8.7Key Parameters for Assessment
Maximum Design Scenario
8.7.1 The Maximum Design Scenario identified in Table 8.9 Open ▸ presents those parameters taken from the PDE which are expected to have the potential to result in the greatest effect on identified landscape and visual receptors. Any other development scenario within the PDE, will result in the same, or less, level of environmental effect. The scenario has been selected from the details provided in Volume 1, Chapter 3: Project Description.
Impacts Scoped Out of the Assessment
8.7.3 This impact is outlined, together with a justification for scoping it out, in Table 8.10 Open ▸ .
* Phase refers to construction (C), operation and maintenance (O) and decommissioning (D) phase.
8.8Methodology for Assessment of Effects
Overview
8.8.1 The purpose of the LVIA is to identify, predict and evaluate potential likely significant effects associated with the Proposed Development. Wherever possible, identified impacts are quantified, however the nature of LVIA requires interpretation by professional judgement. In order to provide a level of consistency to the assessment, the prediction of magnitude and assessment of significance of the residual landscape and visual impacts have been based on pre-defined criteria.
Distinction Between Landscape and Visual Effects
8.8.2 As set out in GLVIA3, Paragraph 2.21, landscape and visual effects are assessed separately, although the procedure for assessing each is closely linked. A clear distinction has been drawn between landscape and visual effects as described below:
- Landscape effects relate to the effects of the Proposed Development on the physical and perceptual characteristics of the landscape and its resulting character and quality.
- Visual effects relate to the effects on views experienced by visual receptors (e.g. local residents, visitors, footpath users, road users etc.) and on the change in views experienced by people.
8.8.3 Essentially, the landscape and visual effects and whether these are significant, are assessed by considering the landscape or visual sensitivity to the Proposed Development, against the magnitude of change in order to identify a level of effect that would be brought about by the Proposed Development, were it to be implemented.
8.8.4 The type of effect is also considered and may be direct or indirect; temporary or permanent (reversible); cumulative; and beneficial, neutral, or adverse.
8.8.5 Landscape and visual assessment unavoidably involve a combination of both quantitative and subjective assessment and wherever possible a consensus of professional opinion has been sought through consultation, internal peer review, and the adoption of a systematic, impartial, and professional approach.
8.8.6 Criteria for Assessment GLVIA3 sets out broad guidelines rather than detailed prescriptive methodologies. The methodologies tailored for the assessment of this development is based on GLVIA3 guidance, which recommends that an assessment “concentrates on principles and process” and “does not provide a detailed or formulaic recipe” to assess effects, it being the “responsibility of the professional to ensure that the approach and methodology are appropriate to the task in hand” (preface to GLVIA3).
8.8.7 The effects on the landscape resources or visual receptors (people) are assessed by considering the proposed change in the baseline conditions (the impact of the proposal) against the type of landscape resource or visual receptor (including the importance and sensitivity of that resource or receptor). The methodology is set out in detail below and summarised in Plate 8.4 Open ▸ . These factors are determined through a combination of quantitative (objective) and qualitative (subjective) assessment using professional judgement.
Nature of Effects and Nature of Receptors
8.8.8 As identified in the GLVIA3, landscape and visual effects are identified by establishing and describing the changes resulting from the different components of the development and the resulting effects on individual landscape or visual receptors. Assessment of the level of effects takes account of the nature of the effects (‘magnitude’), as well as the nature of the receptors (‘sensitivity’) and differentiates between them according to the phases (construction, operational and demolition) of the development in which they would occur (GLVIA3, Box 3.1).
8.8.9 Effects are also defined as direct and in-direct. Direct landscape effects relate to the host landscape and concern both physical and perceptual effects on the receptor.
8.8.10 Indirect landscape effects relate to those landscapes and receptors which are separated by distance or are remote from the development and therefore are only affected in terms of perceptual effects. The LI also defines indirect effects as those which are not a direct result of the development but are often produced away from it or as a result of a complex pathway.
8.8.11 Visual effects are considered as direct effects, as the view itself may be directly altered by the Proposed Development.
8.8.12 The aim of the LVIA is to provide an objective assessment of the relationship between the Proposed Development and the landscape in which it would be located and seen. As part of this, it is also important to consider the nature of the proposed change in the context of the key characteristics of the landscape. Being a large-scale development added to the landscape, it is unlikely that a beneficial nature of effect would be found, but neutral effects could occur where it is considered the Proposed Development does not change the defining characteristics of the landscape and/or has been well absorbed/integrated into its surrounding context.
8.8.13 Generally, with the development of ‘new’ or large-scale industrial developments, a precautionary approach has been adopted, which assumes that significant landscape and visual effects are weighed on the adverse side of the planning balance. Unless it is stated otherwise, the effects considered in this assessment have been considered to be adverse.
8.8.14 Whether an effect is defined as Beneficial, Neutral or Adverse is identified based on professional judgement. GLVIA3, indicates at paragraph 2.15 that this is a “particularly challenging” aspect of assessment, particularly in the context of a changing landscape.
8.8.15 The decision regarding the level of effect and the decision regarding whether an effect is beneficial or adverse are entirely separate.
Sensitivity to Change
8.8.16 Sensitivity is judged taking into account the component judgments about the value and susceptibility of the receptor.
