Constraints Review
4.1 Area of Search
Definition
4.1.1 Stage 1 of the route selection process commenced in April 2012 with the Primary
Constraints Review.
4.1.2 A preliminary area of search was collectively defined, predicted on the assumption
that the three proposed wind farms at Brechfa would likely be connected via an
overhead line to the existing Swansea North Substation.
4.1.3 The preliminary area of search was initially based around the indicative corridor
identified for the Brechfa Forest West Wind Farm development, with appropriate
extensions made to frame an area of sufficient coverage that would: accommodate
the indicative route and other potential alternative corridors for the proposed
scheme; enable identification of environmental sensitivities and constraints that
could be directly and/or indirectly affected by progression of a connection; and
enable identification of technical and/or engineering factors that may preclude or
hinder development of an overhead line.
4.1.4 The extent of the preliminary area of search was principally defined by a combined
review of desk-based mapping, known sensitivities and their boundaries, existing
topography, settlement patterns, transportation corridors and high-level technical
inputs provided by WPD.
4.1.5 The area identified necessarily captured the three wind farm substation locations
and the identified Swansea connection point, the boundary of which was broadly
defined to the east by a combination the A474, B4310, and the western boundary
of the Brecon Beacons National Park. The western extents were constrained by
the town of Carmarthen, the A484, and the River Towy estuary.
35
Environmental Data
4.1.6 Environmental information concerning landscape, ecology, cultural heritage and

land use/planning interests within the preliminary area of search was gathered by
way of desk-based studies and initial stakeholder consultation with relevant local
authorities and statutory consultees such as the Countryside Council for Wales
(CCW)2.
4.1.7 Data collection focused on identification and gathering of first tier environmental
issues within the preliminary study area; these comprised physical constraints and
sites of international or national significance on which preliminary route corridors
could be identified, adopting avoidance as a key criterion.
4.1.8 Data relating to more extensive second tier issues, such as sites of regional and
local significance, was also obtained at this time and mapped. Although
consideration was given to these types of constraint, this data was acknowledged
to form a more influential factor during the later stages of localised corridor option
refinement and detailed routeing of alignments.
4.1.9 A full schedule of first and second tier data collected for the above environmental
topics is presented in Table 4.1 later in this report.
Engineering Considerations
4.1.10 A number of technical and operational factors were set out by WPD early in the
appraisal process, which was deemed to form material considerations throughout
the study.
4.1.11 Factors identified as requiring consideration from the outset of the study are as
follows.
 Wind farm connections – allowance for connectivity between each proposed

wind farm substation and the identified connection point;

2
Natural Resources Wales (NRW) became operational on 1st April 2013, and brings together the work of the former
Countryside Council for Wales (CCW), Environment Agency Wales (EAW) and Forestry Commission Wales (FCW), as
well as some functions of Welsh Government.
36
 Avoidance of steep slopes and routeing in areas of high altitude (>200m, albeit
that the connections into the wind farms will be at this height or greater) due to
difficulties of engineering on sharp gradients, problematic construction and
maintenance access, and exposure of overhead distribution equipment to
more adverse climatic conditions that could render achievement of security of
supply extremely difficult;
 Proximity of major infrastructure – as a basis for demonstrating existing

corridors of disturbance, and where existing and planned utility infrastructure
could potentially present a constraint or barrier to corridor identification and
subsequent detailed routeing of overhead alignments;
 Avoidance of major areas of settlement – through adoption of a minimum 60m

buffer threshold from properties for overhead routes, with efforts made to
achieve a more desirable 100m distance wherever possible;
 Nature of equipment – acknowledging some types of overhead conductors

cannot be successfully accommodated on a wooden pole structure, and the
physical limitations associated with the maximum permissible spans between
poles;
 Length of connection – in terms of identifying economically viable routes that

enable WPD to meet its statutory obligations;
 Existing corridors of disturbance - to follow existing routes of overhead lines

(with due regard given to the Holford Rules) and road corridors where the
principle of successfully accommodating linear infrastructure in the local
environment has been established.
4.1.12 Accordingly, information relating to existing electrical distribution infrastructure

(33kV circuits and above), principal utility connections, key settlements and
topography was obtained and recorded as part of the constraints mapping
exercise.
37
Alternative Connection Point
4.1.13 In parallel with the data collection exercise, WPD continued to undertake its
strategic review of options in mid 2012. During the review, a potential alternative
to a direct connection into the Swansea North substation emerged in June 2012 –
this was located at close to Llandyfaelog, approximately 10km south of
Carmarthen.
4.1.14 This alternative connection point is a location between Tower No. 42 and 46, the
latter forming the terminal end tower associated with an existing overhead
distribution line that indirectly connects back to the Swansea North substation.
The route is named the “EE route”.
4.1.15 In evaluating the merits of the EE route, WPD considered that utilisation of this
existing infrastructure would potentially offer advantages in terms of achieving a
shorter, more economical overhead connection length for the new line. WPD
determined that the ongoing appraisal process should give consideration to the
potential for connecting the three wind farms to the Swansea North substation via
either the EE route, or directly into the substation, until such time that the Strategic
Optioneering Report could be completed and a single preferred connection
identified.
4.1.16 Accordingly, the EE route was mapped and brought into the overall scope of the
appraisal for consideration during the second stage of the process.
4.1.17 The EE route connection area and associated existing overhead lines is depicted
on Figure 1(Appendix 2 – figures included within the first interim route selection
report).
Consultation and Refinement of the Area of Search
4.1.18 Consultation on the outline methodology and the preliminary constraints data
gathered within the preliminary area of search was undertaken on 09 August 2012
38
with stakeholders comprising CCW, Environment Agency Wales, and Cadw3.
4.1.19 A series of GIS outputs were produced for discussion purposes; these depicted
single and composite areas of constraint under the key interests of landscape,
ecology and heritage. Outputs principally comprised constraints mapping
presented on Ordnance Survey mapping at 1:20,000 scale to enable clear
identification of sensitivities.
4.1.20 Consultees made the following key observations in respect of the tabled
information.
 Clear justification would need to be provided for why the area of search
extends towards the coast south of Carmarthen;
 Use of LANDMAP4 data would be an important factor during the appraisal,

with a possible approach suggested that builds upon landscape character and
sensitivity;
 Historic Landscape Areas, areas of semi-natural ancient woodland and open

access areas should be marked on the constraints plans;
 Visual aspects and dynamics form an important factor for consideration later in
the appraisal process;
 An expectancy from Cadw of no direct impacts on statutory designations, and

avoidance where possible of indirect effects on the setting of historic assets;
 Aim to reduce effects on areas of Registered Historic Landscape, those at

flood risk, and individual watercourses.
4.1.21 A key response from CCW was that potential route corridors need to be
responsive to the above constraints, and therefore should not be defined by an
arbitrary or uniform width.

3
The Welsh Government’s historic environment service.
4
LANDMAP forms key landscape guidance for Wales, and comprises a GIS based landscape resource where
landscape characteristics, qualities and influences on the landscape are recorded and evaluated into a nationally
consistent data set.
39
4.1.22 In relation to the study area, it was suggested by CCW that this be broadened to
capture the western fringes of the Brecon Beacons National Park near Llandeilo,
given the potential for indirect visual effects to occur from within this important
area.
4.1.23 Other feedback suggested refinements be made to extend the boundary

westwards beyond Carmarthen, thus capturing part of the River Towy estuary, and
to widen the coverage in the north-east towards the settlement of Llandysul. The
rationale behind these modifications was to permit consideration of possible
corridor options that may exist to the west of Carmarthen.
4.1.24 A second similar meeting was held with representatives from Carmarthenshire
County Council and the City and County of Swansea on 16 August 2012. In
addition to the previously tabled information, WPD provided a brief summary of the
feedback given by consultees from the previous week’s meeting.
4.1.25 Additional points and observations raised were as follows.
 A recommendation to investigate the possibility of rationalising existing

overhead lines as part of the project;
 The Towy Valley emerged as a key constraint requiring careful consideration,

given its visual dynamics and designated status;
 A need to map the existing transmission and distribution network, and other
utility infrastructure, in order to factor in the locations and extent of overhead
and underground connections;
 Consideration of strategic search areas, future developments and land

allocations contained in relevant forward planning documents;
 A requirement to consider recreational interests (e.g. cycle routes and

recognised viewpoints), albeit at later stages of the appraisal process.
4.1.26 WPD accordingly took account of all consultee feedback from both meetings, and
subsequently RSK updated the constraints mapping to reflect the above
40
observations and considerations, re-engaging stakeholders where necessary to

obtain additional data within the refined area of search.
4.1.27 The refined area of search is depicted on Figure 5 (Appendix 2 – figures included
within the first interim route selection report). This area was adopted as the basis
for the identification and appraisal of potential Route Corridor Options in Stage 2.
Methodological Refinements
4.1.28 Shortly after receipt of consultation feedback during the Stage 1 Primary
Constraints Review, the outline appraisal methodology was updated and finalised
in early September 2012 prior to progression into activities associated with
Stage 2. A key change in the staged approach to appraisal centred on the need
for engineering factors such as topography coming forward as a material
consideration earlier in the study, and to incorporate feedback on the timing of
future consultation events. These changes are reflected in the method statement
contained in section 3 of this report.
4.2 Summary of Data
4.2.1 The following range of data was requested and obtained as part of the Stage 1
Primary Constraints Review data collection exercise. This took account of
consultee feedback, preliminary engineering and technical considerations, and
additional stakeholder data requests.
41
Table 4.1– Stage One Data Sources
Topic Area Content Data Source

Landscape National Parks CCW
Historic Parks and Gardens Cadw
Special Landscape Areas Carmarthenshire
County Council
City and County of
Swansea
LANDMAP Areas (Outstanding and CCW
High): Geological Landscape,
Landscape Habitats, Visual and
Sensory, Historic Landscape, and
Cultural Landscape)
Country Parks CCW
Topography Ordnance Survey
Regional Landscape Character CCW
Areas
Registered Common Land CCW
Ecology Sites of Special Scientific Interest CCW
(SSSI)
Special Areas of Conservation CCW
Special Protection Areas CCW
National Nature Reserves CCW
Ancient and Semi Natural CCW
Woodland
RSPB Nature Reserves RSPB
Local Nature Reserves CCW
Important Bird Areas RSPB
42
Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monuments Cadw

Listed Buildings Cadw
World Heritage Sites Cadw
Registered landscapes of either Cadw
special or historic importance in
Wales
Designated Wrecks Cadw
Conservation Areas Cadw
Historic Environmental Record Dyfed Archaeological
(HER) (specifically to identify non- Trust
designated heritage assets Glamorgan-Gwent
demonstrably of equivalent Archaeological Trust
significance to designated assets)
Planning/Land Use Woodland Ordnance Survey
Recreational Routes (Long data and Carmarthen
distance footpaths and National / Swansea planning
Cycle Routes - existing and frameworks, and
proposed) Welsh Technical
Transportation Network (road, rail Advice Note 8:
and aviation) Renewable Energy
Major watercourses (TAN 8)
Major areas of settlement
Areas of Open Access (Open
Country)
Strategic Search Areas and Land
Use Allocations
Existing utility infrastructure (e.g. WPD and statutory
overhead transmission and undertakers
distribution lines)
Flood Risk Areas Environment Agency
Wales
4.2.2 Where raw data was obtained in hard copy or electronic form requiring digitising,
the accuracy of the data was considered to be appropriate to the degree of
definition being sought at that stage of the appraisal.
4.2.3 Data types highlighted in bold text within the table above indicate those which
were considered by the project team and consultees to form first tier (primary)
constraints; these were used as the basis for preliminary identification of potential
route corridors in the constraints review as set out below.
43
4.3 Constraints Review
4.3.1 The preliminary analysis of mapped constraints revealed that the refined area of
search is typified by designated landscapes of high quality, with extensive
protected nature conservation interests and a long-standing history represented by
archaeological and built features of acknowledged importance and value.
4.3.2 First tier interests were considered to be of the highest environmental and/or
amenity value, in line with the principles of avoidance set out in the Holford Rules
and other best practice guidance.
4.3.3 Reference is made in the Holford Rules to Historic Parks and Gardens. Although
such designations are non-statutory, it was considered that their very reference in
the guidelines necessitated their inclusion within the first tier criteria. A similar
approach was adopted in the appraisal for locally designated Conservation Areas,
given their specific mention in the guidelines.
4.3.4 The accompanying notes to the Holford Rules make clear the need to avoid
routeing close to residential areas on the grounds of amenity. To ensure
compliance with this principle, major settlement areas such as towns and villages
were demarcated from Ordnance Survey mapping and local planning frameworks
and taken forward as first tier criteria on the grounds that they represent
constraints associated with residential amenity.
4.3.5 The review revealed that designations and features such as Historic Parks and
Gardens can contribute to the perception, composition, understanding and
appreciation of both the landscape and heritage topics. Similarly, initiatives such
as LANDMAP apply to more than one topic. In instances where overlap occurs,
interests have been considered across all relevant topics as part of the constraints
review, but have been presented once below for concision.
4.3.6 The following sub-sections provide an environmental profile of the study area as
defined in Figure 5 (Appendix 2 – figures included within the first interim route
selection report). The work undertaken to understand the baseline conditions of
44
the study area which is reported in the rest of this section forms Stage 1a and 1b
of the revised methodology.
4.4 Landscape and Visual Dynamics
4.4.1 Landscape encompasses the whole of the external rural and urban environment.
Topography, vegetation, habitation by wildlife, drainage patterns, land use,
engineered and built form combine with perceptual factors such as culture, history,
and seasonal change to frame landscapes of distinctive character.
4.4.2 There is a clear relationship between landscape character and visual context; the
landscape is generally experienced by those viewing it, albeit senses such as
touch and smell influence perceptions.
4.4.3 Government policy makes a clear commitment to the protection and enhancement
of our most valued landscapes, their scenic qualities, and components that
contribute to the perception of character. Large tracts of land within the refined
area of search are afforded varying levels of statutory and non-statutory protection
through planning policy designation.
report) presents the constraints in relation to landscape and visual interests.
45
Historic Parks and Gardens
4.4.5 Several Historic Parks and Gardens comprise internationally and nationally
significant areas considered important to, and an integral part of, the historic and
cultural fabric of Wales. Registered sites are classified as being of either Grade I,
Grade II* or Grade II status.
4.4.6 There are fifteen designated Historic Parks and Gardens within the refined area of
search. Six are located within the Towy Valley (Middleton Hall, Aberglasney,
Golden Grove, Plas Dinefwr, Paxton’s Tower and The Bishop’s Palace and
Abergwili).
4.4.7 Pantglas, Edwinsford and Taliaris Historic Parks and Gardens are all located north
of the Towy Valley, with Derwydd and Glynhir located just south of the valley near
Llandeilo.
4.4.8 Penllergaer, Parc Howard, Stradey Castle and Llechdwnni are located towards the
southern fringes of the refined area of search.
National Parks
4.4.9 National Parks are designated under the National Parks and Countryside Act 1949
(as amended) for the purpose of conserving and enhancing natural beauty.
4.4.10 The eastern fringes of the refined area of search capture the western extremity of
the Brecon Beacons National Park near the settlement of Llandeilo. The Park was
designated in 1957 and covers an area of some 1,344 square kilometres.
Country Parks
4.4.11 Country Parks are nationally important designated sites comprising publicly
accessible areas for undertaking recreation within a countryside environment.
4.4.12 Three Country Parks have been recorded within the refined area of search. A
small section of the Pembrey Country Park crosses the western fringes of the
refined area of search (the majority of the park being located beyond the
46
area). The Lyn Llech Owain Country Park lies to the north-east of the settlement
of Cross Hands, and the Gelli Aur Country Park is located south-west of Llandeilo.
Special Landscape Areas
4.4.13 A number of regionally and locally significant river valleys, upland landscapes and
coastal landscapes are protected from development and other man-made
influences through application of Special Landscape Area (SLA) non-statutory
policy designation.
4.4.14 There are twelve SLAs located within the refined area of search. Cothi Valley,
Mynydd Llanllwni and North Boundary are located along the northern extents of
the refined area of search.
4.4.15 The Upper and Lower Towy Valley SLAs generally follow the course of the River
Towy.
4.4.16 The following SLAs are located along the southern reaches of the refined area of
search, in a west to east direction: Cefn Sidal Coastal Plain; Pembrey/Burry Port
North; Burry Port/ Llanelli Road; Llanelli Road; River Lliedi Valley; River Morlais
Valley; and Loughor Valley.
Common Land
4.4.17 Registered Common Land covers approximately 8.4% of Wales, and forms a key
role in providing important habitat for plants and wildlife as well as being a key
landscape resource.
4.4.18 Small pockets of Common Land are scattered throughout the refined area of
search, the largest examples of which are located towards the eastern extents
(north and south of Glanaman, and north of Brechfa Forest).
LANDMAP
4.4.19 LANDMAP is an information system devised by CCW to map and evaluate the
landscape of Wales. It retains a key function in the formation of landscape policy
47
and the appraisal and assessment of development proposals in relation to

landscape impacts.
4.4.20 Containing five datasets, the information is presented at different levels, which
facilitates the examination and appraisal of landscape sensitivity at broad and
more local scales.
4.4.21 Following review of LANDMAP data, it was apparent that the creation of a
combined multi-map for all aspect layers would not readily assist ease of data
interpretation or further the process of options appraisal beyond initial high level
constraint identification. It was therefore considered appropriate to initially map
only those ‘Outstanding’ and ‘High’ evaluated aspects to inform the filtering of high
value areas.
4.4.22 Those areas classified as Outstanding are associated with the western extremity
of the Brecon Beacons National Park and the Towy Valley. High classified areas
of varying scale are widely distributed throughout a large part of the remainder of
the refined area of search, with significant concentrations noted in the upland
landscapes surrounding Brechfa, and between Kidwelly and Pentre-Gwenlais.
Regional Landscape Character Areas
4.4.23 In relation to existing landscape character, the area of search encompasses

several individual Landscape Character Areas (LCA) defined by CCW at the
regional level across Wales. Regional LCA characteristics and boundaries were
originally set out in the Landscape Character Map for Wales (2007). LCAs were
subsequently refined by CCW using LANDMAP data in 2009 and are currently in
the process of being finalised.
4.4.24 The refined area of search captures a total of ten distinct LCAs, the boundaries of
which are depicted in Figure 7 (Appendix 2 - figures included within the first interim
route selection report). A summary of their key characteristics are presented
below.
 Area 21: Cambrian Mountains - The Cambrian Mountains lie at the heart of
48
Wales, straddling the Counties of Ceredigion and Powys. They are formed
from an upland spine of resistant rock forming a north-south orientated belt of
wild and remote moorland. This large scale, windswept upland landscape
encompasses Mid Wales’s highest peak, Plynlimon The north western
boundary is defined by the Dovey Valley, beyond which lies the Snowdonia
National Park. To the north the upland landscape forms a transition to the
upland moorland landscape of Area 16. Y Berwyn/Berwyn. Parts of the
Upland Ceredigion, Towy Valley and Dolaucothi Landscapes of Outstanding
Historic Interest fall within this area. The Clywedog Valley and Elan Valley
Landscapes of Special Historic Interest also fall within this character area;
 Area 43: Teifi Valley - 43. Dyffryn Tefi/Teifi Valley separates area 21.
Uwchdiroedd Cymru/Cambrian Mountains from the hills of Ceredigion (25.
Ceredigion). It occupies the wide, flat bottomed valley formed by a former
moraine-dammed glacial lake, with its boundaries created by the skyline of the
valley. This lowland river landscape straddles the administrative boundaries of
Ceredigion and Carmarthenshire and encompasses one of Wales’ largest peat
bogs, Cors Caron. The mouth of the Teifi Valley adjoins the Pembrokeshire
Coast National Park and the St. Dogmaels and Moylgrove Heritage
Coast. Part of the Upland Ceredigion Landscape of Outstanding Historic
Interest falls within the upper valley while parts of the Lower Teifi Valley and
Drefach and Felindre Landscapes of Special Historic Interest fall within the
lower reaches;
 Area 41: Towy Valley - The Towy Valley is a flat floodplain landscape, crossed
by the meandering course of the River Towy. It is a narrow character area
located in south central Wales. Sheep and dairy cattle graze rich green
pasture fields, with small areas of broadleaved woodlands often covering
gentle slopes. The historic importance of the river is reflected in the remains
of strategically placed features including Roman forts and medieval stone
castles. It is also the location of a number of historic parks and gardens. As
such, the valley is recognised as a Landscape of Outstanding Historic Interest;
49
 Area 42: Pembroke and Carmarthen Foothills - The Pembroke and

