This assessment was undertaken in accordance with best practice. The heritage assessment follows the guidance outlined in: Conservation Principles: policies and guidance for the sustainable management of the historic environment (English Heritage 2008), The Setting of Heritage Assets (Historic England 2015, revised 2017), Statements of Heritage Significance: Analysing Significance in Heritage Assets (Historic England 2019), Managing Change in the Historic Environment: Setting (Historic Scotland 2010), and with reference to Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 3rd Edition (Landscape Institute 2013). The impact assessment also follows the guidance outlined in the Principles of Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment in the UK produced by CIfA, IHBC and IEMA in July 2021.The local heritage assets were visited by B. Morris on the 28th of February 2024; a second set of visits were undertaken on the 7th of March in better conditions by S. Walls. A more detailed consideration of the methods employed can be found in Appendix 5. The geophysical (gradiometer) survey follows the guidance outlined in Geophysical Survey in Archaeological Field Evaluation (English Heritage 2008b); Standard and Guidance for Archaeological Geophysical Survey (CIfA 2014); EAC Guidelines for the use of geophysics in Archaeology: Questions to Ask and Points to Consider (Europae Archaeologiae Consilium/ European Archaeological Council 2016). The proposed development would see the repowering of an existing operational wind turbine. The existing turbine is 28.4m to hub with a rotor diameter of 34m. The replacement turbine would be 40m to hub with a rotor diameter of 54m. The baseline for this assessment includes the operational turbine, and the candidate turbine would represent a perceptible (40%) increase in size. In terms of designated heritage assets, the zone of visual influence drawn up for the site, and the site visits undertaken, indicate screening from hedgerows and trees is, for most part, very comprehensive, and even those assets in relative proximity to the site are largely insulated from any visual effect. Beyond 5km, the increase in apparent size is assessed as being highly unlikely to have any appreciable effect. Only the Grade II Listed Chapel of St Syth, the Scheduled hillfort of Helsbury, and the Grade I Listed Church of St Brueredus were likely to experience any additional harm via their setting, and in each instance the additional level of harm was adjudged to be negligible adverse. With this in mind, the overall impact of the proposed development can be assessed as negligible adverse. The geophysical survey would indicate that the archaeological potential for the site is low.