Landscape Sensitivity
8.8.17 The sensitivity of a landscape receptor is a combination of “judgements of their susceptibility to the type of change or development proposed and the value attached to the landscape” (GLVIA3, paragraph 5.39). For the purposes of this assessment, susceptibility and value of landscape receptors are defined as follows:
8.8.18 Landscape susceptibility: “the ability of the landscape receptor (whether it be the overall character or quality/condition of a particular landscape type or area, or an individual element and/or feature, or a particular aesthetic and perceptual aspect) to accommodate the proposed change without undue consequences for the maintenance of the baseline situation and/or the achievement of landscape planning policies and strategies” (GLVIA3, paragraph 5.40).
8.8.19 Value of the landscape receptor: “The value of the Landscape Character Types or Areas that may be affected, based on review of designations at both national and local levels, and, where there are no designations, judgements based on criteria that can be used to establish landscape value; and, the value of individual contributors to landscape character, especially the key characteristics, which may include individual elements of the landscape, particularly landscape features, notable aesthetic, perceptual or experiential qualities, and combinations of these contributors” (GLVIA3, paragraph 5.44).
8.8.20 The sensitivity of landscape receptors is defined as high, medium, or low based on professional interpretation, combining judgements of their value attached to the landscape and susceptibility to the type of change or development proposed.
8.8.21 Landscape receptors include the different landscape character types or areas which may be affected by the Proposed Development, as well as landscape designations within the LVIA Study Area.
Landscape Value
8.8.22 The value attached to landscape receptors (both landscape fabric and landscape character) is reflected by landscape designations and the level of importance which they signify. However, landscape designations are not the sole indicator of landscape value (paragraph 5.26, GLVIA3).
8.8.23 With reference to the LI Technical Guidance Note 02/21 ‘Assessing landscape value outside national designations’ (Landscape Institute, 2021), the following range of factors (not exclusive) are also considered in order to identify the value of the landscape:
- landscape quality/conditions;
- perceptual/scenic quality;
- rarity/representativeness/ distinctiveness;
- conservation interest;
- aesthetic/perceptual aspects;
- recreational value; and
- cultural associations.
8.8.24 Table 8.11 provides an example of how these factors (not exclusive) are considered in a scale of High, Medium, Low.
8.8.25 Landscape value is the ‘inherent component’, which is independent of the development proposal, while the other component, susceptibility, is development specific.
Landscape Susceptibility
8.8.26 Susceptibility indicates the ability of a landscape to accommodate the Proposed Development ‘without undue consequences for the maintenance of the baseline situation and/or the achievement of landscape planning policies and strategies’ (LI and IEMA, 2013).
8.8.27 Susceptibility of landscape fabric/elements to direct change is defined as high, medium, or low based on an interpretation of a combination of parameters including:
- contribution of the landscape element which would be removed/affected to the key characteristics of the surrounding landscape; and
- extent to which the landscape element which would be removed/affected can be replaced.
8.8.28 Some landscape receptors are better able to accommodate development than others due to certain characteristics that are indicative of capacity to accommodate change.
8.8.29 Susceptibility of landscape character to change is defined as:
- High – with low ability to accommodate the specific proposed change,
- Medium - with moderate ability to accommodate the specific proposed change, or
- Low – with high ability to accommodate the specific proposed change.
8.8.30 Susceptibility of landscape character to change is dependent on an interpretation of a combination of factors including:
- Scale and pattern of the landscape and its elements/features;
- Simplicity or complexity of the landscape;
- Landscape pattern and focus/the nature of skylines;
- Landscape quality or condition;
- Existing land use;
- Visual enclosure/openness or exposure;
- Tranquillity/ remoteness/ wilderness and
- Scope for mitigation, which would be in character with the existing landscape.
8.8.31 Table 8.12 provides an example of how these parameters (not exclusive) are considered in a scale of High, Medium, Low.
8.8.32 An overall sensitivity assessment of the landscape receptor is made by combining the assessment of the value of the landscape character receptor and its susceptibility to change. The basis for the assessments will be made clear using evidence and professional judgement in the evaluation of sensitivity for each receptor.
Sensitivity of Visual Receptors
8.8.34 Visual susceptibility: “The susceptibility of different visual receptors to changes in views and visual amenity is mainly a function of: The occupation or activity of people experiencing views at the particular locations; and the extent to which their attention or interest may therefore be focused on the views and the visual amenity they experience at particular locations” (GLVIA3, paragraph 6.32).
8.8.35 Value of views: Judgements made about the value of views should take account of: “recognition of the value attached to particular views, for example in relation to heritage assets, or through planning designations; and, indicators of value attached to views by visitors, for example through appearances in guidebooks or on tourist maps, provision of facilities for their enjoyment (such as parking places, sign boards or interpretive material) and references to them in literature or art…” (GLVIA3, paragraph 6.37).
8.8.36 Sensitivity is not readily graded in bands and GLVIA3 notes, with regards to visual sensitivity, that the division of who may or may not be sensitive to a particular change “is not black and white and in reality, there will be a gradation in susceptibility to change” (GLVIA3, paragraph 6.35). To provide both consistency and transparency to the assessment process, however, Table 8.13, below defines the criteria which have guided the judgement as to the intrinsic susceptibility and value of the resource/receptor and subsequent sensitivity to the Proposed Development.
8.8.37 Combining susceptibility to change and value attached to the view seems in practice to lower the visual sensitivity of receptors where the proposals do not align with the main direction of view. Therefore, there is potential for double counting this with the assessment of magnitude of change, which is also affected by direction of view. Therefore, this methodology places more emphasis on the nature and activity of the visual receptor, with residents/recreational receptors, all being high sensitivity to the type of development proposed.
8.8.38 Although intermediate ratings are avoided, in cases where intermediate ratings are given, e.g., “medium-low,” then this indicates an effect that is both less than medium and more than low, rather than one which varies across the range.