Carmarthen Foothills character area is located in south west Wales, straddling
the counties of Carmarthenshire and Pembrokeshire. It is a varying landscape
of remote upland plateaux dissected by sheltered wooded valleys, with regular
pasture fields grazed by cattle and sheep. Quiet hamlets and villages are
linked by a network of winding rural roads. The character area is framed by
the Cambrian and Preseli mountains to the east and west, and the Teifi and
Towy valleys to the north and south;
 Area 40: Gwendraeth Vales - The Gwendraeth Vales character area is located
in south-central Wales, between the upland landscapes of the Brecon
Beacons and Epynt in the east and the low lying Taff and Towy estuaries to
the west. The landscape is varied owing to its complex underlying geology,
with a prominent limestone ridge overlooking rolling hills and valleys.
Evidence of past settlement and industrial uses of the area is still visible at a
number of locations in the landscape. The eastern part of the area lies within
Brecon Beacons National Park;
 Area 45: Taf, Towy and Gwendraeth Estuaries - The Taf, Towy and
Gwendraeth Estuaries character area is located in Carmarthenshire in south
west Wales. Extensive sand dunes and coastal flats fringe the estuaries,
whilst rolling pasture fields and woodlands characterise the land surrounding
the inland courses of the Taf, Towy and Greater Gwendraeth rivers. The
character area sits between the Gower Peninsula and south Pembrokeshire
coast. The southern half of the character area falls within the Taf and Towy
Estuary Landscape of Outstanding Historic Interest, and the northern section
is part of the Towy Valley Landscape of Outstanding Historic Interest;
 Area 44: Taf and Cleddau Vales - The Taf and Cleddau Vales character area
is located in south east Wales, straddling the two counties of Pembrokeshire
and Carmarthenshire. The landscape is framed to the north by the Preseli
Hills. The character area comprises a hilly topography of rich pasture and
cereal fields, intersected by woodland-fringed rivers. The western edge of the
50
character area lies within the Towy Valley Landscape of Outstanding Historic
Interest;
 Area 30: Brecon Beacons and Black Mountains –The Brecon Beacons and
Black Mountains character area is located in southeast Wales, lying within the
counties of Carmarthenshire and Powys. The area is defined by flat topped
mountains and sweeping scree slopes, shaped by geological and glacial
activity. This windswept landscape rises to a height of 886 metres – the
highest point in southern Britain. East Fforest Fawr and Mynydd-y-Glog, and
Black Mountain and Mynydd Myddfai are Landscapes of Special and
Outstanding Historic Interest respectively. All of the character area lies within
Brecon Beacons National Park;
 Area 37: South Wales Valleys – The South Wales Valleys occupy a large part
of southern Wales, framed by the Brecon Beacons and Black Mountains to the
north, the M4 corridor to the south, and lowland vale landscapes to the east
and west. This varied landscape comprises urbanised valleys with a strong
link to the area’s industrial past, overlooked by wide expanses of sheep
grazed plateaux. The area includes Margam Mountain, Rhondda and
Gelligaer Common – Landscapes of Special Historic Interest. The former
industrial areas of Merthyr Tydfil and Blaenafon are recognised as
Landscapes of Outstanding Historic Interest. Blaenafon is also designated as
a World Heritage Site for its complex of remains relating to its past coal and
iron industries. The eastern edge of the character area lies within Brecon
Beacons National Park;
 Area 38: Swansea Bay – The Swansea Bay character area encompasses the
city of Swansea and the surrounding towns of The Mumbles, Burry Port,
Llanelli, Neath and Port Talbot. The area stretches south east down the coast
from Swansea to Porthcawl, fringed by the 37 Dyffrynnoedd y De/South Wales
Valleys to the north and east. The landform is broken by the Lougher, Tawe,
Neath and Ogmore estuaries, which flow into Swansea Bay. It is a landscape
of contrasts – from attractive coastlines and heavy industries to the elegant
51
townscapes surviving in parts of Swansea. The dune areas at Merthyr Mawr,

Kenfig and Margam Burrows are Landscapes of Outstanding Historic Interest.
The Ogmore estuary falls within the Glamorgan Heritage Coast area.
4.4.25 The early stages of the appraisal appropriately take account of the visual context
of the refined area of search as an integral component of the perception of
landscape character.
Topography
4.4.26 Topographically, the area of search is highly varied. The area around Brechfa
Forest to the north of the refined area of search is high ground with some areas
over 350m AOD. A large part of this northern section is vegetated with a mixture
of ancient semi-natural and coniferous woodland.
4.4.27 The River Towy forms a key topographical valley feature running east to west
across the northern central part of the refined area of search. The valley is
characterised by low lying floodplains and associated pastoral farmland. Other
key valley features associated with the A483 road corridor between Llandeilo and
Pontarddulias, and the River Cothi between Abergorlech and Felingwm Uchaf.
4.4.28 The highest part of the refined area of search is associated with the western
fringes of the Black Mountain range, forming an integral part of The Brecon
Beacons National Park and reaching elevations of some 500m AOD.
4.4.29 Other notable peaks include Mynydd Y Gwair (374m AOD) south-east of
Ammanford, characterised by rolling moorland, and Mynydd Rhos-wen (358m
AOD) situated west of Brechfa. Flatter, more low-lying estuarine areas are noted
around Carmarthen Bay to the west of the refined area of search.
4.5 Ecology
4.5.1 The area of search extends across significant areas of wildlife habitat variety and
nature conservation interest. There are wildlife habitats associated with upland,
lowland, terrestrial and aquatic contexts which support habitats and populations of
52
acknowledged importance at the international, European, national and local level.
report) presents the constraints in relation to ecological and nature conservation
interests.
Important Bird Areas
4.5.3 Important Bird Areas (IBA) comprise globally important habitat for the conservation
of bird populations.
4.5.4 Carmarthen Bay, which marks the boundary of the refined area of search to the
west, is designated as an IBA. This designated area encroaches into the refined
area of search at the estuary north of Ferryside.
Special Areas of Conservation
4.5.5 Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) are European sites designated under the EC
Directive 92/43/EC.
4.5.6 There are four areas within the refined area of search designated as SAC.
Carmarthen Bay and Estuaries, south of Carmarthen, is designated for various
habitats that support marine life.
4.5.7 The River Towy SAC, designated for habitats that support otter and fish, crosses
the whole of the refined area of search from east to west.
4.5.8 Cernydd Carmel SAC, located north-east of Cross Hands, is designated for its
diverse habitats The final site is Caeau Mynydd Mawr SAC, located to the east of
Cross Hands, designated for its population of Marsh Fritillary Butterfly.
Special Protection Areas
4.5.9 There are no European designated Special Protection Areas (SPA) within the
refined area of search.
53
Sites of Special Scientific Interest
4.5.10 Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) comprise nationally important sites
designated for their biodiversity or geological interest under the provisions of the
Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). The nature of SSSIs vary
depending on their qualifying interest, and they frequently provide the foundation
for additional designations.
4.5.11 There are 69 SSSIs located throughout the refined area of search.
National Nature Reserves
4.5.12 National Nature Reserves (NNR) form a key foundation for nature conservation in
the UK, with all such sites being afforded additional SSSI status to provide a
higher level of protection.
4.5.13 There are four NNRs within the refined area of search, located around the same
latitude as the Towy Valley. These comprise: Cors Goch Llanllwch - a raised bog
to the west of Llanllwch; Waun Las - south of Llanarthney, of particular note for
grassland fungi; Cernydd Carmel - west of Llandybie, the only seasonal lake in
Britain; and the Dinefwr Estate - east of Llandeilo.
RSPB Reserves
4.5.14 Reserves managed by the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB)
comprise a portfolio of sites that seek to conserve, protect and enhance habitats
for our rarest or most threatened bird species.
4.5.15 One RSPB reserve is present within the refined area of search. Cwm Clydach is
located in the south-eastern extremes of the refined area of search, north of
Clydach, and comprises an ancient broadleaved woodland home to breeding pied
flycatchers, redstarts, dippers and buzzards.
Ancient and Semi-Natural Woodland
4.5.16 In Wales, ancient and semi-natural woodland (ASNW) comprises sites that have
54
been wooded continuously for several hundred years. The long continuity of
ASNW, their undisturbed soils and ability to support wildlife renders it a valuable
natural habitat of national importance.
4.5.17 Notable concentrations of ASNW are associated with the upland landscapes of
Brechfa Forest to the north.
Local Nature Reserves
4.5.18 Local Nature Reserves (LNR) comprise sites designated by local authorities to
protect their natural features and wildlife of special interest.
4.5.19 Two sites are present in proximity to Carmarthen Bay: Glan-Yr-Afon, located near
to Kidwelly; and Ashpits Pond Pwll Lagoon, located between Burry Port and Pwll.
A third site, Carreg Cennen Woodlands, is found south east of Llandeilo.
4.6 Heritage
4.6.1 Heritage resources comprise the physical remains of the historic environment and
their settings. These resources include historic buildings and townscapes, historic
gardens and designed landscapes, ancient monuments and other archaeological
sites and landscapes which are often very fragile and vulnerable to attrition from
natural and human causes.
4.6.2 Policy objectives seek to ensure their conservation whilst balancing the needs for
sustainable development. Large numbers of sites of varying importance and
heritage significance have been recorded within the refined area of search.
report) presents the constraints in relation to archaeological and built heritage
interests.
World Heritage Sites
4.6.4 There are no internationally important World Heritage Sites within the refined area
of search.
55
Scheduled Monuments
4.6.5 A Scheduled Monument (SM) is a nationally important archaeological site or

historic building, given protection against unauthorised change.
4.6.6 There are 177 designated SMs dispersed across the refined area of search.
Notable concentrations are recorded around the settlement of Carmarthen and in
landscapes east of the A483 road corridor.
Conservation Areas
4.6.7 Conservation Areas are designated by local planning authorities for their special
architectural and historical interest.
4.6.8 There are over 500 Conservation Areas in Wales, 22 of which fall within the
refined area of search. Of these 22 designated areas, approximately half are
located within Carmarthen.
4.6.9 Two Conservation Areas are associated with Kidwelly near the south-western
boundary of the refined area of search. The remainder are located in more
central/eastern parts of area in Llanddarog, Llangathen, Llandeilo, Cwmdu,
Llangadog, Talley, and Abergorlech.
Listed Buildings
4.6.10 A Listed Building is a structure that has been placed on the Statutory List of
Buildings of Special Architectural or Historic Interest by CADW. There are three
types of listed status for buildings in Wales. Grade I: buildings of exceptional
interest; Grade II*: particularly important buildings of more than special interest;
and Grade II: buildings that are of special interest, warranting every effort to
preserve them.
4.6.11 There are 1133 Listed Buildings in the refined area of search, many of which are
concentrated in established settlements and clustered within designated areas
around Carmarthen and Llanelli.
56
Registered Landscapes of Special or Historic Importance
4.6.12 To recognise the value of historic landscapes and raise awareness of their
importance, CADW, in partnership with CCW and the International Council on
Monuments and Sites, has compiled a Register of Landscapes of Historic Interest
in Wales.
4.6.13 The register identifies 58 landscapes of outstanding or special historic interest,

considered to form the best examples of different types of historic landscapes in
Wales.
4.6.14 Four registered landscapes fall within the refined area of search. Drefach and
Felindre encroaches into the north-western boundary of the area, with the majority
of the designation falling outside the boundary. The Towy Valley follows the
course of the River Towy. The Taff and Towy estuary is located around the
Kidwelly area in the south-west, and the Black Mountain and Mynydd Myddfai
forms part of the Brecon Beacons National Park to the east of the refined area of
search.
Designated Wrecks
4.6.15 There are no designated wreck sites associated with the refined area of search.
4.7 Land Use/Planning
4.7.1 The refined area of search falls under the jurisdiction of two authorities -
Carmarthenshire County Council (CCC), and the City and County of Swansea.
Figure 10 (Appendix 2 - figures included within the first interim route selection
report) presents the constraints in relation to land use and planning
considerations.
Land Use and Tourism
4.7.2 Land use throughout the large part of the refined area of search is primarily
focused on rural economic activity. Commercial forestry is important on the
57
intermediate slopes of the uplands, with arable production generally confined to

more lower lying areas. The area is generally devoid of significant industrial
activity.
4.7.3 Tourism and recreation are important sectors founded on the physical and natural
assets that underscore the landscape quality and sense of remoteness
represented across the northern and eastern extents of the area of search.
Major Settlement Areas
4.7.4 The major settlements are situated along the southern boundary of the refined
area of search. They include Llanelli, Gorseinon, Ammanford, Kidwelly and Burry
Port, as well as Carmarthen towards the north west.
4.7.5 Other than in the key settlements, the majority of the local population is dispersed
across smaller villages and hamlets located in sheltered valleys and agriculturally
richer areas.
Recreational Routes
4.7.6 The importance of prime recreational and tourist routes is acknowledged, with
image and amenity forming essential parts of their value.
4.7.7 The refined area of search contains many linear networks with north-south and
east-west orientations; this suggests interface with potential route corridors will be
inevitable. Accordingly, major recreational routes are viewed as first tier
constraints and material considerations to route corridor identification and
differentiation.
Woodland
4.7.8 The most densely wooded area is the central northern section to the north of
Brechfa, which is vegetated with a mixture of ASNW and coniferous woodland.
4.7.9 Small pockets of both ASNW and coniferous woodland are located throughout the
refined area of search, with notable areas established along both sides of the M4
58
road corridor, east of Junction 47 near Pontarddulais.
Major Watercourses
4.7.10 The most significant watercourse in the refined area of search is the designated
River Towy, which flows across the refined area of search in a broadly west to
south-west direction to Carmarthen Bay and its associated estuaries.
4.7.11 Another major watercourse comprises the River Cothi which forms a tributary of
the River Towy and flows in a north to south direction from the Brechfa area before
joining the Towy east of Carmarthen. A further major watercourse comprises the
River Loughor flowing from the Black Mountains south past Ammanford, Hendy
and Pontarddulais.
Transportation Network (road, rail and aviation)
4.7.12 A network of major A-roads, B-classification and rural routes provide connectivity
between settlements across the refined area of search.
4.7.13 The M4 strategic corridor enters the south-eastern corner of the refined area of
search and runs in a broadly north-westerly direction before terminating south-east
of Ammanford. The M4 forms the main arterial route into the refined area of
search, from which the A48 and A483 roads spur and connect to settlements in
the east and west. The A40 forms the key route through the central section of the
refined area of search, and provides vehicular connectivity between Carmarthen
and Llandeilo.
4.7.14 Other important A-classification routes include the A485 between Carmarthen and
Llanllwni, the A484 running north-west from Carmarthen, the A4138 from the M4
to Llanelli.
4.7.15 The south coast railway mainline runs along the southern boundary of the refined
area of search (Swansea to Carmarthen), with a spur at Llanelli which provides
local rail connections to Ammanford, Llandeilo and beyond. A local route to
Drefach is also available from Kidwelly in the south.
59
4.7.16 Pembrey Airport is located within the south-eastern extents of the refined area of
search, north-west of Burry Port.
Areas of Open Access (Open Country)
4.7.17 An Area of Open Access is land designated Under the Countryside and Rights of
Way Act 2000 where the public can roam freely on mapped areas of mountain,
moor, heath, downland and registered common land.
4.7.18 Three large Areas of Open Access, and 32 smaller designated areas, are captured
within the boundary of the refined area of search. The largest areas are located
south of LLanllwni, north of Glanaman, and north of Pontlliw.
Strategic Search Areas
4.7.19 Strategic Search Areas (SSAs) are areas in Wales that have been targeted for
Renewable Energy development. These areas are outlined in Technical Advice
Note (TAN8).
4.7.20 Two SSAs, G and E, are located partly within the refined area of search. A large
part of SSA G extends into the northern boundary of the refined area of search just
east of Llanllwni, whereas approximately a third of the western section of SSA E
extends into the refined area of search north east of Felindre.
Land Allocations
4.7.21 Carmarthenshire County Council’s planning and development framework identifies

current and proposed employment areas, which are mostly centred on the key
settlement areas with some pockets located in less densely populated areas.
4.7.22 Swansea City’s planning and development framework identifies a variety of

existing land uses and potential development zones which are allocated across
the urban areas falling under its control (these being associated with the northern
suburbs of Swansea and rural areas around Mynydd Y Gwair).
4.7.23 A number of areas have been identified as holding minerals mining potential, with
60
coal noted in the urban areas in the south of the refined area of search and in
some more rural parts. In addition, locally administered urban designations of
conservation comprising green wedges, greenspace protection, community
recreation land and environment enhancement are also dispersed across the
southern extents of the refined area of search.
Existing Utility Infrastructure
4.7.24 A parallel run of two 400kV overhead National Grid transmission lines cross the
refined area of search from south of Carmarthen to the Swansea North Substation,
and continue beyond the eastern extents of the refined area of search north of
Pontardawe.
4.7.25 A network of 132kV overhead distribution cables in the southern parts of the
refined area of search provides electrical connectivity to larger settlements such as
Ammanford and Burry Port, interfacing at the Swansea North Substation west of
Clydach. The network of 132kV lines orientate from the substation in different
directions, with several crossing urban and rural locations and established road
corridors.
4.7.26 South of the A40 there is an extensive network of overhead 33kV circuits spanning
the refined area of search between West Carmarthen and Llandeilo. Additional
33kV circuits provide connectivity between Ammanford, Llandeilo, Kidwelly, Burry
Port, Pontarddulias and other settlements along the southern periphery of the
4.7.27 Local circuits of less than 33kV provide connectivity to rural areas, hamlets and
more isolated dwellings in the northern extents of the refined area of search.
Flood Risk Areas
4.7.28 The main areas at risk of flood in the refined area of search correspond with
floodplains, these being associated with areas adjacent to the rivers Towy and
Loughor, and the lower lying coastal regions found in the south and east of the
61
4.8 Site Reconnaissance
4.8.1 Following adoption of the appraisal methodology and collection of first and second
tier data, an experienced Landscape Architect undertook a site visit in early
September 2012.
4.8.2 The purpose of the site visit was to: establish a general understanding of the
landscape pattern of the refined area of search; identify vantage points from which
the visual context could be understood; ground truth data and information
collected; and identify any matters requiring early consideration in the next stage
of the appraisal.
62
5 Stage 2a: Identification of Route Corridor Options
5.1 Introduction to Stage 2a
5.1.1 This section of the report explains the process followed to reach an agreed set of
Route Corridor Options for the proposed grid connection. Within this section of the
report a distinction is drawn between ‘potential’ or ‘preliminary’ route corridor
options (that were considered at Stage 2a but rejected) and the Route Corridor
Options (that were agreed between WPD, RSK and consultees and that are
subject to detailed comparative appraisal at Stage 2b of the route selection
process).
5.2 Route Corridor Workshop
Background and Objectives
5.2.1 Commencement of Stage 2 activities began with a Route Corridor Workshop on

14 September 2012.
5.2.2 The purpose of the workshop was to explore the appropriateness and
completeness of first and second tier data collected and mapped during the
Stage 1 exercise, establish areas of constraint and opportunity within the refined
area of search, and to develop and agree preliminary route corridors.
5.2.3 The workshop was attended by representatives of WPD covering engineering and
technical matters, and specialists from RSK covering the environmental topics of
landscape, ecology, heritage, and land use/planning.
5.2.4 The workshop considered various factors including the refined area of search, GIS
and aerial photography. This was followed by a more detailed review and
appraisal by attending environmental specialists of the following topic areas.
63
Landscape
5.2.5 The following observations were made in respect of landscape sensitivities.
 The River Towy corridor is visually sensitive and contains several elevated
viewpoints. As such, any route across may have to make use of pinch-points
across the valley rather than following the line of valley itself (as
recommended by the Holford Rules);
 Concerns were raised regarding the Brecon Beacons National Park falling
within the refined area of search. It was considered that any corridor routeing
should seek to avoid this nationally important asset from the outset;
 The refined area of search contains numerous SLAs that correspond with the
area’s many valley features, some of which are extensive (e.g. River Cothi and
River Towy) and may pose an unavoidable constraint to routeing;
 Woodland areas are extensive, and thus offer genuine opportunities to screen
new overhead lines on the proviso that areas of ASNW are avoided;
 A concentration of Registered Parks and Gardens exists around the west of

Llandeilo; these interests should be avoided during route corridor
identification;
 Conflict with the considerable coverage and dispersal of LANDMAP areas

defined as being of outstanding and high visual and sensory quality may prove
inevitable during routeing;
 Good views are available from the Abergwili locality.
Ecology
5.2.6 The following observations were made in respect of ecological sensitivities.
 Effects on ecological interests by virtue of wooden pole installation would be

minor and localised due to the small footprint of the associated works;
64
 SACs and SSSIs will need to be avoided during routeing where possible. It
was acknowledged that the Towy Valley SAC may be unavoidable, and as
such may invoke the need for an Appropriate Assessment to be undertaken as
part of the DCO application;
 Recorded areas of wintering birds, wetlands areas and ASNW should be

avoided;
 Bats are unlikely to be adversely affected by the proposed scheme. It was

noted that routeing through wooded areas could offer potential habitat
improvements for some bat species due to reduction and removal of wooded
canopies;
 Bird strike could be perceived to be an issue on the project due to the

overhead nature of the works;
 Dormice have been identified in central sections of the refined area of search.
Great Crested Newt has not been raised as a potential issue by CCW;
however a detailed review of available background records will provide an
indication of presence or absence.
Heritage
5.2.7 The following observations were made in respect of archaeological and built
heritage sensitivities.
 Some 1000+ Listed Buildings are present in the refined area of search,
approximately 10% of which are of Grade I or Grade II*. Setting is important
to most of these assets, but less so for those located nearer the coastline
south of Carmarthen;
 A high concentration of these assets exists within the Towy Valley, many
occupying prominent elevated positions, with some examples located around
the settlement of Ammanford exhibiting group value;
 The settlement of Hendy possesses a high concentration of Listed Buildings;
65
any routeing near this area should aim to take advantage of the existing M4
corridor;
 Routeing to the west of Carmarthen would be preferable if seeking to avoid

Listed Buildings within the refined area of search, as would progressing
through Llandeilo;
 75% of the 120 Scheduled Monuments comprise above ground features;

therefore setting is a material consideration to routeing;
 Some Scheduled Monuments have group value, and those associated with
Carmarthen should be avoided;
 TheTowy Valley is a prominent designated landscape of historic importance.

