PART 2

Sets out fundamental core principles and required processes. Tone will be less discursive and more focussed on methods, procedures and technical issues. Checklists, bullet points, text boxes, flow charts, diagrams etc will be included as appropriate, with photographs and illustrations where relevant.

Chapter 4 Principles and overview of process

Methodology and terminology- Effects assessment: magnitude, sensitivity, significance. (Impact/effect) Introduced in

Chapter 1- Defining EIA and SEA significance Principles - details in Chapters 6 and 7- Dealing with legal, policy, LCA context depending on geographic location- Tailoring approach to appropriate level of detail required (scale)

‘Length and presentation’ of the assessment: relevant and appropriate content Landscape (impact) Assessment) Introduced this distinction in Chapter 2 Visual (impact) Assessment ) Details of scope and procedures in Chapters 6/7 Cumulative (impact) Assessment Introduced in Chapter 3, mentioned here under nature of

effects, detail in separate Chapter 8 (possibly) Recording key steps and maintaining an audit trail Monitoring Visualisations, illustrations, GIS and modelling tools Better In Chapter 7 and 9?? Key steps (flow chart?) Summary/checklist

Introduction

4.1 This Chapter introduces the processes of LVIA and sets them in the context of the wider EIA procedures. There is now a well established set of steps and procedures for EIA which is summarised in simplified form in Figure 3.1 and in the flow chart in Figure 3.2 (a modified and simplified version of current 3.2). LVIA is normally carried out as a separate theme or topic study within an EIA and appears as a separate section of the ES. There are links between the EIA process and LVIA at virtually every stage, which are summarised below. Greater detail on how the key steps in the process are carried out specifically for landscape effects and for visual effects are included in Chapter 6 and 7 respectively. A clear distinction must be drawn between the process of carrying out the assessment - the EIA or more specifically the LVIA - and the presentation of the findings of the assessment - the Environmental Statement or ES. Guidelines on handling information about landscape and visual impacts in the Environmental Statement are provided in Chapter 9.

Some key principles of good practice

4.2 Good practice in LVIA will be helped by considering the following overarching principles:

Techniques and methods used should be clearly described so that the procedures can be understood by non experts and can be replicated if necessary;

Approaches should be tailored to the particular circumstances of the proposal, with legal, policy and contextual information all being specific to the particular geographical location;

Terminology must be clearly defined;

Good records should be kept of all surveys and of the steps taken in reaching judgements about significant effects so that there is an audit trail that can be followed;

Emphasis should be placed upon key issues and effects that are likely to be most relevant to decision-making, while acknowledging where lesser concerns have been considered but not included in the detailed assessment. Quality of the assessment is more important than quantity;

Consultation with others should be used to provide relevant information and to help judgements about matters of value and significance, while making clear where professional judgement has been used;

Impartiality is vital and judgements should be both as objective as possible and fully explained;

If there is uncertainty about possible effects the 'precautionary principle' should be adopted and the worst-case scenario considered;

Any limitations that may have constrained the assessment should be fully stated. These might, for example, relate to unavailability of information, effects of adverse weather or visibility on field surveys, or gaps in responses to consultations.

Figure 3.1 Steps in the EIA Process

Step in Process DescriptionScreening Determination of whether an EIA is needed for the proposed development Project description/specification Provides a description of the proposed development for the purpose of the

assessment. Normally includes description of any alternatives considered.Scoping Makes an initial judgement about the scope of the EIA and of the issues that

need to be covered under the individual topics or themes. Includes establishment of the relevant study area.

Baseline studies Establishes the existing nature of the environment in the study area, including the effects of any changes likely to occur independently of the development proposal. Includes information on the value attached to the different environmental resources.

Prediction and description of the effects

Systematic prediction of the effects that are likely to occur and description of their nature.

Mitigation Proposals for measures designed to for avoid, reduce or compensate for any negative effects or enhance positive effects. Mitigation proposals may be incorporated into the project design through the iterative design and assessment process

Evaluation of the effects after mitigation

Systematic and transparent evaluation of the evaluation of the effects that remain after mitigation has been incorporated into the scheme proposal.

Preparation of the Environmental Statement

Presentation of the findings of the EIA in written and graphic form in the Environmental Statement.

Monitoring and auditing Monitoring and auditing of the effects of the implementation of the proposal and of the mitigation measures proposed.

Screening

4.3 This step determines the need for an EIA. The EU Directives and UK country regulations set out the types of project, known as Annex 1/Schedule 1 projects for which an EIA is mandatory. They also list Annex 2/Schedule 2 projects which may require EIA if they are likely to have significant effects on the environment. The initial assessment of whether or not an EIA is required will usually consider the nature, size and location of the development and the nature and scale of the likely environmental effects.

4.4 The proposer of a scheme may seek a screening opinion from the competent authority (usually the local authority or other regulating body) to indicate whether an EIA is required Government guidance suggests that when decisions are made by the competent authority as to the need for an EIA, the first criterion to be taken into account should be whether or not the development is in a location that falls within a defined (in the UK country regulations) range of sensitive areas. From a landscape perspective the list of such areas includes National Parks, the Broads, landscapes appearing on the World Heritage List and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty and equivalent areas in Scotland. Other areas designated at a local level may also be relevant.

4.5 If all or part the proposed development is in a sensitive area then consideration is given to the thresholds relating to different types of development included in Schedule 2 of the EIA Regulations and to the following criteria set out in Government Guidance1:

Characteristics of development – taking into account aspects such as size, raw material usage, emissions and risk of accidents;

Location of development – the environmental sensitivity of the areas likely to be affected including existing land uses and the capacity of the existing environment to ‘absorb’ the new development;

Characteristics of the potential impact – in particular with regard to its extent, complexity, probability, duration and frequency, in relation to the characteristics and location of the development.