Magnitude of Change
8.8.39 The effect of the Proposed Development on each landscape or visual receptor is referred to as the magnitude of change or magnitude of impact. The magnitude of change is stated as combining consideration of the scale or size of effect with the extent of the area affected and duration/reversibility of that effect. (GLVIA3, paragraph 3.24).
8.8.40 Judgements need to take account of:
- “The extent of the existing landscape elements that will be lost, the proportion of the total extent that this represents and the contribution of that element to the character of the landscape…; the degree to which aesthetic or perceptual aspects of the landscape are altered either by removal of existing components of the landscape or by addition of new ones…” and, “whether the effect [impact] changes the key characteristics of the landscape, which are critical to its distinctive character” (GLVIA3, paragraph 5.49).
- “the scale of the change [impact] in the view with respect to the loss or addition of features in the view and changes in its composition, including the proportion of the view occupied by the proposed development; the degree of contrast or integration of any new features or changes in the landscape with existing or remaining landscape elements and characteristics in terms of form, scale and mass, line, height, colour and texture; and, the nature of the view of the proposed development, in terms of the relative amount of time over which it will be experienced and whether views will be full, partial or glimpses” (GLVIA3, para 6.39).
8.8.41 The relative weighting of the three main factors is not specifically discussed in the guidance. There are some practitioners who give them equal or almost equal weight. This means that there is potential for the overall magnitude of change to be less than the scale of effect alone. (For example, a high magnitude of change, based on size or scale, may be reduced to a lower rating if it occurred in a localised geographical area and for a short duration.) However, others give most weight to the scale of effect and extent (in terms of distance). As the Proposed Development is long-term, the overall magnitude of change is therefore often at the same level as the scale of effect. For a study of this nature, it is therefore considered sensible to take a precautionary approach and consider that the scale of effect is likely to be at a similar level to the magnitude of change.
8.8.42 The duration and reversibility are stated separately in relation to the assessed effects (i.e. as short/ medium/ long term and temporary/permanent).
8.8.43 The magnitude of change arising from the Proposed Development in respect of landscape fabric/physical elements of the landscape (direct landscape change) is described as high, medium, low, or negligible based on the interpretation of a combination of largely quantifiable parameters, as follows:
- the extent of existing landscape elements that will be lost;
- the proportion of the total extent of the particular landscape elements that this represents;
- the degree to which aesthetic or perceptual aspects of the landscape would be altered by removal of existing components of the landscape and/ or introduction of new elements;
- the geographic area over which the loss of landscape elements will be perceived.
8.8.44 The magnitude of change arising from the Proposed Development at any particular landscape character or visual receptor is described as High, Medium, Low, or Negligible based on the interpretation of a combination of the following parameters:
- Distance: the distance between the receptor and the Proposed Development. Generally, the greater the distance, the lower the magnitude of change.
- Extent: the extent of the area over which the change would appear.
- Proportion: the field of view occupied by the Proposed Development in proportion to the overall field of view. A panoramic view, where the Proposed Development takes up a small part of it, will generally be of lower magnitude than a narrow, focused view, even if the arc of view occupied by the Proposed Development is similar.
- Nature of view: the duration of the effect in terms of the relative amount of time over which it will be experienced on whether views will be full, partial or glimpses.
- Orientation: the angle of the view in relation to the main receptor orientation, where there is a dominant direction to the vista.
- Context: the elements that combine to provide the setting and context to the Proposed Development. In particular, man-made structures within the context can decrease the magnitude of change.
- Skyline/Background: the colour/texture of the Proposed Development should reflect the predominant background colours/ textures in the locality. For example, skyline developments may appear more noticeable, particularly where they affect open and uninterrupted horizons.
8.8.45 The criteria utilised in ascribing the magnitude of change to assist consistency of approach throughout the assessment is detailed in Table 8.15 Open ▸ .
8.8.46 Although intermediate ratings are avoided, in cases where intermediate ratings are given, e.g., “medium-low,” then this indicates an effect that is both less than medium and more than low, rather than one which varies across the range.
Duration and Reversibility
8.8.47 The duration and reversibility of landscape and visual effects are based on the period over which the Proposed Development is likely to exist (during construction and operation) and the extent to which the Proposed Development will be removed (during decommissioning), with effects reversed at the end of that period. The duration of the impact is described using the following terms:
- long-term – more than 10 years (may be defined as permanent or reversible);
- medium-term – 6 to 10 years; and
- short-term – 1 to 5 years.
Cumulative Effects
8.8.48 Cumulative assessment relates to the assessment of the effects of more than one development. NatureScot’s guidance ‘Assessing the Cumulative Landscape and Visual Impact of Onshore Wind Energy Developments (NatureScot, 2021) provides the basis for the cumulative assessment methodology, in addition to GLVIA3.
8.8.49 Operational, and consented developments are treated as being part of the landscape and visual baseline i.e. it is assumed that consented schemes will be built except for occasional exceptions where there is good reason to assume that they will not be constructed.
8.8.50 The cumulative effects have been assessed as the ‘additional’ effect over and above the baseline of other development as well as the ‘combined’ cumulative effect of a number of other developments including the Proposed Development.
8.8.51 Cumulative change arising from the Proposed Development when considered in conjunction with other similar developments in the vicinity is determined taking account of the above criteria as well as the following:
- the number of existing, consented, and proposed developments visible;
- the distance to each of the visible developments from the receptor location;
- the direction of each development in relation to the receptor;
- the extent of the view occupied by each development;
- the cumulative effect of development upon the fabric or key landscape components; and
- in the case of landscape character area, residential areas, and transportation/recreational routes: the proportion of the area or route subject to cumulative views.