Other high value areas comprise Kidwelly, Bethlehem and Registered Parks
and Gardens within the refined area of search;
 Conservation Areas, although considered important in respect of the Holford

Rules, are likely to pose only a local constraint to routeing.
5.2.8 Details on non-designated assets were unavailable at the time of the workshop;
however it was acknowledged that high value receptors might exist that have yet
to be factored into the mapping exercise. It was also noted that the potential to
encounter undiscovered archaeology within the Towy Valley is likely to be high
given its historical importance.
Land Use/Planning
5.2.9 The following observations were made in respect of land use and planning
considerations.
 A fine balance is needed in respect of settlements, as some provide scope to

visually screen and contain overhead distribution infrastructure but could result
in objections due to proximity issues. The importance of factoring proximity to
residential areas as a key criterion was reinforced by WPD’s engineers;
66
 The River Towy is particularly sinuous in its form. As such, any route corridors
crossing the valley should seek to traverse the body of water in a single
instance rather than require multiple crossings that could give rise to a
potentially greater environmental impact;
 Consideration needed to be given to the prospect of one or more of the wind

farms not receiving consent, and how preliminary routeing of corridors should
best address this potential issue.
5.3 Key Considerations
5.3.1 The collective review of the composite constraints for landscape, ecology, heritage
and land use/planning interests against the project objectives and findings of the
site reconnaissance revealed the following considerations that were subsequently
factored into the preliminary route corridor identification exercise.
Towy Valley
5.3.2 The Towy valley and estuary presents a heavily constrained, designated river
corridor running east-west across the entire width of the refined area of search.
5.3.3 Due to its low lying topography, the degree of visual exposure (and sensitivity) is
considerable, particularly from elevated vantage points in the local area.
Numerous villages, hamlets and isolated dwellings intersperse the valley, along
with small pockets of woodland.
5.3.4 Given that connection between the three proposed wind farms and either of the
two identified connection points requires a new connection running in a broadly
north-south direction, the valley presents an unavoidable constraint either east or
west of Carmarthen that would need to be crossed.
5.3.5 It was considered that any crossings over the river valley would need to adopt a
principle of identifying pathways of least resistance, in order to minimise potential
direct conflicts with interests. It was also considered important that the routeing of
corridors would need to give due regard to the potential for indirect effects on
67
wider assets such as Scheduled Monuments and the Brecon Beacons National
Park.
Brechfa Forest
5.3.6 The Brechfa Forest locality was identified as being dominated by established
concentration of plantation woodland on highly variable upland topography.
5.3.7 The wide distribution of ASNW within this area of forestry was deemed to be a
factor that could significantly limit corridor routeing potential from, and between,
the three proposed wind farms.
5.3.8 A further issue warranting consideration related to the open upland setting of
landscapes north of Swansea North Substation; this was highlighted as a
potentially constraining factor to corridor routeing due to the high altitudes and
heightened degree of visual exposure that could potentially arise.
Conflict with the principles of the Holford Rules
5.3.9 The sheer number of valley formations associated with central and upland
sections of the refined area of search offers genuine opportunities for
accommodating route corridors, and thus achieving compliance with the Holford
Rules concerning the preferential use of valley features.
5.3.10 Further review of the mapped constraints, however, revealed that the majority of
such features directly associate with SLA designations - interests which the
Holford Rules seek to avoid when routeing - which brings both objectives into clear
conflict. This conflict is amplified further through many valley areas being
considered of “High” or “Outstanding” value in the LANDMAP initiative (visual and
sensory).
5.4 Identification of Preliminary Route Corridors
5.4.1 The second part of the workshop was given over to an interactive session which
allowed attendees to plot preliminary pathways on a series of constraint plans by
68
hand between the three wind farm substations and the two identified connection
points at Swansea North and Llandyfaelog.
5.4.2 The exercise was informed by considerations which emerged in the first part of the
session, which formed the starting point for corridor development. High amenity
areas such as the Brecon Beacons National Park and areas exhibiting a cluster of
important assets were initially demarcated on the plans to guide the drafting of
linear pathways by a process of avoidance. This resulted in pockets of the refined
area of search being effectively discounted from routeing.
5.4.3 A complex linear network emerged from the exercise, which established a
composite of indicative pathways that sought to avoid first tier interests where
possible within the refined area of search. In the main, the majority of pathways
avoided highly constrained areas, densely populated areas, and high value areas.
Several of the pathways took advantage of existing corridors of disturbance such
as A and B classification roads running north-south through the refined area of
search, and tracked overhead lines associated with the existing electricity
transmission and distribution network.
5.4.4 A number of possible interconnection routes between the three wind farms were
also identified; this came in direct response to the issue of one or more of these
developments potentially falling out of scope of the project due to the possibility of
receiving an adverse planning decision.
5.4.5 The hand drawn outputs of the exercise were subsequently digitised in GIS to
provide a permanent record of the exercise. Each pathway was then buffered to
generate a nominal 2km ‘corridor’ to indicate the relationship and potential conflict
with mapped constraints, and to provide a basis for further development and
refinement of the routes.
5.4.6 The digitised findings of the workshop are depicted on Figure 11 (Appendix 2 –
figures included within the first interim route selection report). Due to the number
of potential connections, no preferential pathways clear of constraint emerged
from the initial exercise.
69
5.4.7 Shortly after the workshop, it was agreed that more local scale planning
considerations should be factored into the next stages of project appraisal. This
information was sought from the relevant planning authorities within the refined
area of search, and was mapped digitally in GIS format.
5.5 Refinement of Preliminary Route Corridors
5.5.1 Following the drafting of the preliminary 2km wide route corridors, the project team
commenced a more detailed review of each route.
5.5.2 Environmental specialists and project managers from RSK undertook a joint site
survey over a two day period in mid October 2012, the purpose being to verify the
preliminary route corridors in the field and undertake criteria based sieving of
options.
5.5.3 Site visits were considered necessary in order to establish a thorough

understanding of the locality and its associated sensitivities, and to build upon the
constraints data gathered during Stage 1 of the appraisal.
5.5.4 Due to the high value and sensitivity of the local landscape, the exercise was
necessarily landscape led and sought to refine the preliminary corridor boundaries
through a process of extension and reduction. The exercise also sought to identify
corridors that could be realistically discounted from further consideration by virtue
of overriding engineering, technical or environmental criteria (both first and second
tier), or introduce potentially viable corridors that may not have been initially
identified during the desk-based review.
5.5.5 A detailed visual examination of the refined area of search was undertaken in
terms of topography, elevation, slope, drainage pattern, environmental
designations and landcover. Appreciation of more perceptual aspects such as
scenic quality was also considered in the field.
5.5.6 The following principles and criteria were considered as part of the refinement
exercise.
70
 Designations – sieving of routes that present the least conflict with first and
second tier designated interests relating to landscape, heritage, ecology and
land use/planning;
 Directness – selection of corridors that offer the most direct route from the
wind farms to the identified connection points, and which avoid sharp changes
in direction;
 Topography – preference of options that follow open valleys and generally

avoid steeply sloping, visually prominent land;
 Landcover – preference of options that avoid urban areas, recreationally

important areas and densely vegetated areas;
 Technical – selection of corridors with the least challenging engineering

requirements (e.g. crossing of wide trunk roads and rivers), and those with
minimal direct conflict with existing infrastructure.
5.6 Outcomes of Site Visit
5.6.1 Due to the extensive nature of the refined area of search, efforts during the site
visit were principally focused on the review of preliminary route corridors running
from the three wind farms to the Swansea North Substation, with emphasis
directed towards reviewing potential crossing opportunities along the Towy Valley
between the settlements of Carmarthen and Llandeilo.
5.6.2 The following general conclusions and observations were drawn from the site
visits, which subsequently fed into the sieving and boundary refinement of
potential route corridor options to be taken forwards.
Wind Farm Locality (wind resource area)
5.6.3 The three wind farms would be located across a contiguous upland area to the
north of the River Cothi at general elevations of between approximately 250 to
350m AOD.
71
5.6.4 A key assumption was that the associated proposed substation locations would
need to be linked in some form, enabling all three to be served by a grid
connection to either of the two identified connection points.
5.6.5 The process of balancing desk and site-based information identified three potential
options.
 A direct southern link off the upland area, dropping down into the valley of the
River Cothi west of Brechfa village;
 A link to the north-west to avoid the most complex topography and steepest
slopes which characterise the southern fringe of the upland area;
 A link to the east, into the valley of the River Cothi east of Abergorlech (a
slightly less sensitive and less enclosed section of the valley).
Brechfa/Cothi Valley
5.6.6 Constraint mapping suggested this valley might present an opportunity for
routeing; however the valley landscape running from Llanllawddog in the west to
Llansawel to the east is particularly sensitive given its enclosed topography and
recreational amenity use. The feature creates a barrier to the grid connection to
the south of the upland wind resource area (though considered a secondary rather
than primary constraint).
5.6.7 The following conclusions were drawn in respect of this area.
 Preference to avoid the especially narrow section of the valley of the River
Cothi as it turns south to the east of Brechfa village, due to steep topography
and scenic interest;
 Identification of the section of the valley to the west of Brechfa village as the
least sensitive crossing point;
 A preference for circumnavigating this valued valley either to the west or east.
72
Towy Valley
5.6.8 This valley brings together a notable density of primary and secondary constraints.
Joint fieldwork by the assessment team identified three broad crossing points.
 East of Carmarthen near Abergwili;
 East of Nantgaredig;
 East of Llandeilo.
5.6.9 A direct connection from Swansea North to the wind resource area would have
resulted in a crossing of the Towy Valley in the vicinity of Llanarthne/Llangathen.
The combined site visit concluded that, given the apparent feasibility of other
reasonably direct crossing points, a crossing in this vicinity (close to a number of
nationally designated resources) should be discounted as an option.
5.6.10 Sensitivities in areas immediately to the north and south and the absence of
significant connecting valley-route opportunities also suggested that there was no
clear case for considering an underground crossing of the Towy Valley in this
location; however further consideration of a short route between Abergorlech and
Carmarthen South introduced an option crossing the valley near Llanarthne, that
warranted further evaluation.
Urban Areas and Settlements
5.6.11 The A48 road corridor was identified as an opportunity (based on topography and
existing influences on the landscape); however a swathe of dispersed but
connected built up areas and other constraints in the vicinity of Tumble, Cross
Hands, Gorslas, Pen-y-groes, Temple Bar and Milo represented an extensive
physical constraint.
5.6.12 When combined with recreational areas to the north, this resulted in definition of a
route corridor option to the south of this section of the A48. It was noted this
would necessitate at least two crossing points along the course of this road. It was
concluded that further work would be necessary to confirm the feasibility of an A48
73
road corridor route passing north east of Tumble.
5.6.13 Fieldwork identified a potentially feasible route (pinch point) around Ammanford
near Pantyffynnon.
Mynydd Y Gwair (high ground north of Swansea North)
5.6.14 A general principle adopted in the routeing process was to avoid areas of higher
and more exposed, visually prominent land such as that associated with Mynydd Y
Gwair in the south-east of the refined area of search.
5.6.15 Notwithstanding this, site based observations revealed a presence of existing

overhead lines on this high ground north of Swansea North Substation.
Consideration was therefore given to the introduction of a further corridor option
across this area between the existing substation and Ammanford.
5.7 Route Corridor Categorisation
5.7.1 Based on the above broad collective observations of the assessment team, the
preliminary and newly introduced route corridors were categorised in the following
hierarchical manner.
 Those corridors which the assessment team recommended as the least

constrained options warranting further detailed consideration as part of the
appraisal;
 Additional corridors considered more constrained and therefore more difficult

for routeing purposes, but which still have the potential to accommodate a
route and which may warrant further site based evaluation;
 Those corridors initially identified in the workshop but later dismissed by the
assessment team following site review, primarily on the grounds of: significant
conflict with recorded environmental constraints; opposition with the essence
of the Holford Rules; a likelihood of encountering serious engineering
difficulties; and/or where a route would prove uneconomical to implement by
74
WPD.
5.7.2 The categorised corridors are depicted on Figure 12 (Appendix 2 – figures

included within the first interim route selection report). The figure also depicts the
previously identified indicative route for comparative purposes.
5.8 Least Constrained Route Corridor Options
5.8.1 The following identifies those corridors (and sub-sections thereof) that were
deemed to be the least constrained for routeing; these are described in a west to
east and north to south direction across the refined area of search.
New Inn to Abergwili (A485)
5.8.2 This corridor was considered to offer a direct route from New Inn to the Abergwili
crossing of Towy Valley, broadly following the A485 route.
5.8.3 The preliminary corridor was widened to allow for the consideration of options
either side of the A485 road corridor. As the area is relatively low lying, it was
considered appropriate to expand the corridor to the west towards Llanpumsaint to
permit consideration of a potential route closer to the lower valley.
5.8.4 The general locality exhibits an absence of steep slopes with less complex
topography towards the southern section of the corridor; however potential
proximity issues were noted in the Pontarsais area and potential constraints in the
form of ASNW near the settlement of Alltwalis.
5.8.5 A concentration of heritage resources was also recorded within the lower lying
areas of the corridor’s western extents, along with occasional ecological features
of importance.
5.8.6 The location of this corridor was considered to offer potential connection
opportunities to both the Brechfa Forest West and Bryn Llywelyn wind farm
substations, with a crossing of the Towy Valley possible through a very narrow
pinch-point on the eastern fringes of Carmarthen which would reduce the potential
75
for impact on its many designated features.
Brechfa to South of Nantgaredig (via Horeb)
5.8.7 This corridor broadly follows the line of the existing B4310 route, and would offer a
direct connection into the Brechfa Forest West Wind Farm.
5.8.8 Topographically, the area offered a number of opportunities to widen the corridor
to encompass the option of a more westerly valley route alignment. The corridor
boundary was developed to avoid the villages of Brechfa in the east and more
steep slopes found south of the valley.
5.8.9 Ecologically, constraints were noted in respect of possible wintering bird issues in
fields around the settlement of Horeb. ASNW was also recorded in the northern
and southern ends of the corridor.
5.8.10 Routeing across the Towy Valley remained a key consideration due to its many
sensitivities; however it was felt that a narrow crossing point immediately east of
Nantgaredig could be taken advantage of which avoided nearby ASNW and
Scheduled Monuments.
Abergorlech to Llanarthne (via Capel Isaac)
5.8.11 This corridor was not initially identified in the desk study, but emerged following
preliminary site based collective review of constraints and opportunities.
5.8.12 The corridor was considered to offer a direct, diagonal route of limited constraint
across a large tract of the refined area of search from the settlement of
Abergorlech. It was considered that this relatively undisturbed landscape could
accommodate a section of corridor that could potentially be utilised as part of a
wider corridor for connecting the Brechfa Forest East Wind Farm into the proposed
EE route connection point.
5.8.13 Although the corridor traversed an area of high ground north east of Capel Isaac,
subtly lower topographical opportunities were felt to exist that could be took
76
advantage of with careful routeing.
5.8.14 Navigating the Towy Valley remained a key constraint for this corridor, given its
oblique direction of crossing, multiple designations and high environmental value.
It was concluded that further site-based investigation would be necessary in order
to verify the viability of the corridor and its valley crossing between Llanegwad and
Llanarthne.
Abergorlech to Llandeilo (west via Cwmdu and Salem)
5.8.15 This option was considered to provide a section of corridor which could be utilised
for routeing between Brechfa Forest East Wind Farm and the Swansea North
Substation in the south.
5.8.16 A review of the corridor indicated it to offer a reasonably direct route between the
wind farm and the large settlement of Llandeilo. Given its low lying characteristics,
the corridor boundary was widened significantly to offer flexibility to route both east
and west of Salem, the latter potentially offering a valley alignment to be
developed.
5.8.17 The form of the corridor was shaped further to avoid the majority of important
cultural heritage assets, pockets of ASNW and ecologically designated features
such as the SSSI at Cwmdu.
5.8.18 Notwithstanding this, the considerable coverage of woodland within the corridor
was noted as a potential challenge and constraint, albeit of lower importance to
this stage of corridor refinement.
Abergorlech to Llandeilo (east via Talley and Halfway)
5.8.19 This corridor essentially provided an alternative direct route to the previous
corridor described above.
5.8.20 The northern section of this corridor option was developed following site-based
surveys which revealed opportunities to route east of Talley towards the proposed
77
substation in the Brechfa Forest East Wind Farm. The corridor is sited in a low
lying settled valley, with man-made influences apparent in the form of the existing
B4310 route which the corridor generally follows.
5.8.21 A number of challenges were recorded with this option which would require careful
consideration: significant cultural heritage assets in the Talley locality in the form
of Scheduled Monuments, Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas; small steep
sided valleys; and nature conservation interests comprising SSSIs and ASNW at
Talley and Edwinsford.
5.8.22 The boundary of the corridor was accordingly modified to reduce its width through
these areas in an attempt to avoid conflict with these interests, where possible.
The review also identified a potential opportunity to connect the southern extents
of this corridor (between Halfway and Llandeilo) into the northern extents of the
previous corridor via routeing north of Cwmdu, which would avoid encroachment
into the Talley and Edwinsford areas.
Abergwili to Llandyfaelog (EE Route Connection Point)
5.8.23 This corridor offers a direct connection into the corridor running north-south
between Abergwili to New Inn, east of Carmarthen.
5.8.24 Site review of this corridor confirmed a notable absence of environmentally

designated interests between the Towy Valley and the proposed EE route
connection point for much of this route. A proportion of the corridor would track
east of the existing A484 road, which was considered an opportunity for routeing.
5.8.25 Due to the constrained nature of the Towy Valley, the route corridor was narrowed
to reduce the potential for conflict with designated interests. A further constraint
emerged in the form of the A48 strategic route, which any overhead route would
need to navigate across.
Nantgaredig to Llandyfaelog (EE Route Connection Point)
5.8.26 A large proportion of this diagonal corridor was identified through site-based
78
verification which highlighted very few physical or environmental constraints

between the proposed EE route connection point and the Towy Valley. It was
accordingly brought into the scope of the appraisal as it presented an opportunity
to directly connect the Brechfa to South of Nantgaredig (via Horeb) corridor
identified above.
5.8.27 The low lying nature of the environment associated with an absence of woodland
and heritage features meant that the corridor boundaries could extend significantly
from the proposed EE route connection point through to the more constrained
pinch-point at the Towy Valley, thus offering considerable scope for routeing in this
area.
Abergwili/Nantgaredig to Swansea North (via A48 corridor)
5.8.28 This relatively lengthy section of corridor broadly tracked that which was defined in
the desk-based review, with boundaries modified to align with the established A48
road corridor and tweaked to provide potential connection into the Swansea North
Substation via a route north of Pontarddulais and Hendy.
5.8.29 The corridor was considered to form the most direct valley link from the substation
to the east of Carmarthen, thus offering opportunities to connect the Brechfa
Forest West and Bryn Llywelyn wind farms to the electricity grid.
5.8.30 The landscape is characterised as being fairly disturbed in places, which gives rise
to potential conflicts with road crossings due to the number of transport corridors in
the southern extents of the refined area of search.
5.8.31 Site-based review noted that navigation past Cross Hands would be achievable
through a pinch-point to the south-west of the settlement, accepting that careful
routeing would reduce the potential for conflict to emerge on a SSSI in this area.
5.8.32 A further pinch-point was recorded north of Pontarddulais; here any route would
likely have to follow the existing overhead distribution lines that traverse the area.
5.8.33 Isolated and clustered Listed Buildings were noted as a potential barrier to
79
routeing along this corridor in the Pentrebach and Cross Hands areas; boundaries
were accordingly narrowed and repositioned to reduce the potential for incursion
into such assets.
Llandeilo to Swansea North (west via River Loughor)
5.8.34 Identified during desk-based review, this corridor option offers a reasonably direct
route along the eastern extents of the refined area of search, and takes advantage
of an existing narrow valley feature associated with the River Loughor running
between Ammanford and Pontarddulais.
5.8.35 Clusters of Listed Buildings, Scheduled Monuments and pockets of ASNW south
of Llandeilo, were viewed as a potential barrier to routeing; therefore the corridor
boundaries were widened around the A483 to provide a broader scope for
routeing in this area.
5.8.36 The route corridor was adjusted between Ammanford and Pentre-Gwenlais to
avoid encroachment into and overlap with built form, Listed Buildings and an SLA.
Llandeilo to Swansea North (east via Mynydd Y Gwair)
5.8.37 This alternative corridor to that described above takes advantage of the upland
landscapes associated with Mynydd Y Gwair. This corridor was identified during
site-based reconnaissance and has been developed in response to the presence
of existing overhead infrastructure already being present in the locality.
5.8.38 The corridor is elevated, relatively direct and uniform in width between Ammanford
and Swansea North, broadly following the route of a rural lane and largely avoiding
the boundaries of a Strategic Search Area, Open Country, and a SSSI.
5.8.39 Some potential conflict was noted in respect of a dense cluster of ASNW located
immediately south of Pantyffynnon.
5.8.40 The remainder of the corridor between Ammanford and Llandeilo follows that
described in the previous corridor above.
80
5.9 Alternative Route Corridor Options
5.9.1 The following summarises two corridors that were deemed to offer potential for
routeing, albeit exhibiting a heightened degree of constraint that warranted further
detailed evaluation.
Brechfa to Plas Fawr
5.9.2 This additional corridor routes between the north of Carmarthen (Abergwili) and
the settlement of Plas Fawr, west of Horeb, and emerged as a potential sub-option
that would permit an alternative connection pathway between the Brechfa Forest
West Wind Farm and the EE route connection point.
5.9.3 The basis of the route derived from the workshop exercise which identified a
potential corridor between Carmarthen and the B4310, south of Horeb. The
locality is characterised by frequent, dispersed and complex areas of steeply
sloping ground, some of which appeared to be undisturbed in nature and
potentially sensitive to development.
5.9.4 Further desk-based review following site identification confirmed there to be a

small number of designations associated with this alternative corridor, including
ASNW pockets and built heritage assets of national importance.
5.9.5 It was observed that the relatively elevated nature of the corridor would potentially
not preclude routeing, but would likely result in a route that runs contrary to the
grain of the valleys in this area.
Llanddarog (A48) to north Ammanford link (via Milo)
5.9.6 The basis of the second of the alternative corridors was initially identified during
the workshop exercise as potentially offering scope for accommodating a route as
part of options starting or terminating in the east of the refined area of search.
5.9.7 It was identified that this corridor offered an indirect, longer pathway as part of
81
routeing to either the Swansea North Substation or the EE route connection point
from any of the three wind farm substations.
5.9.8 Fieldwork confirmed that although the corridor is elevated in places, there
appeared to be no particular topographical opportunities that could be readily
harnessed. In addition, the southern extent of the corridor is taken by a sizeable
tract of designated landscape accommodating a cluster of built heritage assets,
ASNW, and an area designated as a SSSI/SAC.
5.9.9 Potential routeing opportunities may exist north of these designated assets;
however it was noted from desk-based review that any such routes would
encroach into landscapes identified in LANDMAP as exhibiting high visual and
sensory qualities.
5.10 Dismissed Corridor Options
5.10.1 The following corridors (and sub-options thereof) were principally identified from
the desk-based workshop exercise and subsequently discounted from further
consideration, following modification, refinement and evaluation in the field.
Brechfa to Llandeilo
5.10.2 A potential corridor forming a direct link between the settlement of Brechfa to
Llandeilo (via Capel Isaac and Salem) was initially identified as offering an indirect
linkage between the three wind farm substations and wider corridor options to the
east of the refined area of search, connecting south into the Swansea North
Substation.
5.10.3 A general absence of ecological and cultural heritage constraints initially led to the
identification of this corridor; however site work concluded that a considerable
length of any route would be positioned on elevated ground located south-east of
Brechfa, characterised by slopes of >300m AOD, with no valley opportunities.
5.10.4 Steep slopes were identified in the vicinity of Llanfynydd, and north-west of Capel
Isaac, which were considered a potential barrier to routeing that would generate
82
conflict with the principles of the Holford Rules.
5.10.5 This constraint, coupled with considerable woodland coverage (some comprising
ASNW) and an absence of detracting features, drew a conclusion that this corridor
would not be suitable for routeing.
Abergorlech to Nantgaredig
5.10.6 Desk based review indicated potential for routeing along a corridor between
Abergorlech – immediately south of the proposed Brechfa Forest East Wind Farm
Substation – and the settlement of Nantgaredig in the Towy Valley.
5.10.7 The route was initially considered to offer indirect linkage to both the Swansea
North Substation and the EE route connection point for this wind farm. Preliminary
site work revealed some opportunities exist for taking advantage of the subtle
elevated valley for routeing, and because of a limited number of ecological and
cultural heritage constraints.
5.10.8 Conflicts were, however, acknowledged by virtue of the fact that a large proportion
of this corridor overlaps with SLA designation in what was observed to be a
generally undisturbed landscape of acknowledged high value in visual and
sensory terms.
5.10.9 The corridor was also identified as being of considerable length, particularly if it
were to be harnessed as part of a connection into the Swansea North Substation.
It was also identified that this corridor would only be required if a direct linkage to
the proposed Brechfa Forest East Wind Farm was necessary from either of the
proposed connection points (as opposed to an interconnection between each of
the three wind farms).
5.10.10 The overriding impression gained was that this corridor could be discounted if the
preferred connection were to be made to the Swansea North Substation; however
it was recognised that the corridor – upon further refinement – could form part of a
potential option warranting reconsideration should the EE route connection point
be progressed as the preferred connection point.
83
West of Carmarthen
5.10.11 The workshop exercise identified a potential option that would involve routeing to
the west of Carmarthen.
5.10.12 Site based review confirmed the initial observations that such a route would
potentially offer a pathway between the EE route connection point and the New
Inn locality, west of the Brechfa Forest West Wind Farm Substation, and that it
could form part of a wider corridor linking back to the Swansea North Substation to
the south-east.
5.10.13 The review identified a number of engineering challenges associated with this
option. Although a proportion of the area west of Carmarthen is reasonably low-
lying, a route option through this corridor would necessarily have to traverse more
elevated topography than in comparison to corridors associated with Abergwili,
east of Carmarthen. The route also captures a considerable number of
environmental sensitivities, not least those associated with the crossing of the
Towy estuary which could introduce an unacceptable degree of conflict with
numerous nationally and internationally important landscape and ecological
features.
5.10.14 Although the majority of corridor options identified would require a crossing over
the existing single carriageway A40 route, increased difficulties were noted in
respect of this corridor as the route would require the crossing of a dual
carriageway section west of the town. Other issued recorded included the need to
traverse fragmented areas of landscape considered to be of high value in visual
and sensory terms, and addressing the conflict with complex, steeply sloping
topography north of Carmarthen.
5.10.15 Given the focus of important estuarine designations, increased route length (when
compared to routeing east of Carmarthen) and the level of conflict with Holford
Rules concerning avoidance of areas exhibiting high amenity/value, it was
concluded that routeing via the west of Carmarthen would be unacceptable in
environmental and engineering terms and would therefore not warrant further
84
consideration in the appraisal.
Southern Corridor Options
5.10.16 Desk-based review identified a potential corridor running west from the Swansea
North Substation to Llandyfaelog (EE route connection point) via south of Hendy.
5.10.17 Fieldwork verification extended the desk-based exercise by identifying a further

two options following a comparable corridor alignment; the first of these broadly
followed the B4306 road corridor from Swansea North Substation to Crwbin, the
second provided a short corridor from the Swansea North Substation around the
fringes of Hendy (south and west) to avoid the settlement. These options
principally stemmed from the presence of Mynydd Sylen south of Pontyberem - a
feature characterised by very elevated ground in what is essentially low lying
topography.
5.10.18 The nature of the topography south-east of Carmarthen is such that no strong
valley opportunities exist running east-west that could be harnessed for routeing.
5.10.19 Collectively, these southern corridor options were considered to offer indirect
connectivity, particularly the option connecting to Llandyfaelog which would
introduce a new connection between the two identified connection points, as a
means of wider connection to the three wind farms.
5.10.20 A dispersed distribution of designated interests of importance comprising ASNW

(at River Morlais), SLAs, Carmarthen Bay SAC, and numerous heritage assets
were recorded. Coupled with the ascribed high value visual and sensory qualities
between Mynydd Cerrig and Mynydd Garreg, reasonably dense settlement pattern
and occasional steep slopes, it was concluded that genuine barriers to routeing
exist with these corridor options with no advantage in terms of connection length
or directness being offered.
5.10.21 Accordingly, corridors running across the south of the refined area of search were
discounted on this basis from further review and evaluation.
85
East via Clydach and Pontardawe
5.10.22 A corridor option tracking the south-eastern fringes of the refined area of search
was identified in the workshop as offering an alternative direction of connection
into the Swansea North Substation for routes associated with Llandeilo.
5.10.23 Site work refined the corridors based on a combination of topography,

designations and settlement patterns, concluding there to be a potential corridor
routeing via Clydach, then south of Mynydd y Betws and terminating either north of
south of Ammanford.
5.10.24 Observations indicated this corridor offers an indirect routeing opportunity in

comparison to other corridors, and would render an option that is more elevated in
nature that would traverse a Strategic Search Area for wind energy development.
5.10.25 The presence of steep sloping ground was acknowledged to form a limiting factor
to routeing, as was the linkage of wooded RSPB reserves north of Clydach which
form a clear barrier to route progression. Tree cover (some ASNW) east of
Ammanford and dense clustering of Scheduled Monuments were also noted as
genuine constraint to routeing. Proximity to the Brecon Beacons National Park
boundary north of Pontamman was recorded as a possible issue.
5.10.26 Given no readily identifiable advantages over more direct corridors were identified
in terms of routeing in this part of the refined area of search, it was collectively
concluded that no further focus would be directed towards the evaluation of
corridors east of the Swansea North Substation.
5.11 Adoption of the EE route as the Preferred Connection Point
5.11.1 Following the completion of site work to refine the various potential route corridor
options identified from the workshop exercise, WPD continued to evaluate the
merits of connecting into either the Swansea North Substation or the EE Route in
Llandyfaelog.
5.11.2 Route inspections were undertaken by WPD in November 2012; these concluded
86
there to be no overriding technical reasons why this existing section of overhead

line could not be utilised as a viable connection point for the proposed scheme.
5.11.3 It was therefore concluded by WPD that, for the purposes of route corridor
appraisal, the preferred connection point going forwards for the proposed scheme
would comprise the EE Route. Selection was predicted on the fact that it
represents efficient use of existing under-utilised network infrastructure, and it
presents a potentially more direct connection opportunity for routeing to the three
wind farm substations.
5.11.4 Key consultees previously engaged as part of the Stage 1 activities were
accordingly contacted in December 2012 and January 2013 to inform them of the
preferred connection point, and to update parties on the position regarding route
corridor identification and appraisal.
5.11.5 Feedback provided by Carmarthenshire County Council suggested that

consideration needed to be given in the ongoing appraisal to site allocations set
out in their deposit Local Development Plan, in addition to those previously
identified in their adopted Unitary Development Plan. This information was
subsequently gathered and recorded in GIS to supplement existing datasets
concerning planning related considerations.
5.11.6 The preliminary appraisal findings (described above) were subject to comparative
review in early January 2013, following the strategic decision regarding adoption of
the EE route connection.
5.12 Comparative Review
5.12.1 Comparative review of the refined area of search against the preliminary route
corridors and the decision to discount the Swansea North Substation connection
point on technical grounds revealed the following observations.
 The discontinuation of the Swansea North Substation connection would

necessarily require the dropping of the LSTC indicative route from further
87
consideration in the appraisal;
 Preliminary route corridors offering connection into the Swansea North

Substation would need to be dropped from the appraisal, specifically easterly
routeing opportunities orientated north-south between Abergorlech, Llandeilo
and Pontarddulais;
 The Llanddarog (A48) to north Ammanford link (via Milo) alternative corridor
should be discounted from further consideration, as its progression would
require a corridor link from Llandeilo to Abergorlech in order to form an integral
component of any connection (these being discounted for reasons described
above);
 A large section of the preliminary route corridor between

Abergwili/Nantgaredig to the Swansea North Substation (via A48 corridor)
should be discounted from the study, as this essentially provided an indirect
connection pathway following a north-west to south-east orientation across the
southern extents of the refined area of search;
 Removal of large tracts of preliminary route corridors in the east of the refined
area of search would mean the southern and eastern boundaries could
logically be reduced, given there would be no clear advantage in terms of
constraint avoidance or line length reduction for routeing into or across these
areas;
 There would be a requirement to rationalise the desk-based identified

interconnection corridors between the three wind farms with further fieldwork,
in order to ensure a means of connectivity is provided to each development
should one or more of these schemes not be granted consent through
statutory procedures (given this aspect was not verified by way of the
preliminary fieldwork undertaken);
 A need to: a) verify and refine the preliminary Towy Valley crossing points
between Carmarthen in the west and Llanarthne in the east (Llanarthne being
the furthest easterly crossing point following the discounting of corridors
88
crossing the valley at Llandeilo) through further fieldwork and consideration of

second tier criteria; and b) to refine the boundaries of the remaining
preliminary route corridors through site review to enable consideration of more
localised constraints and opportunities.
5.12.2 Accordingly, a number of modifications were made in order to revise the

boundaries of the refined area of search down to derive an agreed ‘study area’
based on the three wind farms interfacing with the connection point somewhere
between tower no’s 42 to 46 on the EE route (the final choice of connection point
being dependent upon the comparative environmental effects on one tower choice
versus another).
5.12.3 Coverage associated with the southern and eastern boundaries was significantly
reduced.
5.12.4 Eastern boundary modifications sought to exclude the sensitive Brecon Beacons
National Park by broadly tracking the line of the A476 between Tumble and
Llandeilo, and the B4302 between Llandeilo and Talley. As a consequence, the
sensitive landscapes around Ammanford and Pontarddulais would fall outside of
the study area and thus would not pose an ongoing constraint to routeing.
5.12.5 Refinements were also made to the southern boundary between Kidwelly and
Tumble; these sought to exclude large pockets of designated SLAs and ASNW
found north of Llanelli.
5.12.6 The northern and western boundaries were also adjusted to reduce their
coverage; the former was reduced to track closer to the boundaries of the
proposed Bryn Llywelyn and Brechfa Forest wind farms, and the latter was
brought closer to the west of Carmarthen (partially following the north-south line of
the existing A484 route).
5.12.7 The reduced coverage was considered to still offer flexibility for routeing to all
three wind farms, and would facilitate intensification of the corridor appraisal and
refinement activities going forwards.
89
5.13 Refinement of Preliminary Route Corridors
Scope and Objectives
5.13.1 Specialists within WPD and RSK undertook fieldwork jointly on 11 January and
17 January 2013. Preliminary route corridors (and alternative corridors) between
the three wind farms and the EE route connection that remained following the
comparative review were used as the basis for the refinement exercise.
5.13.2 Focus was directed on the first visit to validating the remaining corridor options to
determine their appropriateness and viability in environmental and engineering
terms, and to review the desk-based interconnection options between the three
wind farms that had yet to be the subject of fieldwork review.
5.13.3 Emphasis on the second visit was placed on undertaking a detailed review of the
Towy Valley crossings to: refine crossing boundary extents; determine whether
other viable crossing points exist; and consider technical and engineering
constraints that may preclude routeing.
5.13.4 A further objective of the second visit was to revisit in greater detail the previously
identified routeing opportunities to the proposed Brechfa Forest East Wind Farm
from the Towy Valley locality. Specifically, this involved a greater review of the
Abergorlech to Llanarthne (via Capel Isaac) corridor, and the Nantgaredig to
Abergorlech corridor opportunity - the latter being partly discounted following the
preliminary site review but warranting reconsideration following adoption of the EE
route connection.
Broad Refinements
5.13.5 The following broad refinements were made to the preliminary route corridor
extents and boundaries following the site visits, described in a south to north
direction.
5.13.6 The first modification was made to the corridor coverage around the proposed EE
route locality. This was marginally extended southwards from Llandyfaelog by
90
approximately 1km, and was undertaken following identification by WPD that

interface into this existing overhead line may be achievable via one of several
existing overhead distribution towers (rather than the terminal end tower).
5.13.7 Corridors previously identified south and east of Carmarthen (i.e. those broadly
connecting Abergwili, Llandyfaelog and Nantgaredig south of the A40 road
corridor) were broadly aggregated to form a single, outwardly tapering corridor
from the EE route connection point. The western boundary of this corridor was
then widened to track the line of the A484 in the main, as site based review
indicated no major environmental constraints that would preclude routeing close to
the urban fringes of south Carmarthen.
5.13.8 The corridor extents around Llanddarog were modified through a process of
reduction to ensure avoidance of several pockets of ASNW around the settlement
of Cwmisfael, and to establish a more appropriate corridor orientation directed
towards the A40 for routeing purposes.
5.13.9 The definition of preliminary route corridors had resulted in a triangular shaped
pocket of landscape falling outside of consideration south and west of the
settlement of Nantycaws. Site based review indicated there to be no overriding
environmental or technical factors preventing routeing through this area.
Accordingly, this area was augmented into the refined corridor boundaries for
completeness.
5.13.10 The preliminary route corridors identified two potential crossing points across the
Towy Valley; the first being sandwiched between Carmarthen and Abergwili, and
the second located immediately east of Nantgaredig. Detailed review of the
preliminary corridor boundaries and site based surveys along the valley led to the
following modifications.
 Narrowing of the first corridor crossing point to avoid encroachment into (and
conflict with) settlement on the western fringes of Abergwili and the north-
eastern periphery of Carmarthen;
91
 Refinement of the second corridor width to completely avoid the eastern

fringes of Nantgaredig, and to ensure avoidance of encroachment into the
neighbouring settlement of Pontargothi and surrounding pockets of ASNW;
 Identification of a third narrow crossing point west of Capel Dewi and east of
White Mill. Selection was based primarily on a general absence of residential
dwellings, and given this would offer a direct short route across the valley
feature. The project team acknowledged, however, that routeing in this
corridor may necessitate more than one crossing of the River Towy
watercourse and would need to carefully avoid isolated properties set within
the lower lying parts of the valley.
 Development of a fourth narrow crossing point immediately east of Capel Dewi

that took advantage of a clearing in elevated dense planting immediately north
of the A40 at Pen-yr-alit. It was acknowledged that routeing would be
technically feasible but highly constrained in width, and possibly requiring an
angled crossing to scale the valley and climb the steeper slopes on the
northern side of the A40 road corridor.
5.13.11 As a consequence of increasing the potential Towy Valley crossing points from
two to four, the overall form of the two preliminary corridors north of the valley
were broadened to permit flexibility in routeing direction northwards to any of the
proposed wind farms.
5.13.12 The preliminary route corridor from New Inn to Abergwili was reviewed in detail
during the site visit. It was concluded that a number of changes could be made to
its boundaries to avoid key settlement areas and designated features of
acknowledged value and importance. The following modifications were made.
 Significant reduction in the corridor’s western boundary around the B4301 and
Llanpumsaint, in order to avoid encroachment into major areas of settlement,
High value area of LANDMAP (visual and sensory), dispersed ASNW pockets,
and a SSSI;
 Minor refinement of the corridor’s north-western extents to avoid unnecessary
92
encroachment into the settlements of Dolgran, Pencader and Gwarallt;
 Refinement of the corridor’s north-eastern extents to allow a greater degree of

flexibility in terms of the connection into the proposed Bryn Llywelyn Wind
Farm Substation;
 General amendments to the corridor’s eastern fringes to minimise the degree

of overlap and conflict with sizeable tracts of ASNW immediately south of the
Brechfa Forest West Wind Farm.
5.13.13 The preliminary route corridor between Brechfa to south of Nantgaredig (via
Horeb) was investigated in detail during the site visit, alongside the Abergorlech to
Llanarthne (via Capel Isaac) corridor and Nantgaredig to Abergorlech corridor
opportunities.
5.13.14 After reviewing the constraints and opportunities associated with each option, the
conclusion drawn was that these areas could feasibly constitute a single wide
corridor that would offer routeing opportunities from several of the refined Towy
Valley crossing points around Nantgaredig to both the Brechfa Forest East and
West substations.
5.13.15 It was also considered that formation of a single route corridor would offer genuine
flexibility to avoid or reduce conflict with the highest value environmental
sensitivities, whilst enabling appropriate technical solutions to be realised in terms
of providing a potential interconnection corridor between the two wind farms along
the established line of the B4310.
5.13.16 Accordingly, the corridor was developed to create a broader corridor commencing
north of Nantgaredig, tapering outwards to interface with both wind farms in the
north. The corridor boundaries were developed to primarily avoid major
woodlands and ASNWs associated with Brechfa Forest, and to provide routeing
opportunities either side of the SLA associated with the River Cothi, in order to
minimise conflict with this important designation.
5.13.17 Due to the need to consider potential interconnection opportunities between the
93
three wind farms, a combination of fieldwork and desk-based interrogation of the