8.8.52 The criteria for defining cumulative magnitude in this chapter are outlined in Table 8.15 Open ▸ .
8.8.53 Cumulative effects are described as:
- Simultaneous or combined: where two or more developments may be viewed from a single fixed viewpoint simultaneously, within the viewer’s field of view and without requiring them to turn their head;
- Successive or repetitive: where two or more developments may be viewed from a single viewpoint successively as the viewer turns their head or swivels through 360°; and
- Sequential: where a number of developments may be viewed sequentially or repeatedly at increased frequency, from a range of locations when travelling along a route within the LVIA Study Area.
8.8.54 Developments which have been refused at appeal or withdrawn or are at the scoping stage are not included in the assessment in line with NatureScot guidance. This approach differs from other chapters which have considered developments at the Scoping stage in line with the Volume 1, Chapter 4: EIA Methodology.
8.8.55 The way in which the assessment is described and presented is varied depending on the number and nature of scenarios which may arise.
- The cumulative assessment considers scenarios within which developments of the same status (operational and consented) may be “grouped,” for instance two or more nearby cumulative development proposals may be considered in one scenario if it is considered that the cumulative effects arising if one or more are developed are likely to be similar;
- Receptors judged to receive a Negligible magnitude of change from the Proposed Development on its own are not considered for cumulative assessment on the basis that any significant effects arising would primarily be caused by the cumulative developments and unlikely to be contributed to by the Proposed Development; and
- Only those receptors judged likely to experience effects from the cumulative development(s) being considered within a given scenario are included in the assessment.
Level of Effect and Significance of Effects
8.8.56 The emphasis in LVIA is on identification and reporting of significant environmental effects. The determination of levels of significance requires the application of professional judgement and experience to gauge the balance of variables, which, in every instance, are given different weights according to the site and its surroundings in terms of specific considerations.
8.8.57 Within this assessment, the assessment of effects has taken the following into account (as appropriate):
- reference to regulations or standards;
- reference to best practice guidance;
- reference to policy objectives;
- reference to criteria, for example designations or protection status;
- outcomes of consultation to date; and
- professional judgement based on local/regional/specialist experience.
8.8.58 Each effect is evaluated on a case-by-case basis. The matrix below provides general guidance on the relationship between magnitude of change and sensitivity of receptor. Where the landscape or visual impact has been classified as Major and Major/Moderate this is considered to be equivalent to a significant effect. Moderate effects may or may not be significant, depending on the particular circumstances arising and professional judgement. In this instance justification will be provided in the receptor assessment.
8.8.59 Where intermediate ratings are given, e.g. “Moderate/Minor,” this indicates an effect that is less than Moderate but more than Minor, rather than one which varies across the range. In such cases, the higher rating will always be given first; this does not mean that the impact is closer to that higher rating but is done to facilitate the identification of the more significant impacts within tables. Intermediate judgements may also be used for judgements of magnitude and sensitivity.
8.8.60 LVIA is a means of documenting professional judgement, rather than a formulaic process. In line with the GLVIA 3, the matrix is not used as a prescriptive tool and the methodology and analysis of potential effects at any particular location must allow for the exercise of professional judgement. Thus, in some instances a particular parameter may be considered as having a determining effect on the analysis.
8.8.61 It should also be noted that whilst an effect may be significant, that does not necessarily mean that such an impact would be unacceptable or should necessarily be regarded as an “undue consequence” (GLVIA3, paragraph 5.40). What is important is that the likely effects of any proposal are transparently assessed and understood in order that the determining authority can bring a balanced and well-informed judgement to bear when making any decision. This judgement should be based upon weighing up the benefits of the proposal against the anticipated effects, both positive and negative.
8.9Embedded Mitigation
8.9.1 As part of the Proposed Development design process, a number of Embedded Mitigation measures have been proposed to reduce the potential for impacts on landscape and visual resource, as presented in Table 8.17 Open ▸ .
8.10Assessment of Significance
Overview
8.10.1 This section provides an assessment of the likely significance of the landscape and visual effects of the Proposed Development during the construction, operational and maintenance and decommissioning phases. The effects are assessed on completion, at year 1, and the residual effects at year 15 when the proposed planting will be established and starting to mature, and the new infrastructure has weathered and ‘dulled’ over time.
8.10.2 Table 8.9 summarises the maximum design scenario against which each impact has been assessed.
Landscape Effects Assessment
8.10.3 The LCTs are shown in Figure 8.3 Open ▸ and Figure 8.4 Open ▸ . Based on the Baseline analysis in Section 8.6, the following LCTs are assessed in this section.
- Farmed Lowland Plain LCT;
- Sweeping Moorland and Flows LCT; and
- Sandy Beaches and Dunes LCT.
8.10.4 All three LCTs extend beyond the LVIA Study Area, an area for which baseline conditions have not been part of the field survey. Therefore, the assessment of landscape effects attributable to the Proposed Development in relation to the specific LCT does not comprise those areas which are outside of the LVIA Study Area.
Construction Impacts of the Proposed Development on landscape Character
Farmed Lowland Plain LCT
8.10.5 The Substation and a major part of the Onshore Export Cable Corridor and 400 kV Cables are located within the Farmed Lowland Plain LCT (see Section 8.6 for description).