Brechfa Forest locality revealed a further narrow corridor option that could feasibly
connect the Brechfa Forest East and West wind farms. The corridor runs east-
west between both proposed wind farm substations through heavily forested areas
via a route south of the settlement of Gwernogle.
5.13.18 The corridor’s orientation inevitably conflicts with established Plantation woodland
pockets, but seeks to avoid areas of ASNW and settlements where possible, whilst
harnessing routeing along established rural lanes in the main. Despite conflicts
with SLA designation and LANDMAP (visual and sensory) coverage, it was
considered that a route could be carefully established through the landscape,
utilising existing woodland to reduce visual perception and awareness of overhead
infrastructure.
5.13.19 It was concluded that interconnection between the Brechfa Forest West and Bryn
Llywelyn wind farms could be achieved via a wooden pole overhead line through
the West Corridor, or via an underground connection following the network of
proposed access trackways within the wind farm boundaries.
5.13.20 The alternative preliminary route corridor between Brechfa and Plas Fawr was
examined during the site visit, and it was concluded that the far western and
eastern extents of this corridor could be incorporated into the refined corridors
described above, as this would offer greater directional flexibility for routes out of
the Towy Valley up to the three wind farms. Central sections of the alternative
corridor were discounted on the basis that topographically, any route following the
direction of this corridor would have to traverse steep slopes, valleys and visually
prominent high points.
5.13.21 Following the refinement process, the various selected Route Corridor Options
and interconnection corridors were re-referenced for clarity, as described below,
and visually presented and labelled on Figure 2.
94
Gwernogle Corridor
5.13.22 From the onsite substation at the Brechfa Forest West Wind Farm, the Gwernogle
Corridor extends northeast crossing areas of forestry and associated tracks,
before narrowing as it crosses a minor road to the west to Gwernogle. The
corridor reaches Gwernogle, bounded by the River Byrfon in the north and open
fields in the south, before crossing into the east of Brechfa Forest toward the
onsite substation of Brechfa Forest East Wind Farm, north of the town of
Abergorlech.
5.13.23 The length of this interconnection corridor between Brechfa Forest East and West
wind farms is approximately 12.3km.
Brechfa Corridor
5.13.24 From the onsite substation at Brechfa Forest East Wind Farm, the Brechfa
Corridor heads south crossing agricultural land interspersed with forestry,
continuing through areas of Brechfa Forest before orientating to the southwest to
Abergorlech. The corridor then crosses south of the River Cothi, where it
stretches southwest between Nant-y-Ffin and Pen-y-Garn. The corridor generally
follows the route of the River Cothi and crosses a section of forestry before
heading west to Brechfa.
5.13.25 As the route approaches Brechfa, it crosses a number of minor roads and
watercourses before heading northwest to a pinch point between Allt Llwyn-celyn
and Allt Cerbynau as it connects at the substation of Brechfa Forest West Wind
Farm.
5.13.26 The length of this interconnection corridor between Brechfa Forest East and West
wind farms is approximately 13.6km.
West Corridor
5.13.27 The West Corridor broadly follows the A485 from the town of New Inn south past
the town of Pencader in the west (the centre of which lies just outside the route
95
corridor). Following the A485 south, the corridor captures the settlement of
Gwyddgrug, crossing the River Gorwydd and River Gwyddrug. As the corridor
extends southward, it crosses the B4459 prior to interfacing with the A485 north of
Alltwalis. Agricultural fields, farm dwellings and mountainous terrain characterise
the corridor in this locality. The route captures hillside areas such as Allt Garedig
in the west, and is bounded by the terrain of Allt Llwydcoed in the east.
5.13.28 A pinch point exists within this corridor at Pontarsais and the junction between the
A485 and the B4301. After this junction, the corridor widens and encompasses
the town of Rhydargaeau as it expands further to the south before reaching the
town of Peniel.
5.13.29 The corridor is generally characterised by a composite of forestry, a network of A

and B-classification roads, and small watercourses and settlement set within an
agricultural land use pattern.
West-East Corridor Overlap
5.13.30 At this section, there is an area of overlap between the west and east corridors as
they reach the various crossing options for the Towy Valley (described below).
5.13.31 In this location the corridor extends from south of Peniel to an area immediately to
the west of the River Cothi (south of Felingwm Isaf). The terrain is undulating and
dominated by open, agricultural fields, which are framed and enclosed by a
network of single-lane country roads and isolated, scattered dwellings.
East Corridor
5.13.32 From south of Brechfa, the East Corridor heads south through isolated patches of
forestry, small settlements and scattered country dwellings. The corridor broadly
follows the route south of the River Cothi (though the corridor is west of the river
from Nant Gwilw onwards). The route also follows the B4310 southward toward
Felingwm Uchaf. The corridor covers an expanse of agricultural land that is
intersected by minor roads and single-track country lanes, which dominate in this
part of Wales. The terrain is generally undulating, rising to higher altitudes in
96
some areas (near Allt y Daren and the forested areas).
Towy Valley, A, B C and D
5.13.33 Routeing and definition of these corridors have sought to avoid areas of
established forestry, with a clear objective of crossing the sinuous route of the
River Towy once. The process has also considered proximity to settlements and
Scheduled Monuments as key criteria.
5.13.34 A – Corridor A extends from Peniel southward following the A485. The junction of
the A40 creates a pinch point for the corridor between the A40 and the edge of a
settlement (Abergwili). The route crosses the River Gwili in this corridor before
crossing the River Towy south of the A40. South of the river, the corridor includes
the town of Llangunnor, crosses the B4300, encompasses Tre-gynwr and is bound
by the A40 at its western extremity.
5.13.35 B – Corridor B begins from Penybanc-bach through to White Mill crossing the A40
south to cross the River Towy twice (as it meanders at White Mill Farm and again
North of Lower Penddaulwyn). The corridor then crosses the B4300 to the west of
Capel Dewi and covers an area that is predominantly agricultural land interspersed
with sporadic houses and small areas of tree cover.
5.13.36 C – Corridor C progresses south through agricultural land and between small
dwellings, crossing the A40 and the River Towy before crossing the B4300 to the
east of Capel Dewi. This corridor finishes around an area of forest just south of the
property Hafod Hir.
5.13.37 D – Corridor D extends southeast of Llanfihangel-uwch-Gwili. The B4310 crosses

this section of the corridor from a northeast to southwest direction. The route then
crosses the A40 to the east of the junction between the A40 and the B4310. The
route covers agricultural land with isolated dwellings between Nantgaredig and
Pont-ar-gothi. The corridor enters a pinch point here as it extends south between
a meander of the River Cothi and the B4310, which is immediately to the west of
the route. As the corridor reaches the River Towy, the corridor narrows again,
97
crossing the river and the B4300 and the B4310 in succession. This route takes
advantage of a narrow crossing point immediately to the east of Nantgaredig and
also avoids nearby ASNWs and Scheduled Monuments.
South Corridor
5.13.38 The South Corridor covers a wide area due to the low-lying characteristics of the
landscape offering considerable scope for routeing. The corridor stretches from
Pensarn in the west, to agricultural fields just west of B4310 in the east. In the
west, the corridor boundary follows the A40 from Pensarn as it turns into the A48.
The route, as it moves south, then crosses the A48 and passes the town of
Nantycaws in the centre of the route corridor. The western boundary of the South
Corridor has been refined to avoid the River Towy SAC.
5.13.39 South of the A48, the corridor encompasses Beaulieu Plantation in the centre of
the route, as well as the towns of Cwmffrwd, Idole and Bancycapel and to the west
of Llangyndeyrn. The south route corridor extends over a wide area, which
includes A-classification roads (A484) and several B-classification roads (B4309
and B4306).
5.13.40 In the west, the A48 changes into a minor road that the corridor harnesses to
define its western extremity as it passes Croesyceilog. The route then joins the
A484 as it passes across small lanes, sporadic settlements and small dwellings,
before heading west toward the EE route connection point in the southwest.
5.13.41 The corridor is dominated by agricultural farmland, the pattern of which is framed
and dissected by a network of country lanes in addition to the A and B
classification roads noted above. The corridor also captures areas of forestry and
minor watercourses, for example Nantrhydw and Nant Cwmffrwd towards its
central areas.
98
5.14 Informal Consultation on Preliminary Route Corridors
Purpose and Objectives
5.14.1 Following development, refinement and mapping of the Preliminary Route

Corridors, an informal workshop was held in Carmarthenshire on 18 April 2013.
Key members of the project team and environmental representatives from NRW
and CCC attended the event.
5.14.2 The objectives of the workshop were as follows.
 To explain the methodology and process followed in the route corridor

identification and appraisal process using descriptive and visual methods;
 To introduce, and explain the rationale behind, the Preliminary Route

Corridors that have emerged from the appraisal process and how
environmental, engineering, deliverability and cost factors have formed key
considerations in their development;
 To obtain initial consultee feedback and opinion on the form and extent of the
Preliminary Route Corridors, and their relationship to existing environmental
sensitivities;
 To clarify the key engineering aspects of the project in terms of connection

points and how the connection would be made;
 To agree the appropriateness of selection and evaluation criteria proposed to

be applied in the later stages of the appraisal, which will be used as the basis
for selection of a preferred option; this took the form of a brief report;
 To agree the scope and extent of detailed environmental surveys which need
to be done in the near future (due to seasonal constraints);
 To present the programme for project delivery and how the approach to
continued stakeholder engagement will intensify as progression is made
through the next stages of evaluation and development of route alignments
99
within a preferred corridor option.
5.14.3 Both NRW and CCC were provided copies of draft documents in advance of the
workshop to familiarise them with the status of the route corridor studies
undertaken to date, and the proposed approach going forwards on the project in
terms of how a preferred corridor will be determined.
5.14.4 Representation at the workshop was provided by project team members covering
engineering, consultation, programming and delivery, ecological and landscape
matters. Officers covering landscape and ecological interests represented NRW
and CCC at the event.
5.14.5 The project team presented a series of electronic and paper copy plans showing
the Preliminary Route Corridors to the officers, in order to facilitate discussion and
visually describe the appraisal and selection processes.
Key Discussions and Outcomes
5.14.6 CCC and NRW expressed satisfaction with the overall methodology adopted in
selecting the proposed route corridors.
5.14.7 A number of key themes, topics, suggestions, recommendations and outcomes

emerged during the workshop discussions which prompted debate within the
session and/or gave rise to further corridor appraisal work shortly after the
meeting.
Wind Farm Connections
5.14.8 In addition to the potential for interconnection of Bryn Llywelyn and Brechfa Forest
West wind farms via the West Corridor, consultees advised that the Preliminary
Route Corridor plans be amended to include an indicative overhead or
underground corridor connection between the Bryn Llywelyn and Brechfa Forest
West wind farms. This was accordingly introduced and based upon the alignment
of the proposed wind farm access trackways (where possible), in order to minimise
the potential for landscape and visual effects.
100
Undergrounding and the Towy Valley
5.14.9 Consultees welcomed the fact that the project team had directed considerable
effort towards desk-based and site-based evaluation of the Towy Valley area,
resulting in the identification of four potential crossing points.
5.14.10 The topic of undergrounding was raised in regard to methods for crossing the
Towy Valley, and in relation to the South Corridor boundary adjacent to
Carmarthen, where it was felt that undergrounding could potentially bring
considerable benefits over an overhead solution.
5.14.11 In response to comments raised concerning the possibility of undergrounding, two

potential underground options across the Towy Valley have been identified
(described below and shown on Figure 14 (Appendix 2 – figures included within
the first interim route selection report)).
 The first option would broadly follow the existing A40 road corridor east of
Carmarthen, as it was discussed that an underground option in this area could
potentially bring benefits in terms of reduced visual intrusion across the
western extremity of the Towy Valley, and from more densely populated areas
associated with the fringes of the town;
 The second option is associated with the settlement of Nantgaredig, where it

was noted that the existing local road around which the settlement pattern is
focused could be harnessed as a potential north-south underground crossing
opportunity that would significantly reduce the visual awareness of a
connection in and around the Towy Valley.
Landscape and Amenity
5.14.12 Influential factors to be taken into account in the subsequent selection of the
preferred corridor and route alignment options include the following.
 The need to cross Public Rights of Way, particularly those promoted as

country walks by CCC;
101
 Attention should be given to the draft SLA boundaries, which CCC has
published within its Local Development Plan (Deposit Draft);
 Subsequent appraisal work for the identification of route alignments should

consider all levels of LANDMAP, in addition to the visual and sensory aspect;
 Avoiding areas of forestry by careful routeing wherever possible should remain

a key criterion in the refinement and selection process.
Ecology and Nature Conservation
preferred corridor and route alignment options include the following.
 Use of targeted Phase 1 and Phase 2 ecological surveys; this has been
acknowledged in the outline approach. Such mapping could support the
identification for the presence of protected species (e.g. Dormice);
 Ancient Woodland should be avoided; the use of historic mapping from

Ordnance Survey (circa 1880 onwards) was recommended.
Heritage
preferred corridor and route alignment options centre on the avoidance of adverse
effects upon the setting of Scheduled Monuments, Listed Buildings and
Conservation Areas.
Route Corridors
5.14.15 Discussion and detailed review of the Preliminary Route Corridors and their
associated constraints/opportunities resulted in three additional routeing
suggestions being put forward by consultees, some of which extended marginally
beyond the study area extents.
 Consideration of a potential route corridor option around the west of
102
Carmarthen that would avoid crossing the upper reaches of the Towy Valley,
given the nature and extent landscape and visual sensitivities associated with
this feature. Consultees felt that this option could introduce routeing through
an area considered less sensitive in landscape and visual terms
(acknowledging, however, the challenge of routeing through areas of high
ecological value in this locality);
 Consideration of tracking an existing section of 132kV overhead line between

the settlements of Rhos and Carmarthen which could potentially offer benefits
from a land use and planning perspective (acknowledging that use of the
existing line is not considered technically feasible, and that any such corridor
would only be achievable if a corridor to the west of Carmarthen route were
deemed a viable option);
 Consideration of a potential interconnection corridor between the Brechfa

Forest East Wind Farm and the Brechfa Forest West and Bryn Llywelyn wind
farms via a more northerly route associated with the northern slopes of
Mynnyd Llanllwni, as a potential alternative to the identified Gwernogle and
Brechfa corridors. Consultees considered that a northern option could offer
benefits in terms of reduced impact on landscape and habitat.
5.14.16 It was noted that a West of Carmarthen option had already been developed,
appraised and subsequently discounted as part of initial corridor routeing studies.
However, based on consultee feedback it was concluded that this option should be
revisited.
5.14.17 In respect of the second suggestion, the existing 132kV overhead line runs broadly
parallel with a large section of the A484 route running in a southerly direction
between the settlements of Rhos and Cynwyl Elfed, before continuing southwards
to the west of Carmarthen where it terminates at Carmarthen substation. It was
acknowledged that any corridor routeing opportunities along the existing Rhos to
Carmarthen corridor would be dependent on a favourable outcome on the West of
Carmarthen corridor option (subject to re-review as described above), given the
corridor terminates west of the town.
103
5.14.18 In respect of the third suggestion, a northern interconnection corridor would be

plotted between the wind farms and then subject to the same level of scrutiny,
appraisal and evaluation applied previously to all other potential route corridor
options.
5.15 Revisiting the West of Carmarthen Corridor
5.15.1 Detailed scrutiny was undertaken of the west of Carmarthen locality to ascertain
existing constraint relationships between the proposed EE route connection point
and the A484 (north of Carmarthen); these being defined as the general locations
where any corridor option west of the town would logically commence and
terminate, if progressed.
5.15.2 The following observations and conclusions were made regarding this option.
 Any route to the west of Carmarthen with a link back into the West Corridor
running between Carmarthen and the New Inn locality would involve a
comparable line length to a route running east of Carmarthen at Abergwili
through the South Corridor and the Towy Valley-A Corridor. It was noted that
such a route would likely require a number of line deviations to successfully
take the circuit around the western and northern periphery of the town;
 The proposed EE route connection area is located immediately east of the

protected River Towy estuary, which carries multiple landscape, ecological
and heritage designations of international and national importance, and is
associated with an area identified in LANDMAP as an example of a High
Value (visual and sensory) environment;
 The more southern areas of the River Towy and the surrounding fields are
likely to be used by wintering birds associated with the Carmarthen Bay
Special Protection Area (SPA). Given that birds are one of the more sensitive
ecological receptors, any route should avoid crossing the River Towy in this
area;
 Several pockets of important ASNW between the estuarine environment and
104
south of the A40 road corridor physically constrain the width and direction of
corridor opportunities considerably;
 The form and layout of settlement along the A40 corridor (including CCC
proposals for new development to the west of Carmarthen) defines the
easternmost extent of any corridor options, effectively forcing any routeing
outward into the more sensitive rural landscapes west of Llanwch;
 Cors Goch Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) and National Nature
Reserve (NNR) is located immediately south of the A40, and comprises one of
only six raised bogs in Britain with a peat substrate and associated sensitive
habitats. The site is also known for the Bog-bush Cricket, Marsh Fritillary
butterfly and Scarlet Tiger Moth. The SSSI would therefore be sensitive to
development and should therefore be avoided. The combination of Cors Goch
NNR and SSSI and the presence of the pockets of ASNW mean that corridor
routeing could only realistically cross the A40 corridor through one of several
narrow pinch points devoid of constraint, immediately south of Carmarthen
Substation;
 Crossing the A40 would require an overhead line to traverse an area of

amenity land currently used as an agricultural showground, the character of
which is markedly influenced by the presence of existing wooden pole
distribution lines which cross the area and connect into Carmarthen Substation
to the north;
 Considerable overhead wirescape centred on Carmarthen Substation

contributes to the perception of the low-lying local landscape, much of which
comprises circuits of different voltage that traverse the surrounding environs in
all directions. The introduction of a further overhead distribution line west of
Carmarthen could inevitably heighten the awareness of overhead lines in this
area, which would conflict with the objectives of the Holford Rules (Rule 6);
 Aside from proximity issues to smaller areas of settlement, isolated Listed

Buildings and fragmented LANDMAP High Value (visual and sensory) areas,
105
the area associated with north-west Carmarthen was not considered to pose a
considerable constraint to routeing a corridor back towards the A485.
5.15.3 In revisiting the corridor, it was acknowledged that there could be some merit in
avoiding the upper sections of the visually sensitive Towy Valley east of
Carmarthen by routeing south and west of the town. Notwithstanding this, any
corridor would be significantly constrained by there being only one logical crossing
point at the A40 (south of Carmarthen Substation) where conflict with higher value
interests could realistically be avoided and/or reduced to some degree, unless
routeing were to be projected at considerable distance west of the town (which
itself would introduce conflict with the Holford Rules in terms of length and
directness of route).
5.15.4 It was noted that sizeable nature conservation interests located between the EE
route connection point and the A40 corridor presented a genuine barrier to route
progression. Consequently, it was felt that the need to cross the ecologically
sensitive estuary feature would introduce conflict with conservation objectives.
5.15.5 Whilst some degree of benefit was recorded in terms of reduced conflict with SLA
designated interests west of the town in comparison to other identified Towy Valley
crossing opportunities, the evaluation of ecological conflict, increased visual issues
associated with the introduction of additional wirescape, and increased line length
drew a conclusion that this option should be discounted from further study.
5.15.6 In arriving at this conclusion, it was also noted that the suggested route corridor
from the West of Carmarthen northwards to the settlement of Rhos should not be
considered further, given its dependence on the above.
106
5.16 Development of a Northern Corridor
Workshop Observations
5.16.1 Initial observations made by consultees attending the April 2013 workshop noted
there to be an existing country lane running in an east-west direction between the
settlements of Rhydcymerau (on the B4337) and Llanllwni (on the A485), the route
of which could potentially be harnessed as a corridor to interconnect the three
wind farms.
5.16.2 A position was agreed to develop any corridor options on the basis of entering the
Brechfa Forest East Wind Farm at its northern tip (adjacent to the settlement of
Gorsgoch), with the assumption being to route south – possibly via underground
techniques – through forestry within the development boundary to the proposed
substation location via existing and proposed access tracks.
5.16.3 Consultees highlighted that opportunities for routeing could arise from a number of
proposed changes to land-based designation boundaries which are currently
being evaluated as part of the Carmarthenshire Local Development Plan (Deposit
Draft) (June 2011). Specifically, this related to existing SLAs associated with
valley landscapes north of the settlement of Gwarallt, whereby planned reductions
in their coverage could realise genuine opportunities for routeing along these
features.
Environmental Overview
5.16.4 Environmental data comparable to that compiled and interrogated as part of the
route corridor identification exercise was obtained and digitised for an area
immediately north of the three wind farms, marginally extending outside the study
area. This was undertaken to establish the current conditions in relation to
landscape, ecology, heritage and planning interests, with a view to identifying any
genuine corridor opportunities that could provide connectivity between the Brechfa
Forest East and Bryn Llywelyn wind farms via a northerly route.
107
5.16.5 The mapped environmental constraints associated with the northern corridor are
depicted on Figure 15 (Appendix 2 – figures included within the first interim route
selection report). A review of the data drew the following conclusions.
 The general landscape is one characterised within LANDMAP as being of