Sensitivity
8.10.6 The Farmed Lowland Plain LCT is not subject to any landscape designations within the LVIA Study Area. This is a landscape that is actively used and subject to alteration by humankind. The landscape is valued for its openness, allowing wide panoramic views of the surrounding complex landscape pattern. These open vistas are generally edged by the distant horizon of the sea or distinctive profiles of the faraway hills. It is not a landscape that can be considered particularly susceptible to the type of development proposed, as being identified as the ‘East Coast Connectivity and Tourism Corridor’ and the ‘Area for Energy Business Expansion’ on the CaSPlan Strategy Map.
8.10.7 Farmed Lowland Plain LCT is evaluated as having a medium-low sensitivity to the Proposed Development.
Magnitude of change
8.10.8 Construction works within the PPP Application Boundary would involve the creation of the Substation platform, construction compounds, stripping and stockpiling material, digging trenches, and installing ducts and the Onshore Export and 400 kV Cables. The related earthworks would result in a direct change to the existing landscape fabric. The Substation platform would involve direct and permanent changes to the existing landscape fabric to a limited physical extent.
8.10.9 With completion of the works related to the Onshore Export Cable Corridor, and 400 kV Cables the ground will be reinstated, and fields will be returned to agricultural use and field boundaries and vegetation reinstated wherever possible. Land within temporary construction compounds will be reinstated to its previous use.
8.10.10 The construction works would not include the loss of valuable native woodland or other valuable landscape features within the PPP application boundary. Removal of commercial forestry plantations (Bridge of Gravity next to B876) is considered of less value. The assumption has been made that the trees associated with Stemster House access track and its junction with the B874 will be retained.
8.10.11 Farmed Lowland Plain LCT is a large-scale landscape, and as the area is allocated for Energy Business Expansion, the type of activities proposed are not notably discordant in nature within this large-scale and busy agricultural landscape with a dense transport network and blocks of forestry plantation. Therefore, the introduction of this type of construction work would result in direct overall medium-scale change, to the Farmed Lowland Plain LCT.
8.10.12 The temporary nature and reversibility of the effects will minimise any perceived impact, which is considered to be of a Low magnitude upon the Farmed Lowland Plain LCT within the LVIA Study Area.
Significance of Effect
8.10.13 The low magnitude of change upon medium-low sensitive landscape would result in minor adverse and not significant effects. The nature of these effects would be direct, short-term, localised (reversible) and adverse.
Sweeping Moorland and Flows
8.10.14 The works related to the construction of the Onshore Export Cable Corridor would comprise a short, approximately 2.3 km long, section of the Sweeping Moorland and Flows LCT (see Section 8.6 for description).
Sensitivity
8.10.15 The Sweeping Moorland and Flows LCT is not subject to any landscape designations within the LVIA Study Area. The industrial nature of the landscape, with a coniferous forest forming the dominant characteristic, indicates low value. The landscape does not accommodate any properties or roads, and it is therefore considered to have low susceptibility to the type of development proposed. Based on this, the Sweeping Moorland and Flows LCT is evaluated as having a Low sensitivity to the type of development proposed.
Magnitude of change
8.10.16 Sweeping Moorland and Flows LCT comprises an area of commercial forestry and the railway line to the service Subsea7 works. It is expected that the railway will be crossed by a trenchless technique. This type of construction works would result in direct overall small-scale localised change to the existing landscape resource.
8.10.17 Within the Onshore Export Cable Corridor, which extends through the forestry, the trees have to be removed. Commercial forestry is not considered as a valued landscape feature. On completion of the works the ground will be reinstated along with vegetation where possible, alternatively low growing shrubs can be planted.
8.10.18 The temporary nature and reversibility of the effects will minimise any perceived impact, which are considered to be of a Low magnitude upon the Sweeping Moorland and Flows LCT within the LVIA Study Area.
Significance of Effect
8.10.19 The small magnitude of change upon a low sensitive landscape would result in Minor adverse and not significant effects. The nature of these effects would be direct, short-term, localised (reversible) and adverse.
Sandy Beaches and Dunes
8.10.20 The Landfall area on the coastal edge of Keiss Links, to the east of the A99, immediately to the south of the settlement of Keiss, is defined as the Sandy Beaches and Dunes LCT (see Section 8.6 for description).
Sensitivity
8.10.21 Generally Sandy Beaches and Dunes LCTs are designated, for both their habitat and their scenic qualities, however, this does not apply to the area associated with Sinclair’s Bay, which already accommodates a works area to the north of the mouth of the River Wester, to the south of the proposed Landfall. This would indicate a lower susceptibility for this part of the Sandy Beaches and Dunes LCT to the type of the development proposed. Due to its rarity, recreational value and closeness to the settlement of Keiss, the beach is considered to have high recreational value. The area is part of East Coast Connectivity and Tourism Corridor (Plate 1) and the A9, which defines the western boundary of the LCT, overlaps with the NC500 (designated long distance recreational route). On this basis, the Sandy Beaches and Dunes LCT is evaluated as having overall medium-high sensitivity to the Proposed Development.
Magnitude of change
8.10.22 The Landfall, where the offshore export cables come onshore will be installed by HDD (or equivalent trenchless technique) from a location to the south of the settlement of Keiss. The cables will pass underneath the sand dunes, the exit pit and HDD compound will be above MHWS to the east of the sand dunes. A cable vessel would be located for a short period offshore, and the cables pulled onshore and joined with the Onshore Export Cables at the jointing bay.
8.10.23 Disruption will occur at this location for a period of up to 12 months, however through the use of HDD no physical disruption to the path network or dunes will occur. Once operational, the cables will be located underground with only the inspection covers at the TJBs being visible.