High Value (visual and sensory), and contains a complex mosaic of upland
features and valley slopes dominated by forestry plantation and agricultural
management;
 A large tract of landscape associated with the Bryn Llywelyn Wind Farm area
and surrounding forested uplands is protected by way of SLA designation, with
several wooded areas afforded ASNW status;
 A linear tract of landscape associated with the southern banks of the River
Teifi is designated as an SLA, which extends south to a distance of between
1-2km from the watercourse;
 Upland landscapes north of the three wind farms are visually prominent, with
some topping 400m AOD in height;
 Settlement patterns are predominantly characterised by small hamlets,

individual farmsteads and isolated residential properties collectively set around
a network of small country roads and lanes;
 Two Scheduled Monuments and a Listed Building fall within the corridor
boundary.
Option Development
5.16.6 Following review of the environmental constraints associated with the suggested
option of routeing along the existing lane between Rhydcymerau and Llanllwni, it
was concluded that whilst the lane offers a direct corridor connection opportunity,
any routeing of an overhead line along this road corridor would be positioned on
sensitive elevated landform protected by SLA designation. Such an option would
inevitably introduce direct conflict with the objectives set out in the Holford Rules,
and would prove visually prominent in the local environment.
108
5.16.7 Two Scheduled Monuments comprising cairn and round barrow features were also
recorded as being positioned adjacent to each other along the lane, which were
considered to pose a potential physical and setting constraint to developing a
corridor along this linear route.
5.16.8 On balance, it was concluded that utilisation of this existing linear transportation
corridor would introduce an unacceptable level of conflict with the Holford Rules,
specifically Rules 2, 4 and 5 due to its visually exposed position.
5.16.9 Following the evaluation and subsequent discounting of this option, focus returned
to the identification of a potential corridor or corridors around the northern slopes
of the upland landscapes, the purpose being to define opportunities that would
enable the positioning of overhead lines against a landform backdrop (as opposed
to routeing on the visually exposed summits).
5.16.10 A broad corridor commencing from the northern boundary of the previously
identified West Corridor, gradually tapering to the northern boundary of the
Brechfa Forest East Wind Farm development boundary (via the northern upland
slopes), was accordingly defined, drawing on desk-based techniques and local
knowledge, and through application of the routeing principles set out earlier in this
report.
Key Characteristics
5.16.11 Running in a west to east direction, the northern corridor commences from the
boundary of the Brechfa Corridor in a north-easterly direction near the small
settlement of Gwarallt, before heading eastwards towards Banc Du, and then
heading south-east towards the northern extremity of the Brechfa Forest East
Wind Farm.
5.16.12 The southern boundary of the corridor is broadly defined by the sizeable SLA
designation covering the upland landscape. The northern corridor seeks to avoid
this feature, the principle being to route closer to the lower undesignated slopes to
accord with the Holford Rules principles.
109
5.16.13 In order to provide sufficient scope for possible route refinement, a decision was
made for the northern boundary of the corridor to encroach into the existing
Special Landscape Area associated with the southern parts of the River Teifi
valley, based on the assumption that this designation may be removed should the
revised boundary set out within the CCC LDP (Deposit Draft) be confirmed.
5.16.14 The boundaries were defined such that the corridor width and coverage provides
sufficient flexibility to ensure an appropriate distance can be maintained away from
settlements, Scheduled Monuments, Listed Buildings and pockets of ASNW (i.e.
first-tier criterion).
5.16.15 On reaching the west of Banc Du, a decision was reached to taper the corridor
down to a constrained width along an existing access road through the forest
plantation, the assumption being one of avoiding encroachment into this important
and established landscape component.
Evaluation
5.16.16 Following definition, the appropriateness of including the northern corridor as a

route corridor option for further detailed appraisal was tested against Stage 2a
environmental, engineering, technical and cost criteria.
5.16.17 The initial observation on environmental considerations (assuming the future

adoption of the proposed reduced extent of SLA designations in the vicinity) was
that, apart from existing areas of established forestry, isolated heritage assets and
several public rights of way running in a north-south direction between Brechfa
Forest and the A485, the potential northern corridor is generally free of
environmental constraint.
5.16.18 The review noted, however, that the total length of the northern corridor between
Brechfa Forest East and Bryn Llywelyn is circa 20km in length; therefore some
50% longer than the other two essentially equivalent interconnection options
between Brechfa Forest East and Brechfa Forest West. It was identified that an
overhead route through this northern corridor would be likely to give rise to visual
110
impact through intrusion into established views from areas of settlement, individual
properties and footpaths over this longer distance.
5.16.19 Potential was also recorded for indirect impacts to occur on the setting of
protected heritage assets identified within the northern corridor, specifically two
Scheduled Monuments located near the settlements of Llanllwni and Aber-Giar.
As examples of a medieval motte (earthwork castle) and prehistoric barrow
cemetery, both designated features are considered to be of national significance,
and for which the existing landscape contributes to their overall setting and
importance.
5.16.20 The requirement to effectively route north, and then back south, to provide the
interconnection was also deemed to contradict the Holford Rules concerning
utilisation of the most direct and inconspicuous route (Rule 3). On balance, the
review of environmental constraints did not identify any clear environmental
advantage of the northern corridor over other interconnection corridor options that
would justify this indirectness.
5.16.21 Furthermore, it was determined that a proportion of any interconnection route

within the northern corridor could require undergrounding, in order to reduce the
amount of tree felling required within Brechfa Forest. It was considered that this
would result in significant costs over and above shorter options which could be
predominantly overhead. Irrespective of whether the route through Brechfa Forest
is underground or overhead the greater line length would give rise to markedly
increased costs in comparison to other, shorter corridor options and could thereby
contradict WPD’s statutory requirement to identify the most economical route
when the environmental effects of different route options are broadly similar.
5.16.22 It was therefore concluded that the northern corridor option should be dismissed
from further consideration in the appraisal due to the markedly increased costs
and its potential to conflict with established guidelines concerning directness of
route and avoidance of visual impact
111
6 Stage 2b: Selection of the Preferred Route Corridor
6.1 Introduction to Stage 2b
6.1.1 This section of this route corridor selection report summarises the work
undertaken and the processes followed to progress from the agreed Route
Corridor Options (as identified at the end of Stage 2a of the process and described
in section 5 of this report) to the selection of a single Preferred Route Corridor.
The Preferred Route Corridor nevertheless remain a broad area of land through
which a number of alternative route alignments will be considered and appraised
in detail at Stage 3.
6.1.2 Figure 14 (Appendix 2 –figures included within the first interim route selection
report) shows the selected Route Corridor Options that were identified as an
output of Stage 2a of the route selection process. During Stage 2a each potential
corridor was given a name to ease discussion and to differentiate all of the
potential corridors considered (including those that were not subsequently
selected as an Option meriting detailed appraisal at Stage 2b). Due to the width
and overlapping nature of the corridors shown on Figure 14 these areas still under
consideration were re-amalgamated and re-coded during Stage 2b to assist their
detailed appraisal. This re-coding divided the overall route into five geographical
sections (with section A in the south and sections D and E providing possible links
between the three wind farm sites in the north) and identified the various corridor
options associated with each of these stages (numbering between two and four
options for each of the five sections). The various sections and options are shown
on Figure 2.
6.1.3 Stage 2b of the route selection process to identify the Preferred Route Corridor
principally comprised:
 A series of deliberative workshops with representatives of potentially affected

community councils and local amenity user groups where attendees were
asked to provide information and local knowledge relevant to the appraisal of
112
each corridor option;
 Further consultation with statutory consultees, local amenity user groups, the
Council and other elected representatives;
 Further site visits by both WPD (to consider engineering feasibility) and RSK
(to consider potential environmental effects); and
 The Route Corridor Options appraisal by both RSK (on environmental

grounds) and WPD (in regard to their wider regulatory obligations).
6.2 Deliberative Workshops
Introduction
6.2.1 The first stage of consultation was undertaken during summer 2013 over a
14-week period. This gave statutory consultees, local amenity user groups and
local communities (via their community council representatives) an opportunity to
review the work undertaken by WPD up to this date, and the detail that has
informed these decisions. Consultation sought to obtain information, comments
and feedback on WPD’s strategic solution, and the Route Corridor Options
identified in section 5 of this report.
6.2.2 WPD had originally made a strategic decision to progress the proposed scheme
on the basis of providing a means of connection via an entirely overhead 132kV
circuit between the three wind farms and the EE route connection point. At the
outset of the deliberative workshops it was identified that WPD may give
consideration to adopting a mixture of overhead and underground technological
solutions, but that there was a general presumption of an overhead connection
within the comparative appraisal process. Areas where undergrounding might be
considered advantageous could include locations subject to physical constraints
such as urban areas, or highly sensitive designated landscapes of acknowledged
value. Such areas would be considered on their individual merits.
6.2.3 It was also explained that WPD may elect to re-examine options that have been
113
previously discounted as a consequence of consultation, or choose to direct effort

towards the examination of any suggested alternative routes that may not have
already been subject to review and appraisal.
Approach
6.2.4 Three deliberative workshops were held within different parts of the overall study
area. Full details of the process are included within the Interim Consultation
Report for the project.
6.2.5 The workshops comprised a series of presentations explaining the technical

requirements of the grid connection and summarising the process followed to
collate and consider the environmental constraints and to identify potential route
corridors. Attendees were invited to respond to a number of consistent pre-
determined questions. These focused on identifying relevant information relating
to the identified Route Corridor Options (principally relating to environmental
issues and land uses) and to the consultation processes being followed.
Attendees were not at this stage invited to express preferences for one corridor
over another.
Outcomes
6.2.6 During the course of the deliberative workshops attendees were invited to
annotate large plans to locate specific issues and known land uses with a bearing
on potential routing and records were kept of all issues raised. The outcomes of
the deliberative workshops are shown on a series of plans and a schedule of
comments, with project team responses is provided within the Interim Consultation
Report.
6.3 Further Consultation
6.3.1 In addition to the deliberative workshops with community council representatives

and local amenity user groups the following consultations also took place during
Stage 2b of the route selection process:
114
 Statutory Consultees including NRW;
 Developers of the three proposed wind farms;
 Carmarthenshire County Council planning officers and Members;
 MPs and AMs;
 Meetings with other community councillors (who were not able to attend the
deliberative workshops) and other interest and local amenity user groups;
6.3.2 The outcome of this first stage of consultation is recorded in full within the
separate Interim Consultation Report with a summary of the key issues, and how
they have influenced decision making with regard to the Preferred Route Corridor,
a summary is also provided within this report to fully explain the rationale behind
corridor selection.
6.4 Further Site visits
6.4.1 The identification of a reduced number of selected Route Corridor Options at the
end of Stage 2a of the route selection process enabled a number of more focused
site visits to be undertaken by both RSK and WPD during the Stage 2b Route
Corridor Options appraisal.
RSK site visits
6.4.2 Site visits carried out by RSK during Stage 2b focused on:
 Further observations regarding the structure and character of different

landscapes within the Route Corridor Options to further understand their ability
to accommodate the potential effects of the proposed scheme;
 Further observations regarding the relationship between topography and

potential visibility in areas generally characterised by relatively steeply sloping
ground;
 An on-site review of the extent and landscape value of both the existing and
115
proposed SLA designations within the Route Corridor Options to help judge
the weight to be attributed to this constraint within the appraisal process. In
general this confirmed that the proposed designations were ‘well deserved’
and that their extent did reasonably accurately reflect areas within which the
landscape effects of the proposed connection were likely to be greater; and
 Further site assessment to understand the potential effects of the various

crossings of the Towy Valley under consideration.
6.4.3 These site visits by RSK were undertaken in parallel with the options appraisal
process outlined below and enabled the preliminary conclusions of the appraisals
to be cross checked with site observations.
WPD site visits
6.4.4 Site visits carried out by WPD during Stage 2b focused on:
 Collation of additional detail on land uses to ensure that an adequate width of

land was available between settled areas;
 Re-affirming that overhead connections within all of the identified Route

Corridor Options were technically feasible using wooden poles; and
 Identification of those corridors that was likely to be more technically

challenging in terms of the engineering solutions that were likely to be required
to overcome key challenges such as construction access, river crossings and
steep topography.
6.4.5 These site observations by WPD have enabled engineers to input to the options
appraisal process as recorded later within this section of this Route Corridor
Selection Report.
6.5 Route Corridor Options Environmental Appraisal – first stage
The Route Corridor Options appraisal process
6.5.1 The Route Corridor Options appraisal process was environmentally led by RSK
116
but also took account of:
 Evolving WPD technical requirements and consideration of the engineering

implications and requirements likely to be associated with the various Route
Corridor Options;
 The outcome of the deliberative workshops where relevant environmental

information was provided (recorded both here and in the Interim Consultation
Report);
 The outcome of other ongoing consultation processes with statutory

consultees, other key stakeholders and representatives of interested groups
(also recorded in the interim Consultation Report); and
 Site observations by both RSK and WPD.
6.5.2 The Route Corridor Options appraisal process has benefited from inputs from a
wide range of technical specialists including RSK’s landscape architect, cultural
heritage consultant, ecological consultant, hydrological consultant and WPD
engineers.
6.5.3 Figure 2 shows the five route sections (sections A to E) and associated corridor
options (between two and four for each section) that were subject to detailed
appraisal. The appraisal process for each corridor option has been clearly
separated into three parts:
 Firstly, a comparative appraisal by the RSK assessment team on

environmental grounds to identify a preferred route corridor from a solely
environmental perspective;
 Secondly, consideration of any additional material considerations raised during

consultation and the views of all consulted stakeholders including statutory
consultees such as NRW; and
 Thirdly, a review by WPD of the environmentally based corridor

recommendations to factor in and balance engineering, practicability and cost
117
factors to meet WPD’s wider regulatory obligations.
The Route Corridor Options environmental appraisal matrices
6.5.4 An environmental appraisal matrix for the options associated with each of the five
sections was prepared and is provided in Appendix 3. These environmental
appraisal matrices collate inputs from all of the environmental specialists. They
focus on landscape, visual, ecological and cultural heritage issues (identified
earlier in the process as the main determinative factors for corridor selection) but
also include outline consideration of a range of ‘other’ environmental factors that
will become increasingly relevant as the route selection process approaches the
consideration of more specific route alignment options at the next stage (e.g.
hydrological issues).
6.5.5 Although the appraisal matrices do not necessarily explicitly consider matters
raised during workshops and other consultations, knowledge gained by the
assessment team through these consultation processes has informed the
appraisals undertaken.
6.5.6 The appraisal matrices provided in Appendix 3 divide relevant environmental

topics into two levels of appraisal:
 The principal topics that have informed selection of the Preferred Route
Corridor i.e. landscape, visual, cultural heritage and ecology; and
 A range of other secondary topics including hydrology and flood risk; geology,
soils and ground conditions; noise and vibration; socio-economics; electric and
magnetic fields; air quality; and traffic and transport.
6.5.7 The appraisal matrices adopt a system of ‘preference ratings’ from ‘very high’ to
‘very low’ for each topic considered (with a single overall combined rating for the
list of ‘other’ environmental topics considered in outline) and also allow for
opportunities to be highlighted. The ‘preference ratings’ have been appraised on
the basis of professional judgement and have principally been used to differentiate
and rank the corridor options for each section of the route. The ‘preference
118
ratings’ are not therefore defined by specific criteria or thresholds and, in the
context of each section of the route, provide a relative rather than absolute
appraisal of environmental issues and constraints in the interest of identifying a
preferred corridor.
6.5.8 The overall appraisal combining all topic areas is then summarised at the foot of
the appraisal matrix and given a ‘traffic light’ coding of red, amber or green. This
‘traffic light’ coding enables options to be ranked overall but also highlights where
there remained potential environmental issues and constraints associated with the
identified Preferred Route Corridor option for some sections of the route (i.e.
where no ‘green’ corridor option free of potential environmental challenges exists).
In such circumstances a process of review and back-checking was triggered to
reconfirm that a less environmentally constrained corridor option was not available
(see below) and, in one case, has resulted in extension and re-appraisal of one
section of the overall route.
Environmental Appraisal of the Route Corridor Options
6.5.9 The environmental appraisal matrices in Appendix 3 provide a detailed but

reasonably concise summary of the reasoning underpinning the recommended
corridors on environmental grounds. The following provides additional reasoning
and explanation with regard to the key matters encountered on a topic by topic
basis.
Landscape and Visual issues
6.5.10 Detailed appraisal of the landscape and visual issues associated with each of the
Route Corridor Options is set out in the environmental appraisal matrices provided
in Appendix 3. These provide for separate appraisals of landscape and of visual
issues.
6.5.11 Table 4.1 in section 4 of this report provides a list of the landscape and visual
constraints that were collated and mapped as part of the earlier primary
constraints review. The table also divides the eight data sets listed into primary
119
and secondary (first and second tier) considerations. Although the presence of
National Parks, Historic Parks and Gardens and Country Parks were identified as
primary (first tier) constraints, the selected Route Corridor Options were largely
able to avoid these areas and they did not therefore play a critical role in the
relative appraisal of Route Corridor Options. Similarly, the presence of areas of
common land has not been a determinative issue in corridor selection.
6.5.12 The landscape and visual appraisal of Route Corridor Options has therefore been
primarily based on consideration of the following matters which were both relevant
and useful to identify the relative degree of preference associated with each route
section and corridor option:
 Special Landscape Area (SLA) status. The appraisal considered both

existing and proposed SLAs. Earlier stages of route corridor option selection
had quickly established that total avoidance of this local, non statutory
designation was unlikely to be possible. The Route Corridor Options appraisal
has therefore considered the degree of conflict with currently designated and
proposed SLAs. This included field work to provide a general appreciation of
the specific value and character of the SLAs to provide an appropriate and
refined understanding of the degree to which an overhead connection on
typically 15m high wooden poles would conflict with the objectives of their
designation. In general, the SLAs were identified as representing a clear
sensitivity to the proposed scheme and corridors that minimised direct physical
conflict with them have been favoured.
 Landmap evaluation. Visual and Sensory Aspect Areas identified as being

of “Outstanding” or “High” value by NRW were treated in a similar fashion to
SLAs. These areas were also unavoidable and therefore did provide a basis
for differentiation between corridors. In general, these areas were afforded
slightly lower weighting than SLAs. It was judged, however, that while much of
the proposed Cothi Valley SLA is identified by NRW as being of High rather
than “Outstanding” visual and sensory value, the appraisals treat the Cothi
Valley as some of the most sensitive landscape within the areas under
120
consideration.
 Landscape character. The relative ability of different types of landscape

within different Route Corridor Options was considered by reference to
Landmap information, regional landscape character areas and field work. This
analysis and associated fieldwork also provided a sense of the relative
openness and intervisibility that exists in different areas.
 Topography. The topography of the different Route Corridor Options was

an important and influential factor in the appraisal of landscape and visual
issues due both to the diversity of landform and to the presence of distinctive
and highly pronounced topographical form – especially associated with
sections B, D and E of the overall route. Topography was mapped, analysed
and examined in the field both in terms of elevation (and how this relates to
the Holford Rules) and steepness of slope (presenting visual implications).
 Visual receptors. The appraisal considered the presence of visual receptors