8.10.24 The Landfall lies approximately 700 m from the existing Subsea7 works to the south. Therefore, the type of activities proposed are not exactly new within this coastal strip. The introduction of this type of construction work would result in direct overall medium-scale change to this existing narrow strip of the landscape resource. The temporary nature and reversibility of the effects will minimise any perceived impact, which are considered to be of a low magnitude upon the Sandy Beaches and Dunes LCT within the LVIA Study Area.
Significance of Effect
8.10.25 The medium-small magnitude of change upon a medium-high sensitive landscape would result in moderate/minor adverse and not considered significant effects. The nature of these effects would be direct, short-term, localised (reversible) and adverse.
Operational Impacts of the Proposed Development on Landscape Character
8.10.26 Once operational, the Onshore Export Cables and 400 kV Cables will be hidden underground with only inspection covers visible at the link boxes. The existing habitats and features affected by the construction of the Onshore Export Cable Corridor, 400 kV Cables and Landfall will be reinstated following completion with no significant landscape effects likely to persist post-construction. Therefore, as stated in Table 8.10, operational impacts attributable to the Landfall, Onshore Export Cable Corridor and the 400 kV Cables have been scoped out. Accordingly, the LCTs of the Sweeping Moorland and Flows and Sandy Beaches and Dunes would not be affected during the operational stage and therefore the operational impact of the Substation is considered in this section only.
Farmed Lowland Plain LCT
Sensitivity
8.10.27 The Farmed Lowland Plain LCT is not subject to any landscape designations within the LVIA Study Area. This is a landscape that is actively used and subject to alteration by humankind. It is not a landscape that can be considered particularly susceptible to the type of the development proposed. It is identified as the ‘East Coast Connectivity and Tourism Corridor’ and the ‘Area for Energy Business Expansion’ on the CaSPlan Strategy Map. The landscape is valued for its openness, which allows for spectacular views of the surrounding complex landscape pattern, these open vistas generally being edged by the distant horizon of the sea or distinctive profiles of the faraway hills.
8.10.28 Based on this, the Farmed Lowland Plain LCT is evaluated as having a medium-low sensitivity to the type of development proposed.
Magnitude of change
8.10.29 The Proposed Development would introduce several large-scale, man-made objects comprising electrical equipment, the GIS buildings, and associated infrastructure, into the Farmed Lowland Plain LCT, which already accommodates several electricity infrastructure features such as steel lattice towers, OHL with pylons, and substations (Spittal substation and consented West of Orkney substation, which has been considered as part of the baseline context).
8.10.30 The introduction of the Proposed Development would result in a change to the physical characteristics and appearance of the proposed Substation itself, especially due to the large-scale earthworks and permanent loss of some areas of young forestry plantations.
8.10.31 The related effects upon the Farmed Lowland Plain LCT are to be considered cumulatively as additional effects to the consented West of Orkney substation development, which will be located 2.5 km to the south-west, adjacent to the existing Spittal substation. Due to the implemented Embedded Mitigation, which includes creating landforms for screening and planting, both substations would be well integrated into their surrounding landscape context.
8.10.32 The existing SHET-L Spittal substation is sufficiently screened by the intervening landform and vegetation and the consented West of Orkney substation would be shielded behind bunds and therefore difficult to distinguish within the wider landscape. The Substation would appear as a new element in this cumulative context, in limited elevated views from the north and north-east, when travelling on the B874 (see VP1).
8.10.33 The addition of the Substation would also be perceivable simultaneously with the other (existing/consented) substations and the existing OHL within a limited area to the north-west and west of the A9. This change to the landscape is presented by V7A and VP7B and VP8, showing the upper sections of the GIS buildings as difficult to distinguish above the intervening forestry plantation. The landform of Spittal Hill forms a local dominating landmark in this landscape and none of these developments would protrude or compete in scale with the shallow profile of Spittal Hill, which provides a backdrop to the cumulative electricity infrastructure developments.
8.10.34 Due to the location of the Substation on the lower slope of the north-eastern shoulder of Spittal Hill, the impact upon the perceivable character of the landscape, attributable to the Substation, would occur within the area around Loch Scarmclate and on the slopes of the surrounding shallow hills, such as Sordale Hill to the north and Corsback Hill to the north-east, which in turn contain the impact magnitude of change on the perceivable character of the Farmed Lowland Plain LCT.
8.10.35 Farmed Lowland Plain LCT is a large-scale landscape, and the area is allocated for Energy Business Expansion and the type of development are not notably discordant in nature within this busy agricultural landscape of ‘a confusion of characteristics – physical, cultural and experiential.’ It should be noted that the Substation is located within an area of large scale forestry plantations which are due to be harvested in 2057. Therefore, the introduction of the Substation would result in direct overall low magnitude permanent change, to the Farmed Lowland Plain LCT within the LVIA Study Area.
Significance of Effect
Year 1
8.10.36 The low magnitude of change upon medium-low sensitive landscape would result in minor adverse and not significant effects at year 1. The nature of these effects would be direct, long-term (reversible), localised and adverse.
Year 15
8.10.37 It is expected that the magnitude of change/impact would reduce over time as the proposed mitigation planting matures, resulting in minor/negligible and not significant effects at year 15.
Decommissioning Impacts of the Proposed Development on Landscape Character
8.10.38 In the absence of detailed information regarding decommissioning works, the impacts during the decommissioning of the Proposed Development are considered to be likely less than, or at least analogous with, those of the construction stage.
8.10.39 Decommissioning operations will be based on strategies that minimise the environmental impact where possible and will be developed in consultation with THC.
8.10.40 It is expected that decommissioning follows a reverse order of the installation activities with some infrastructure potentially left in situ, therefore lessening the impact on the land as there is no requirement for intrusive works.