while applying only appropriate weight due to the nature of the proposed
scheme (a typically 15m high overhead line on wooden poles – generally
lower than surrounding tree cover). The appraisal acknowledged key routes
with large numbers of people using them (e.g. main roads and routes such as
the B4310) while differentiating between routes that have had an urbanising
influence on their setting (such as the A485) as opposed to those that pass
through more rural areas (such as the B4310). Long distance footpath trails
and cycle routes were also considered while acknowledging that there would
be limited conflict where routes cross rather than parallel and in close
proximity.
6.5.13 Following further site work, the extent of proposed SLA designations in the vicinity
of the Route Corridor Options was given considerable weight in the appraisal of
potential landscape effects. Route Corridor Options that minimised conflict with
the proposed SLA designation were generally preferred. This consideration also
influenced:
121
 The selection of corridor B1 which was judged likely to have the least impact
on the proposed SLA along the Towy Valley; and
 Given the SLA designation of most of corridor E2 (and WPD concerns over the
buildability of E1), section E of the route was subject to a second stage of
appraisal (see below).
6.5.14 The appraisal of visual issues was primarily associated with the avoidance of
steeply sloping ground where the appearance of the proposed connection would
be less well absorbed by surrounding tree cover.
6.5.15 Within route section A, landscape and visual issues were identified as being
relatively limited. A preference for option A1 (or areas towards the western side of
A2) principally reflected the absence of a justification for a longer route through
undisturbed countryside and the presence of an already modified landscape in the
vicinity of the A484.
6.5.16 Within route section B, careful comparison of the various options for crossing the
Towy Valley (including field work) concluded that option B1 was best able to
accommodate the appearance of an overhead scheme. This part of the Towy
Valley was judged to be already subject to a range of modifying and urbanising
influences and that an overhead connection here would least impact on the
integrity and continuity of the valley landscape. Distinct landforms and steeply
sloping ground to the north of the Towy Valley at B2 and B3 presented constraints
elsewhere.
6.5.17 Within route section C, option C1 was identified as the least sensitive landscape
character type and minimised conflict with existing and proposed SLAs. No
justification for a longer route through more sensitive countryside was identified.
6.5.18 Within route section D, option D2 was identified as preferable due to its
association with the consented Brechfa West Wind Farm Site, and visually
enclosed and largely isolated forest context, however, it was considered that an
alignment through D1 was achievable.
122
6.5.19 The options within route section E were subject to very careful and detailed
relative consideration of potential landscape and visual effects including field work.
Both corridors were attributed with relatively low landscape and visual preference
ratings. It was concluded that the specific landscape structure and character of E1
would be better able to accommodate the appearance of an overhead line and
would, despite distinct and complex topography, be preferable to an overhead
connection along the designated Cothi Valley SLA. This preference remained
unchanged in the context of the widened version of E2. While acknowledging that
the undesignated southern areas of the extended E2 demonstrate some reduction
in landscape and visual sensitivity compared to the Cothi valley between Brechfa
and Abergorlech, a more southerly corridor would still need to cross the Cothi
Valley and SLA further to the south.
6.5.20 WPD’s more detailed consideration of the engineering implications of option E1

reconfirmed that the topography and forest cover represented very difficult
technical challenges.
Cultural Heritage issues
6.5.21 Detailed appraisal of the cultural heritage issues associated with each of the Route
Corridor Options is set out in the environmental appraisal matrices provided in
Appendix 3.
6.5.22 The baseline data regarding known constraints was used to identify which of the
proposed corridors would be likely to result in the lowest adverse effects on the
historic environment. The risk of harm to settings of heritage assets is a material
factor in appraising corridor options, and is likely to be the most widespread form
of adverse effect. As a result, the key consideration for preferred corridor
identification was the quantity and severity of adverse visual impacts upon
designated heritage assets.
6.5.23 Corridor option A3 is less preferred than A1 or A2 in with regard to Scheduled

Monuments. Option A3 is also the least preferred option with respect to the
historic landscape; however, if the northern connection point near Llandyfaelog
123
were adopted, A3 would be the preferred option regarding the historic landscape.
There is no preference between these corridor options regarding Listed Buildings.
6.5.24 Corridor option B4 is the least preferred option with regard to Scheduled
Monuments, while options B2 and B3 are most preferred. Option B1 is the least
preferred option with regard to Listed Buildings, while option B2 is the most
preferred. Option B1 is the only option that may adversely affect a Conservation
Area, including the possibility of traversing it. Options B2 and B3 are the least
preferred options with regard to the historic landscape; the most preferred option
between B1 and B4 would depend on the route alignment chosen.
6.5.25 Although there was a broad consensus within the environmental appraisal
matrices for the selection of corridor option B1 for the Towy Valley crossing, the
cultural heritage appraisal of option B1 identified it as the least favourable of the
four options considered. This reflected the presence of a conservation area,
registered parkland and a relatively large number of listed buildings close to this
corridor option. Further consideration of the potential visual and setting issues
associated with an approximately 15 m high overhead line on wooden poles within
this reasonably well vegetated and flat corridor, combined with observations from
WPD engineers that overhead route alignments were likely to be available that
would minimise visual effects on cultural heritage receptors, satisfied the appraisal
team that option B1 was preferred.
6.5.26 Corridor option C2 is the least preferred option regarding Scheduled Monuments,
while C1 and C3 are approximately equal, depending on the route alignment
chosen. Option C2 is also the least preferred option regarding Listed Buildings,
while C3 is the most preferred option. Option C3 is, however, the only option that
may affect a Registered Park and Garden. Option C2 is the least preferred option
regarding the historic landscape, the others being of broadly equal preference.
6.5.27 Overall, corridor option D1 and D2 are regarded as being of high preference with
respect to the historic environment.
6.5.28 Corridor option E2 is less preferred with regard to Scheduled Monuments and
124
Listed Buildings, and may also affect a Conservation Area, which option E1 would
not. There is no preference with regard to the historic landscape. Overall, corridor
option E2 is regarded as being of low preference with respect to the historic
environment, principally due to potential effects near Abergorlech. Both corridor
options have the potential to result in adverse effects on non-designated but high
value historic landscape character areas, as a result of which option E1 is
considered to be of medium preference.
6.5.29 When viewed as whole corridor options, the sequence of options preferred for
cultural heritage would be A2, B2 and C1, followed by D2 and E1 to reach the two
northern wind farm substations. However, if a route alignment could be located
through corridor option B1 that avoided changes to the settings of the
Conservation Area and Listed Buildings at Carmarthen, as well as minimising
adverse effects on heritage assets at Abergwili, the preferred sequence of corridor
options would be A1 and B1, to reach C1, D2 and E1. These two options would
avoid the areas of lowest preference, near Carmarthen (B2) and along the Cothi
Valley (E2).
6.5.30 None of the assessed corridor options carries any over-riding cultural heritage
concerns with regard to Scheduled Monuments, Listed Buildings, Registered
Parks and Gardens or Conservation Areas. This is because no corridor option
would necessitate a route alignment passing directly through or across any such
designated sites. However, for several corridor options the choice of route
alignment may be critical to avoiding ‘substantial harm’ to the setting of designated
heritage assets.
Ecological issues
6.5.31 Detailed appraisal of the ecological issues associated with each of the Route
Corridor Options is set out in the appraisal matrices provided in Appendix 3.
6.5.32 The appraisal of ecological issues was primarily associated with the avoidance of
broad-leaved woodland, especially those designated as Ancient Semi-natural
Woodland (ASNW). The avoidance of broad-leaved woodland would in turn avoid
125
impacts on protected species that depend on them e.g. Dormouse and bats.
Woodland also provides connectivity across the landscape that has the potential to
be impacted by the scheme. For example, although both options E1 and E2 were
classified as having low preference, option E1 was preferred over E2 due to
concerns that impacts to the habitats associated with the Cothi Valley may be
unavoidable. It is also possible that the corridor boundary of option E1 could be
moved to avoid ASNW which would increase the preference on option E1 to
having only ‘medium’ preference.
6.5.33 The River Towy is a designated site that is unavoidable within the route corridor
options. The river is designated for features that are likely to be constant in all
route crossing options and as such, the appraisal concentrated on the habitat that
the river provides for wintering birds, and potential ecological issues with the
habitats surrounding the crossing points. Through consultation it was noted that
the further east towards Llandeilo, the more risk of coming into contact with
wintering birds, especially swans. In addition, there are areas of broad-leaved
woodland on either (or both) areas that would be difficult to avoid when accessing
river crossing in options B2-4. As a result, option B1 was considered to be the
preferred crossing.
Hydrological issues
6.5.34 Appraisal of the hydrological issues associated with each of the Route Corridor
Options is included under the heading of ‘other’ in the appraisal matrices provided
in Appendix 3. These are factors which will become increasingly relevant as the
route selection process approaches the consideration of more specific route
alignment options at the next stage. The following important detail can be provided
in relation to Route Corridor Options B1, B3 and B4 at the Towy Valley.
6.5.35 Option B1 (western crossing of the Towy Valley nearest to Carmarthen) is located
within flood zone 3 with the potential to cross the River Gwili, Abergwili Mill Leat,
Bwlch Stream and the River Towy. The flood map also illustrates defences
located to the east of the proposed crossing. These defences are designed to
126
protect Abergwili village as can been seen from the hatched area on the flood map
provided by NRW.
6.5.36 Option B3 (central crossing of the Towy Valley) is located within flood zone 3. The
crossing may require crossing of both the River Towy and Lash Nantgaredig.
6.5.37 Option B4 (eastern crossing of the Towy Valley) is located within flood zone 2 and
3 with the potential to cross both the River Cothi and River Towy.
6.5.38 All options are within flood zone 2 or 3 and all require crossing of the River Towy.
The flood defences within crossing B1 are avoidable. Option B1 has the greatest
number of potential main river crossings.
6.5.39 NRW has also indicated that they have direct consenting powers, under byelaws,
for works within 7m of the top of the natural bank or landward toe of any river
retaining structure on a main river. In addition, as the River Towy banks can
experience significant erosion it is suggested that the setting back of poles further
than 7m would be beneficial.
6.5.40 All section B options would require crossing the River Towy and while the selected
B1 option had the most main river crossings, hydrology was not considered a
determining factor in overriding this decision as long as guidelines set out by NRW
were followed when developing an alignment.
Other environmental issues
6.5.41 The environmental appraisal matrices include consideration of the full range of
environmental issues including some matters raised by community council
representatives at the deliberative workshops.
6.5.42 It was generally considered that for noise and EMF, proximity to residences was
the most important factor and this was not a determining factor in corridor
selection. Proximity to residences will be considered at alignment stage.
6.5.43 Geology, soil and ground conditions vary across the corridor options but are not
127
determining factors in selecting a preferred corridor. Ground conditions will be

reviewed and included as part of the alignment studies. Peat deposits were in part
assessed as part of the ecology appraisal, in assessing avoidance of peat/bog
habitats.
6.5.44 Socio-economic impacts including impacts on tourism as a result of the visual

impact of the development was raised as a result of the Stage 1 Consultation
process. These factors were considered as part of the corridor appraisal.
6.5.45 None of the corridors are within an Air Quality Management Area and air quality
was not considered a differentiating factor when selecting a preferred corridor. Air
quality will continue to be reviewed as the project progresses and will be assessed
in the EIA if, as a result of the development, it is considered likely to give rise to
significant effects on air quality.
First Stage Conclusions
6.5.46 The environmental appraisal matrices provided in Appendix 3 show a reasonably

clear consensus across the key environmental topics in relation to sections A to D
of the route. The Preferred Route Corridor for these sections comprises options
A1, B1, C1, with a slight preference for D2.
6.5.47 Selection of a Preferred Route Corridor within section E of the overall route proved
less clear cut. The first stage of environmental appraisal found generally low
levels of environmental preference associated with both option E1 and E2. That
neither option is free of potentially significant environmental issues triggered a
requirement to review and back check whether all feasible corridors to provide a
link between Brechfa West and Brechfa East wind farms had been correctly and
adequately identified at earlier stages in the process.
6.6 Route Corridor Options Environmental Appraisal – second stage
Review of Section E of the route
6.6.1 The initial Route Corridor Options appraisal was not decisive in relation to section
128
E which would be needed to provide the required link between the consented
Brechfa West Wind Farm Substation (the connection formed by preferred option
C1) and the substation associated with the proposed wind farm at Brechfa East.
Second Stage Conclusions
6.6.2 Following the review of corridor options within section E of the overall route,
widening and refinement of corridor option E2 (shown on Figure 4) and its re-
appraisal on environmental grounds, the environmental appraisal continued to
point towards a preference for corridor E1. The principal reason for this was the
conflict of corridor E2 with the Cothi Valley SLA.
6.6.3 The Preferred Route Corridor on purely environmental grounds was therefore
identified as A1 (with some extension to include western parts of A2), B1, C1, D2
and E1. This is not to say that other corridors cannot accommodate a connection,
but recognises that they could be less preferable. This environmental
recommendation was then subject to review in relation to the detailed outcomes of
the consultation processes and consideration by WPD of its wider regulatory
obligations to also identify the most cost efficient, effective and co-ordinated.
6.7 Consultation Responses
6.7.1 Consultation comprised:
 A series of deliberative workshops; and
 A number of meetings with statutory consultees and other key stakeholders

and stakeholder groups:
 Written correspondence with all statutory consultees, elected representatives

and local amenity user groups.
6.7.2 The predominant concern raised by stakeholders was regarding the potential
visual impact of the project including the effect of visual impacts on tourism in the
local area. As part of the identification of the route corridors, the areas of highest
129
landscape value were avoided as far as possible and this was acknowledged by
Carmarthenshire County Council in their response to the Stage 1 Consultation.
Landscape and visual impacts were considered as part of the route corridor
selection.
6.7.3 NRW referred to the potential landscape and visual effects and noted in particular
that the Brechfa Corridor (E2), East corridors (C2 and C3) and crossing of the
Towy Valley may give rise to unacceptable landscape and visual effects.
6.7.4 The B corridors associated with the Towy Valley crossing were evaluated. The
evaluation included consideration of potential landscape and visual effects as well
as impacts on the Towy Valley Landscape of Outstanding Historic Interest in
Wales. As a result of this consideration, the corridor closest to Carmarthen was
considered to be the most suitable from a landscape and visual perspective and
corridor B1 was therefore selected. This was recognised by one stakeholder as
crossing the shortest extent of the Towy Valley corridors [approximately 2.5km].
6.7.5 The location of the existing electrical infrastructure was considered at route
corridor selection in order to avoid, where possible, perception of a ‘wirescape.’
This will be considered in more detail at alignment stage in order to avoid, where
possible, converging routes.
6.7.6 Undergrounding was referred to consistently in the consultation responses. While

WPD have based the routeing studies on overhead lines, the use of
undergrounding sections of the route where appropriate, will be considered at
alignment stage. It should be noted that while undergrounding does eliminate
landscape and visual impacts, the impacts of undergrounding should also be
considered as the construction process can create adverse impacts on matters
such as archaeology. The RSPB specifically referred to the construction
processes associated with undergrounding damaging natural habitat leading to the
displacement of birds.
6.7.7 Responses have included reference to impacts on designated sites, areas of peat
habitat and species of conservation concern. Designated sites were avoided as
130
far as possible as part of the route corridor selection process. Scoping phase 1
habitat surveys, aerial photography, background data search of local records, and
habitat mapping from NRW and CCC have all been used to inform the selection of
a preferred corridor and will be used for alignment studies. Tree felling may be
necessary in some areas but will be avoided as far as possible especially with
regard to ASNW and Broadleaved woodland. Records of protected species along
with habitat mapping were reviewed as part of the preferred corridor selection.
Protected species surveys will be undertaken as appropriate along the alignment,
in agreement with NRW.
6.7.8 Wintering Bird Surveys commenced in October 2013 using a methodology, and
undertaken in areas, agreed with NRW. The survey results will be used to assess
the impact of overhead lines on wintering birds. Impacts can be the result of
collision, disruption due to construction and increased predation due to additional
predator vantage points. The way in which birds use the Towy Valley was
considered when selecting the preferred corridor.
6.7.9 Two respondents highlighted the impact of overhead cabling on designated or

sensitive areas, making specific reference to sensitive habitats and woodlands
included in the Glastir Woodland Management Scheme; the location of these
areas will be considered at alignment stage where possible.
6.7.10 Hydrology and flood risk considerations have been reviewed as part of the corridor
selection with focus on crossing of the River Towy. Jonathan Edwards MP and
Rhodri Glyn Thomas AM referenced the fact that some residents are dependent
on spring water and raised concern that construction could contaminate these
water sources. While this matter has not been considered in selecting the
preferred route corridors, it will be considered when selecting the route alignment
options to ensure no significant effects are experienced by residents to their water
supply.
6.7.11 The potential impact of the proposal on cultural heritage is a concern to some
stakeholders, particularly the impact on sites of historical and archaeological
131
interest within Carmarthen Town and the Towy Valley, as well as churches within
the corridors. Heritage impacts were evaluated in selecting the preferred corridors
and will continue to be a consideration in the selection of alignments.
6.7.12 Consultees raised the issue of proximity to, and the visual impact of, the proposals
on national cycle paths and promoted walks and these were taken into
consideration in the selection of the preferred corridors and have been avoided
where possible. Impacts on these features will continue to be considered during
selection of alignments in addition to more local public rights of way (PRoW).
6.7.13 A number of people mention the three villages of Gwyddgrug, New Inn and
Alltwalis, located beside the A485, as the ones likely to be impacted by both the
Brechfa Forest West Wind Farm and the Alltwalis Wind Farm. This will be taken
into account when developing the route alignments.
6.7.14 Tourism was highlighted as a concern because of the potential impact of the
overhead line discouraging visitors to the area. Workshop consultation suggested
that tourism interests appeared to be focused on the Towy and Cothi valleys. The
River Towy crossing selected (B1) was noted at one community workshop as ‘less
attractive’ for tourists and visitors, while the far eastern Towy Valley corridors were
identified as having a number of tourism attractions as well as recreational
activities such as fishing, holiday accommodation and local show grounds. The
C2/C3 Cothi Valley corridor which was not selected as part of the preferred
options included a tourist route with views and holiday accommodation.
6.7.15 One stakeholder referred to the potential for noise from the operation of the
transmission line. Noise has not been assessed as part of the preferred corridor
selection but will be considered at alignment stage where proximity to properties
will be a factor in routeing. This will also be relevant to comments regarding EMF
and the potential for associated health effects.
6.7.16 The environmental recommendations regarding the Preferred Route Corridor are
broadly supported by and in line with the consultation responses received. No
material considerations have been identified through the consultation processes
132
that would justify any amendment to the Preferred Route Corridor recommended
on environmental grounds.
6.8 WPD’s Wider Regulatory Obligations
6.8.1 Following the environmental appraisal and consultation processes, further

consideration of the recommended route corridors was carried out by WPD to
ensure that the emerging Preferred Route Corridor met its wider regulatory
obligations. This included consideration of further engineering matters,
practicability of construction and cost.
6.8.2 Overall, this process did not identify any conflict between the Preferred Route
Corridor from an environmental perspective, and the Preferred Route Corridor
from a wider regulatory perspective in relation to sections A, B and C of the overall
route. These environmentally preferred corridors were therefore selected without
the need for further work.
6.8.3 This process of review by WPD resulted in the identification of areas of conflict
between the Preferred Route Corridor from an environmental perspective, and the
Preferred Route Corridor from a wider regulatory perspective in relation to sections
D and E of the overall route. These are considered further below.
6.8.4 Matters relevant for consideration are formed around WPD’s duty to facilitate,
develop and subsequently maintain an efficient, co-ordinated and economical
system of electricity distribution. Considerations therefore include the technical
requirements of the network, the buildability of a connection and the implications
that the necessary engineering solution may have when balanced against likely
environmental effects and implications for maintenance during the operational
lifetime of the connection.
6.8.5 In line with the approach taken by the project to date, the technical assessment
first considered the feasibility of constructing an overhead 132kV line. Where it
was concluded that such infrastructure would be technically unfeasible, the option
of an underground connection was assessed.
133
6.8.6 This section is structured around each of the corridor options which were
consulted upon during the Stage 1 Consultation process. Each corridor section
ends with a conclusion on the technical merits of each corridor. The following
section of this report (Section 7) takes these conclusions and the conclusions
concerning the environmental performance of the options to arrive at WPD’s
Preferred Corridor Choice.
Section A
6.8.7 This corridor option extends from tower 42 to tower 46 on the existing EE route,
east of Llandyfaelog north to the four Towy River corridor crossing options.
6.8.8 For the purpose of refining this wide corridor the environmental assessment which
is reported earlier within this section of the report has sub-divided this corridor into
options A1 (west), A2 (central) and A3 (east).
6.8.9 WPD’s line surveyors have inspected the corridor. The corridor is characterised
by gently undulating topography comprising gentle slopes and with no discernable
difference across the width of the corridor. Existing National Grid and WPD lines
cross the corridor demonstrating an ability to construct an overhead line grid
connection within it. No linear infrastructure, (existing grid lines, above ground
pipelines, railway or telecommunication infrastructure) was brought to the attention
of WPD during the Stage 1 Consultation that would prove a barrier to the
construction of an overhead line and it is considered that on technical grounds, a
generally straight alignment (i.e. short route length) could be achieved. The most
economic route through the corridor would therefore be to follow the western side
(A1 option) of the corridor resulting in a distance of approximately 8km as opposed
to 10km and 12km if a central or eastern route where to be chosen.
Section B
6.8.10 The Route Corridor Options identified four potential options for the crossing of the
River Towy. These were identified as crossing options A-D within the Stage 1
Consultation (B1-B4 within the environmental assessment which is reported earlier
134
within this section). All four crossings are estimated to be approximately 4km in
length subject to the potential for any line deviation which is set out below.
Option B1
6.8.11 This is the closest corridor option to Carmarthen and it extends around the eastern
boundary of the town northwards to form the West Corridor. Potential, physical
barriers to the construction of an overhead line are the presence of the River
Towy, the A40/A48 and the River Gwili.
6.8.12 The topography of the corridor is characterised as reasonably gentle with the
absence of a steep slope to the north of the Towy Valley. Other than the barriers
identified above, no linear infrastructure (existing grid lines, above ground
construction of an overhead line.
6.8.13 The technical assessment of this Corridor option concludes that it is feasible to
construct an overhead line through it. Site visits undertaken during the Stage 1
Consultation process indicate that alignment options could be developed which
can accommodate the span necessary to cross the A40/A48, rivers Towy and
Gwili. Whilst these alignments are unlikely to be straight, i.e. the shortest (most
economic) route, they would be unlikely to require significant deviation.
Option B2
6.8.14 This corridor option cross the River Towy to the west of Capel Dewi. Potential
physical barriers to the construction of an overhead line are the presence of the
River Towy and the A40.
6.8.15 The topography of the corridor is characterised by steep slopes to the northern
side of the valley at White Mill, particularly to the east and west of White Mill. This
valley side is also heavily wooded. No linear infrastructure (existing grid lines,
above ground pipelines, railway or telecommunication infrastructure) was brought
to the attention of WPD during the Stage 1 Consultation that would prove a barrier
135
to the construction of an overhead line.
6.8.16 The key technical issue associated with this corridor option is the presence of the
River Towy. Stage 1 Consultation with local amenity user groups and statutory
consultees suggests that the course of the river is subject to change following
major flood events. Any infrastructure, (either overhead line or underground cable)
would also need to be resilient to flood inundation. The consultation with statutory
consultees suggested that there would be no in-principle reason why overhead
poles could not be located within the River Towy floodplain, although justification
would be required. Providing a suitable span could be obtained over the river
(span length typically varies from 53m to 120m with an average span of 85m) then
there would be no technical reason why an overhead line could not be taken
forward. WPD is of the opinion that a span of 120m is achievable which would
provide sufficient set back from the river bank. If following further consultation
during route alignment consideration this is deemed insufficient by consultees then
it would be technically possible to underground beneath the river.
6.8.17 The steep slope to the north of the valley does represent a challenge to the
construction of an overhead line although the gradient is not considered
insurmountable. There may be a requirement, subject to further technical work, to
cross the slope at an angle (i.e. a deviation from the otherwise shortest route).
The construction of an overhead line is feasible, although more challenging and
potentially less economic than Crossing A (B1).
Option B3
6.8.18 This corridor possesses similar physical characteristics and technical challenges
to Crossing B (B2). It is located to the east of Capel Dewi, requiring a crossing of
the River Towy and A40 and including steep slopes along the valley’s northern
edge. The same technical and economic considerations set out with regard to
Crossing B (B2) are relevant for this crossing option.
136
Option B4
6.8.19 This crossing possesses similar overall physical characteristics to Crossings B

(B1) and C (B3) although there is no steep valley side to the north of the Towy
Valley which is also wider at this point. An 11kV line running north along the
B4310 indicates that it is feasible to run an overhead line north. Physical
considerations in the form of Nantgaredig village which lies to the west will
however require an appropriate deviation around the settlement.
6.8.20 The implications for the crossing of the River Towy are the same as those set out
for Crossing B (B2). No linear infrastructure (existing grid lines, above ground
construction of an overhead line. The construction of an overhead line is therefore
considered to be technically feasible, and potentially less challenging but
potentially less economic than Crossing A (B1) given the increased distance from
the EE route and the requirement to deviate further west around Nantgaredig.
Section C
Option C1
6.8.21 This corridor is further sub-divided into the area running to the north of Carmarthen
towards Alltwalis followed by alternative corridors to connect the Brechfa West
Wind Farm and Bryn Llywelyn Wind farm. The environmental appraisal reported
earlier within this section 6.5 describes these alternatives as Corridors D1 and D2.
Carmarthen to Alltwalis
6.8.22 This corridor, which is approximately 10km in length, depending upon which
subsequent corridor options are preferred, and follows the general direction of the
A485 north from Carmarthen. The landform rises as the corridor moves north but
is characterised by generally undulating ground giving way to moderately steeper
incised valleys particularly to the east of Alltwalis and south of Brechfa Forest.
137
6.8.23 No linear infrastructure (existing grid lines, above ground pipelines, railway or
telecommunication infrastructure) was brought to the attention of WPD during the
Stage 1 Consultation that would prove a barrier to the construction of an overhead
line.
6.8.24 WPD surveyors have inspected the corridor and confirm that the topography is
appropriate for the construction of an overhead line. Existing stands of woodland
could be avoided if required without undue deviation and there are no significant
areas of bare rock or wet ground (peat/marsh) that would prevent the installation
of wooden poles. It is considered that on technical grounds, a generally straight
alignment (i.e. short route length) could be achieved which would represent an
economic solution.
Section D
Option D1
6.8.25 This section forms the northern part of the West Corridor, north of Alltwalis. It
would provide a connection to Bryn Llywelyn Wind Farm. The route length could
be circa 10km in length and there is the potential to accommodate several
alignment options, including a route following lower ground associated with the
A485 corridor and one that aligns with the wind farm boundaries. Within this
section of the corridor are the settlements of Gwyddgrug and New Inn. The
topography is undulating with higher rounded ridgelines north of Alltwalis and west
of Gwyddgrug. Gradients are considered to be sufficient to enable the
construction of an overhead line whilst watercourses such as the Afon Gorwydd,
Nant Gwen and Nant Bele lie within narrow wooded valleys which have the
potential to be crossed by a single span.
Stage 1 Consultation that would prove a barrier to the construction of an overhead
line.
138
6.8.27 As with the southern section of this corridor, it is considered to be technically

feasible to build an overhead line within this northern section, there is an absence
of rocky or marshy areas and whilst deviations may be required to provide a
suitable stand-off from residential properties these are unlikely to be substantial.
Existing WPD infrastructure is present within this corridor, most notably the 132kV
wood pole ‘trident’ line which connects the Alltwalis Wind Farm to the WPD
substation at Rhos. This line traverses the corridor from east to west and a new
line running north to south from the Bryn Llywelyn Substation within this corridor
will need to cross it. One of the lines will need to be undergrounded at the
crossing point to achieve the necessary clearances for electrical safety reasons.
Option D2
6.8.28 Stage 1 Consultation indicated that a corridor between the Brechfa West and Bryn
Llywelyn substations may be required to be undergrounded due to the presence of
proposed wind farm infrastructure and the requirement (for an overhead line) for
substantial felling. This initial conclusion has been supported by further
assessment undertaken into the technical issues surrounding the construction and
operation of an overhead line within a wind farm.
6.8.29 During the Stage 1 Consultation discussions where held with the forestry team at
NRW which concluded that a 60m width of forest cover would need to be felled to
provide a corridor through the forest area for an overhead line. This would be to
ensure that no trees could affect the line should they fall and thereby ensure
security of the energy supply.
6.8.30 The topography of the forest between the two proposed wind farm substations is
high and includes areas of steep sided valleys such as the Afon Pib and Afan
Marlais, whose tributaries are within the corridor. Constructing an overhead line in
this corridor through the forested area highly challenging because of the
engineering constraints associated with designing it for the terrain, clearing the
route, erecting the line and maintaining it.
6.8.31 In addition to these factors the siting of the proposed turbine positions would
139
compromise the alignment of the overhead line with in the wind farm. The
construction of an overhead or underground connection would also lead to
restrictions on the operation of the wind farm. For example, the use of cranes in
the maintenance of wind turbines and movement of construction and maintenance
machinery would be restricted unless prior notice is provided to de-energise the
line on health and safety grounds and lead to an interruption in supply.
6.8.32 The construction of an overhead line along corridor option D2 would represent
significant technical challenges and may not represent the most efficient and
economical system design.
6.8.33 WPD have therefore concluded that it would not be technically feasible to
construct and operate an overhead line through the whole of option D2. WPD
would therefore need to underground all or part of this corridor. However, the
costs incurred would not represent the most economical system design.
Section C
B4310
6.8.34 This corridor stretches from the Towy Valley north and to the east and the west of
the Cothi Valley connecting to Brechfa West substation. For the purpose of
refining this extensive corridor the environmental assessment which is reported
within the previous section in this report has sub-divided it into two options C2
(west), C3 (Cothi Valley east). A technical assessment of the C1 option of this
corridor was reported in paragraphs 6.8.21 to 6.8.24 above.
Option C2 (West).
6.8.35 This section runs north of the Towy Valley and along the western side of the Cothi
Valley then following the B4310 either to the (elevated) west or (valley) to the east.
It would link up to option E2 and through this to the Brechfa West Substation. The
length of the corridor is at least 10km and would be longer if it ran in the valley to
the east of the B4310.
140
Stage 1 consultation that would prove a barrier to the erection of an overhead line.
6.8.37 The topography present within this corridor is undulating rising to a height of over
200m south of Plas Fawr and then again to the west of Horeb before descending
to the south of Brechfa. The corridor has an open character comprising larger
fields with few substantial hedges and a relative absence of wooded areas with the
exception of some blocks of coniferous forestry to the west of the B4310. There
are few settlements within the corridor and as such it would be possible to avoid
construction through or alongside residential areas. Rivers such as the Afan Pib in
the north, and the Afan Annall in the west are tributaries of the Towy and could be
crossed by grid infrastructure if required. The River Cothi runs substantially
outside the eastern boundary of the corridor. Small scale WPD infrastructure runs
through the corridor, and it is concluded that the character of this corridor section
is unlikely to pose any serious impediment to the construction of an overhead line.
Option C3 (Cothi Valley East)
6.8.38 This is the longer corridor passing to the east of the Cothi over elevated ground to
reach Brechfa East. The length of the route is estimated to be approximately
16km measured from the Towy Valley (including part of C2).
6.8.39 As with option C2, no infrastructure has been brought to the attention of WPD
during Stage 1 consultation that would prove a barrier to the erection of an
overhead line.
6.8.40 This section is defined by a significant area of coniferous forestry (Craig ddu
Wood) which effectively forms the north-western boundary of the corridor. The
wood lies on comparatively flat, high ground. WPD have not accessed the wood
but it is assumed that construction through it would be possible although this
would require the creation of a clear felled corridor. Alternatively it would be
technically possible to construct an overhead line in the open land which runs
along the south-eastern boundary of the woodland.
141
6.8.41 After Pen-y-Garn the land reduces in altitude northwards towards Abergorlech,
increasingly the corridor is characterised by woodland cover, smaller fields and
hedgerows. Whilst the terrain becomes more complex around Abergorlech, with
an increased prevalence of wooded areas, it should be possible to construct and
overhead line around the settlement and then north to the Brechfa east substation
crossing the River Cothi. This may however require construction through existing
woodland.
Section E
Option E1
Gwernogle Corridor
6.8.42 This is also known as option E1and it is reasonably direct, although meandering,
which cuts across complex topography in vicinity of Gwernogle. The length of the
section is estimated to be 14km although any alignment options within it may be
required to meander to accommodate the valley gradients.
6.8.43 WPD’s more detailed consideration of the engineering implications of the E1

option reconfirmed that the topography and forest cover represented very difficult
technical challenges that were likely to result in the need for incorporating longer
spans across valley areas. These span lengths would exceed the distances that
could be supported on twin wooden poles and would therefore require the use of
steel lattice gantry structures. WPD expect large sections of the route through E1
to be built on wooden poles but that certain sections are likely to need steel lattice
gantries to support long span lengths, these being primarily valley spans. The
steel gantries would be sized to fit the design profile of a predominately wooden
pole line and as such are anticipated to be of similar height to the wooden pole
sections and not the taller traditional steel lattice towers used by the National Grid.
Option E2
Cothi Valley
142
6.8.44 This is known as the option E2 and would run directly along the Cothi Valley for an
estimated distance of 14km and would link the Brechfa Forest West Wind Farm
and Brechfa Forest East Wind Farm substations.
6.8.45 Given the substantial technical and environmental concerns relating to both E
sections and the absence of a clear preference on technical grounds, the appraisal
team identified the need to:
 Revisit the engineering requirements likely to be associated with option E1 in

greater detail; and
 Having selected options A1, B1 and C1 as the Preferred Route Corridor from
Llandyfaelog to Brechfa Forest West Wind Farm, revisit the desirability of a
more southerly connection from Brechfa Forest West Wind Farm to Brechfa
Forest East Wind Farm largely away from the designated section of the Cothi
Valley.
6.8.46 Option E2 was therefore widened to take in land further to the south.
6.8.47 WPD’s more detailed consideration of the engineering implications of option E1

reconfirmed that the topography and forest cover represented very difficult
technical challenges that were likely to result in the need for incorporating longer
spans across valley areas suspended using steel lattice gantry structures rather
than wooden poles.
6.8.48 The ability to construct an overhead line connection through option E1 will not be
confirmed until further detailed work is completed and the feasibility of construction
will be known. The current engineering preference is therefore option E2 which
offers a broader range of route alignment options and presents the most economic
and efficient solution to constructing a new connection. Route alignment options
within the widened section E2 will be considered at Stage 3 of the route selection
process. The benefits of a more southerly connection will need to be more fully
tested to identify whether a satisfactory route alignment that substantially avoids
the Cothi Valley SLA can be identified. Identification and appraisal of alignment
143
options within section E2 will also require clarity on the justification/necessity of

certain sections of some of the possible alignment options being placed
underground.
6.8.49 Notwithstanding the conclusion stated above, it is not possible to select a

preferred corridor in section E of the overall route at this time. This is because:
 No option for section E of the overall route has been identified by RSK as
being free of potentially significant environmental issues;
 The environmental appraisals and WPD’s consideration of its wider regulatory

obligations (based on the level of information currently available to the team)
point to a different choice of section; and
 Based on the level of detailed information available to the project team at this
stage in the process, a full and proper consideration of the environmental and
wider regulatory requirements is not yet possible.
6.8.50 Both option E1 and the widened version of option E2 will therefore be taken into
the next stage of assessment and consultation. This will enable a more detailed
understanding of potential alignments and their associated engineering solutions
to be established to provide a higher level of detailed understanding against which
environmental and wider regulatory challenges can be more fully understood and
more properly weighed.
6.9 The selected Preferred Route Corridor
6.9.1 The selected Preferred Route Corridor (Figure 4) includes options A1 (slightly
extended to include western parts of A2), B1, C1, D1 with both E1 and the
widened and subsequently refined version of E2 being taken forward for further
assessment.
6.9.2 In selecting Preferred Route Corridor Option A1, the corridor has been widened to
allow for further consideration at Stage 3 of a more easterly alignment within what
was initially presented as option A2.
144
6.9.3 The inclusion of both E1 and the widened version of E2 at the next stage will
enable more detailed work to be carried out in relation to specific alignment
options within both of these options. This process will clarify the engineering
requirements necessary and further consider the justification for undergrounding
certain parts of these options. Decision making at the next stage in the process in
relation to section E of the overall route is likely to require preliminary alignments
and outline engineering solutions to be drawn up and appraised for three principal
alternatives:
 A largely overhead connection through section E1 that may require steel

rather than wooden infrastructure at some points to overcome the highly
challenging topography;
 A least environmentally impactful connection along the Cothi Valley in the

northern part of E2 (this may include preliminary proposals for some sections
to be undergrounded); and
 Identification of an alternative deviating within the southern part of E2 which

would minimise the extent of conflict with the SLA (this may include
preliminary proposals for some limited sections to be undergrounded).
145
7 Stage 3a: Identification of Route Alignment

Options
7.1 The Next Step
Identification of route alignment options
7.1.1 This Route Corridor Selection Report has explained how the Preferred Route
Corridor for the Brechfa Forest Connection Project was selected. The Preferred
Route Corridor remains, in some areas, a broad area of land of variable width
within which a number of different options for the precise alignment of the grid
connection will be feasible.
7.1.2 The next step in the project will be to identify feasible route alignment options
within the Preferred Route Corridors that will then also be subject to detailed
comparative appraisal. Stage 3 design development work will be progressed to
identify, assess and evaluate potential route alignments that will meet the
objectives of the project and the obligations of WPD. The route alignment options
to be identified as this next step may include consideration of the possibility of
undergrounding some sections of the route where technical or environmental
issues suggest that this would be justified.
7.1.3 As part of this process, the principles of the Holford Rules will continue to be
applied to refine potential solutions, with consultation continuing to ensure the
views and opinions of statutory bodies, non-statutory agencies and local
communities are recorded and considered.
146
8 Stage 3b: Selection of the Preferred Route

Alignment
8.1 Future Steps
Selection of the Preferred Route Alignment
8.1.1 An appraisal of all of the route alignment options identified within the Preferred
Route Corridors will be undertaken in due course. Following appraisal and
detailed consultation, WPD will select a preferred route alignment from the options
considered. The appraisal of the route alignment options will be undertaken using
the appraisal criteria used at Stage 2b, supplemented by additional considerations
where relevant and necessary. These appraisals will provide a clear justification
for the final route alignment chosen.
8.1.2 The preferred route alignment will then be subjected to formal EIA procedures, in
order to avoid, wherever possible, adverse effects on physical, biological and
human sensitivities within the receiving environment. The scope and coverage of
the EIA will be agreed in advance with PINS, statutory consultees and other key
stakeholders.
8.1.3 The final scheme design will be subject to statutory consultation in accordance
with Sections 42, 47 and 48 of the Planning Act 2008. WPD expects the
submission of the DCO will not be made until late 2014; this will provide sufficient
time to undertake all necessary activities associated with design development, EIA
and pre-application consultation.
147

Route Corridor Selection Report and PEI

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Route Corridor Selection Report and PEI

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Route Corridor Selection Report

Route Corridor Selection Report and

Brechfa Forest Connection Project

Document prepared by RSK Environment Ltd.

The Old School, Stillhouse Lane, Bristol, BS3 4EB.

1.1 Background to this Route Corridor Selection Report 12

1.2 WPD’s obligations 13

1.4 The Application Process 15

1.5 The Route Selection Process 15

1.6 Structure of this Route Corridor Selection Report 17

2 The Proposed Scheme 18

2.1 Overview of the South Wales Area 18

2.2 Background to the Proposals 19

2.3 Outline Design and Construction of the Proposed Scheme 22

3 Approach and Methodology 25

3.1 Commitments and Principles 25

3.2 Holford Rules 26

3.3 National Grid Guidance 28

3.4 Route Selection Methodology 29

4 Stage 1: Constraints Review 35

4.1 Area of Search 35

4.2 Summary of Data 41

4.3 Constraints Review 44

4.4 Landscape and Visual Dynamics 45

4.5 Ecology 52

4.6 Heritage 55

4.7 Land Use/Planning 57

4.8 Site Reconnaissance 62

5 Stage 2a: Identification of Route Corridor Options 63

5.1 Introduction to Stage 2a 63

5.2 Route Corridor Workshop 63

5.3 Key Considerations 67

5.4 Identification of Preliminary Route Corridors 68

5.5 Refinement of Preliminary Route Corridors 70

5.6 Outcomes of Site Visit 71

5.7 Route Corridor Categorisation 74

5.8 Least Constrained Route Corridor Options 75

5.9 Alternative Route Corridor Options 81

5.10 Dismissed Corridor Options 82

5.11 Adoption of the EE route as the Preferred Connection Point 86

5.12 Comparative Review 87

5.13 Refinement of Preliminary Route Corridors 90

5.14 Informal Consultation on Preliminary Route Corridors 99

5.15 Revisiting the West of Carmarthen Corridor 104

5.16 Development of a Northern Corridor 107

6 Stage 2b: Selection of the Preferred Route Corridor 112

6.1 Introduction to Stage 2b 112

6.2 Deliberative Workshops 113

6.3 Further Consultation 114

6.4 Further Site visits 115

6.5 Route Corridor Options Environmental Appraisal – first stage 116

6.6 Route Corridor Options Environmental Appraisal – second stage 128

6.7 Consultation Responses 129

6.8 WPD’s Wider Regulatory Obligations 133

6.9 The selected Preferred Route Corridor 144

7 Stage 3a: Identification of Route Alignment Options 146

7.1 The Next Step 146

8 Stage 3b: Selection of the Preferred Route Alignment 147

8.1 Future Steps 147

Appendix 1 WPD’s Schedule 9 Statement

Appendix 3 Route Corridor Options Appraisal Matrices

1 Overview of the Route Selection Process Flowchart