8.10.41 As the landscape mound and proposed planting will be mature at the time of decommissioning, it is expected these will be retained.
Visual Effects Assessment
Construction Impacts of the Proposed Substation
8.10.42 The timing and duration of the Substation construction works will result in distinct types and durations of effects:
- Enabling and earthworks – temporary effects;
- Construction of the main structures and buildings – temporary effects; and
- Finishing, commissioning, and programme contingency – permanent and operational effects.
8.10.43 The residual effects arising as a result of the construction of the Substation are assessed as being of the same magnitude and significance on all visual receptors as those arising due to their operation and maintenance, however the residual effects arising as a result of the construction are assessed as being temporary, occurring during the length of the construction phase, and differing in nature from the operational effects mainly due to the influence of the various construction machinery, earthworks, construction compound(s), that will not be present or result in effects during the operational phase.
8.10.44 Therefore, the effects attributable to the construction stage of the Substation are not assessed further.
Construction Impacts of the Onshore Export Cable Corridor, Landfall and 400 kV Cable Corridor
Residential receptors
Sensitivity
8.10.45 The sensitivity of visual receptors (people) from/on settlements and recreational routes has been considered as high.
Magnitude of change
8.10.46 The nature of effects on residents of the settlements and scattered properties within the LVIA Study Area would be dependent on the final alignment of the Landfall and the Onshore Export Cable Corridor as well as the 400 kV Cable Corridor.
8.10.47 The Onshore Export Cable Corridor would occupy a 23.5 km long tract of landscape between the Landfall and the Substation with the 400 kV Cable Corridor following from this towards the Banniskirk Hub site. The construction phase for the Onshore Export Cables will include the installation of temporary fencing, areas of hardstanding within construction compounds (up to two compounds along the route), site clearance (with minimal tree removal), access tracks (where required), temporary haul roads, excavation of open cut trenches and stockpiling of soil. Task lighting would be required for working in winter during darkness. The construction phase of the development could take up to 48 months (if sequential).
8.10.48 Due to the nature of the development, the construction activities within the Onshore Export Cable Corridor will only cause disruption during the temporary construction phase. Once operational, the cable will be buried underground, the ground surface will be restored and only inspection covers will be visible at the link boxes.
8.10.49 Construction activities associated with the Onshore Export Cable Corridor and 400 kV Cable Corridor would introduce movement of large machinery (trenchers) which will attract attention to the works, which are otherwise close to ground level, with low-rise activities (see Table 8.15 for Embedded Mitigation).
8.10.50 As the alignment of the Onshore Export Cables and 400 kV Cables Corridor within the PPP Application Boundary has not yet been finalised, Table 8.16 provides a high level appraisal of potential magnitude of change upon the properties within, and next to, the PPP application Boundary, taking account of the approximate location of properties in relation to the location of the indicative alignment of the Onshore Export Cables and 400 kV Cable Corridor. Therefore, the distances of the properties from the final alignment can potentially differ from approximately 30 m to 330 m. Given that, the appraisal does not conclude the significance of the effect, which depends on the final alignment of the route. Table 8.16 identifies the properties closest to the Onshore Export Cable Corridor, which are likely to experience significant effects during its construction.
8.10.51 Residential visual receptors are shown in Figure 8.5 Open ▸ .
Significance of Effect
8.10.53 The closest properties (as in Table 8.18) would potentially experience medium to high magnitude of change resulting in temporary moderate to major adverse and significant adverse effects.
Recreational Routes
8.10.54 Recreational routes are shown in Figure 8.7 Open ▸ .
Sensitivity
8.10.55 The sensitivity of recreational routes has been considered as high.
NC500 Long Distance Recreational Route
Magnitude of change
8.10.56 Although the detailed design of the Onshore Export Cable Corridor will refine the location of the construction works area, it can be expected that views of the construction works would be experienced within a short section along the NC500, which overlaps with the A99 to the south of the settlement of Keiss. Impacts during construction work would be minimal as the cables will be installed under the road
8.10.57 The construction works within the Landfall would be concealed by the intervening topography (which is undulating). Views of the Onshore Export Cable Corridor works to the west of the route would be transient in nature as the eye is drawn towards the sea to the east. The high-sensitivity users of the NC500 would experience low magnitude of change
Significance of Effect
8.10.58 Moderate/minor adverse and not significant temporary adverse effects.
Core Path Keiss & Reiss
Magnitude of change
8.10.59 Landfall works within the Keiss Links beach area would take up to 12 months. However, the works would not affect directly the Keiss Shore Sinclair’s Bay footpath Core Path, which will remain open. In views from the path the construction compound and related security fencing would be visibly discordant within an attractive and wild coastal landscape. The beach in this area is relatively undisturbed and tranquil. The construction activities would be disruptive to path users within a short section within the large scale coastal landscape. Therefore, high sensitivity users of the Core Path would experience Low magnitude of change
Significance of Effect
8.10.60 Moderate/minor and not significant temporary adverse effects.
Transport routes
Sensitivity
8.10.61 The sensitivity of visual receptors (people) from the main transport routes, including local roads has been considered as Medium.
8.10.62 The Onshore Export Cable Corridor runs mainly perpendicular to the main transport routes and therefore the users of the transport routes would only experience effects attributable to the construction works within a localised section of these routes, as identified in Table 8.7; A99, A822, B876 and B874 and shown in Figure 8.7 Open ▸ .
Magnitude of change
8.10.63 More than 3 km of the length of the Onshore Export Cable Corridor follows the narrow-gauge railway, which runs to the service Subsea7 works between Westerloch on the A99 to Hastigrow on the B876. The alignment of the Onshore Export Cable Corridor avoids it running in parallel with transport routes, therefore avoiding effects upon these routes. Road users would experience Low magnitude of change.
Significance of Effect
8.10.64 Road users of medium sensitivity would experience Low magnitude of change resulting in Minor and not significant temporary adverse effects.
Operational Impacts of the Substation on Visual Receptors
8.10.65 The assessment of visual impact during operation and maintenance is based on the Substation on completion, at year 1, and year 15, once the proposed planting has been established and starting to mature.
8.10.66 The outline of the Substation, alongside the proposed mitigation measures, are illustrated on visualisations in Volume 3: Visualisations and Photomontages. The assessment makes also references to the Viewpoints Assessment in Appendix 8.1, which have informed the judgements made.
Settlements and Residential Receptors
Sensitivity
8.10.67 People in settlements and scattered residential properties have been considered as High sensitivity receptors to the type of the development proposed.
Magnitude of change
8.10.68 Table 8.17 describes Embedded Mitigation measures adopted as part of the Proposed Development.
8.10.69 An indicative Substation Landscape Mitigation is shown in Figure 8.8.
8.10.70 Table 8.19 provides high level appraisal of potential magnitude of change upon the properties within, and on, the PPP Application Boundary around the proposed Substation, plus the settlement of Halkirk and scattered properties along the local road to the south of Halkirk are assessed. Distances are measured from the properties to the proposed Substation switchyard. It should be noted that the assessment related to the orientation of these properties, which correlates to the main views from the properties, is based largely on field survey observations and Google Maps aerial views. Any considerable change to the design of the proposed Substation would affect the assessment of effects upon residential receptors as described in Table 8.19 Open ▸ .
8.10.71 Residential visual receptors are shown in Figure 8.7.
Significance of Effect
8.10.72 In summary, there are five properties next to Banniskirk Road and the A882, at distances of 190 m to 470 m, which would experience High to Medium magnitude of change at year 1 and consequently significant effects. Due to the Embedded Mitigation (mound and planting) within the PPP Application Boundary, which comes close to these properties, in addition to the existing vegetation, would allow these effects to reduce to Moderate adverse and not significant at year 15.
8.10.73 The proposed mound with associated planting immediately to the north-east of the Substation site would physically and visually contain the Substation, although altering the character of the landscape through the introduction of a new landscape element. However, the screening effect would take immediate effect at the end of the construction works, resulting in the screening of Substation structures by a natural looking landform.
Recreational Routes
8.10.74 Recreational routes are shown in Figure 8.6 Open ▸ .
NC500 Long Distance Recreational Route
8.10.75 NC500 route traverses the Onshore Export Cable Corridor LVIA Study Area 16 km to the east of the Substation and is therefore not considered in respect of operational stage effects owing to underground cables not being visible.
Core Paths
8.10.76 Core Paths CA06.09, CA06.05 ( Figure 8.6 Open ▸ ) have a total length of 1 km and line the eastern perimeter of the settlement of Halkirk, passing the rear and front gardens of properties.
Sensitivity
8.10.77 The sensitivity of recreational routes has been considered as High.
Magnitude of change
8.10.78 Views of the existing Spittal substation and consented West of Orkney Substation will be screened and filtered by the intervening-built form, infrastructure and vegetation.
8.10.79 The very top sections of the Substation GIS buildings above the intervening large scale young forestry plantations, would not appear as eye catching new features. A high steel made structure at Georgemas Junction stands out above the forestry. The Spittal to Loch Bhuide OHL with high pylons runs across the middle ground of the view towards the Substation. This is a large scale and busy landscape within which the shallow landform of Spittal Hill forms the skyline above this landscape, so the eye is drawn upwards towards this local focal point.
8.10.80 The proposed mitigation mound would appear as a natural landscape element blending in with the surrounding vegetation.
8.10.81 Due to the distance and limited transient views of the proposed Substation within large scale landscape the magnitude of change is considered Low-Negligible.
Significance of Effect
8.10.82 Minor adverse and not significant permanent adverse effects.
8.10.83 These effects are expected to reduce, when the intervening forestry plantation has matured, down to Minor/negligible and not significant permanent adverse effects.
Transport routes
Sensitivity
8.10.84 The transport routes ( Figure 8.6 Open ▸ ) are considered as Medium sensitivity receptors.
Magnitude of change
8.10.85 Table 8.20 describes the likely effects potentially attributable to the Substation on users of transport routes.
Significance
Year 1
8.10.86 Due to the limited and transient views of the Substation from the transport routes the magnitude of change is considered Negligible to Low, resulting maximum in Minor adverse and not significant permanent adverse effects.
Year 15
8.10.87 These effects are expected to reduce further, when the mitigation planting has been established, down to Minor/negligible adverse and not significant permanent adverse effects.
Decommissioning Impacts of the Proposed Development on visual resource
8.10.88 In the absence of detailed information regarding decommissioning works, the impacts during the decommissioning of the Proposed Development are considered to be likely less than, or at least analogous with, those of the construction stage.
8.10.89 Decommissioning operations will be based on strategies that minimise the environmental impact where possible and will be developed in consultation with THC.
8.10.90 It is expected that decommissioning follows a reverse order of the installation activities with some infrastructure potentially left in situ, therefore lessening the impact on the land as there is no requirement for intrusive works.
8.10.91 As the landscape mound and proposed planting will be mature at the time of decommissioning, it is expected these will be retained.