4.6 In contributing to the screening process the landscape professional may be called upon to provide a professional, albeit informal, opinion as to the potential sensitivity of the landscape or visual effects of a scheme. In making any judgements and providing such advice and opinion, it is important to adopt a structured and systematic approach from the outset and record all actions undertaken, information gathered, issues taken into consideration, assumptions made and opinions offered, together with reasoned justifications. The formally designated landscapes listed in Paragraph 4.3 are considered by definition, to be more sensitive to change than other areas. Development proposals in or likely to indirectly affect such designated areas are often likely to require an EIA. But a focus simply on designated landscapes is likely to be too crude and other landscapes which are deemed sensitive to particular types of development may also meet the criteria.

4.7 The EIA process has clear and proven benefits in improving the sighting, layout and design of development schemes. Landscape and visual issues, because they are often closely related to scheme design, are an essential part of this. The process can contribute to all forms of

1 Department for Communities and Local Government (2006) Environmental Impact Assessment: A guide to good practice and procedures. A consultation paper. Paragraph 69, Page 26.

development whether included in Schedules/Annexes 1 or 2 or not. As a result some scheme proposers will choose to carry out an EIA even when not formally required to do so, simply because the benefits are recognized.

Project description/specification

4.8 An overall description of the nature of the proposed development sometimes referred to as the ‘project specification’ makes an important contribution to all the topics covered in an EIA. It is usually a free standing piece of work and forms a separate component of the ES. It provides a description of the siting, layout and other characteristics of the development. For the LVIA it is important to understand the essential aspects of the scheme which will determine its effects on the landscape within which it is set and the views that people in the vicinity will have of it. This means having a clear understanding of which aspects of the project description a relevant to the LVIA. This is considered further in Chapter 5.

Scoping

4.9 Defining the scope of the EIA study is one of the most critical parts of the process in that it sets the context for everything else which follows. If the scope is defined too narrowly, some critical area of uncertainty or adverse impact may emerge late in the day, at a time when decisions on the shape of the project are too far advanced to allow for any real change. On the other hand, if the scope of the work is too loosely defined, then much time, effort and cost may be spent on pursuing unnecessary detail.

(Text below (4.9 - 4.10) is based largely on 3.13 - 3.17 in second edition with minor changes)4.10 Scoping is the procedure by which the key topics to be examined and the areas of likely significant effects are identified. There is a mechanism to allow the proposers of schemes to ask the competent authority for a scoping opinion, to help to identify the potential effects of a scheme. The objective of scoping is to ensure that all relevant issues are addressed in the EIA but it should not however be used to pre-judge the effect of a development at this early stage. This stage usually requires a desk study, site and scheme familiarisation and informal consultations with the competent authority and the main statutory and other consultees. A request may also be made to the competent authority for a scoping opinion concerning the information that is ultimately to be supplied in the ES. The scoping opinion can help to ascertain the Authority’s opinion on what the main or significant effects are likely to be and to define the content or scope of the ES.

4.11 An ES is not necessarily rendered invalid if it does not cover all the matters specified in the scoping opinion or directive, or because an applicant fails to provide further information when required to do so. However, if it is deemed that the applicant has failed to provide sufficient information on the environmental effects to enable the Regulatory Authority to make an informed decision, the planning application is likely to be refused. Some less important effects may be ‘scoped out’ in that they will not be explored in detail in the EIA. But they may still be briefly reported on in the ES to alert readers to the fact that they were considered.

4.12 A scoping document can be produced to set out the range of possible issues, explaining why each will or will not be evaluated in the full assessment. It may also include brief details on methods, assessment techniques and the presentation of information to be included in the final

ES. Although not mandatory a scoping document can be helpful and may be prepared as a free-standing document or incorporated in the ES.

4.13 In terms of LVIA scoping should be expected to consider several key matters, which should ideally be discussed with landscape professionals in the competent authority as well as with statutory consultees, interest groups and local people. They include:

The extent of the study area to be used for assessment of landscape and visual effects;

The nature of the potential landscape and visual effects that might occur, without at this stage predicting that they necessarily will occur;

The main receptors of impact that need to be addressed in the full assessment including viewpoints that should be assessed for visual effects;

The nature and level of detail for the baseline studies that will be carried out for the LVIA;

Approaches to the assessment of the significance of the effects that may be identified;

The requirements with respect to the assessment of cumulative landscape and visual effects.

****** TEXT BETWEEN SETS OF ASTERISKS IS ORIGINAL WITH SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS BUT MAY NEED MORE FUNDAMENTAL REVIEW - TO DISCUSS?? To see text after editing simply switch to Final as opposed to Final showing Mark Up in the Review menu

Baseline studies(this is the current second edition text from 6.1 - 6.5 with minor editing shown in track changes - all needs to be reviewed. )4.14 The initial step in any landscape or visual impact assessment is to establish review the existing landscape and visual resource – that is the baseline landscape and visual conditions. The data information collected will, when reviewed alongside the description of the proposed change or development, form the basis from which the occurrence, estimation of magnitude and significancefor the prediction, description and evaluation of the landscape and visual effects of the development may be identified and assessedproposal.

The purpose of baseline studies is to record and analyse the existing landscape features, characteristicsprovide an understanding of the landscape in the area that may be affected, , the way the landscape is experienced, and the value or importance of the landscape and visual resources in the vicinity of the proposed developmentattached to it. This requires research, classification, and analysis of the landscape and visual resources as follows :

Research / Survey involves both desk and field studies to assemble basic information.Classification entails sorting landscape into units or groups of distinct and recognisable type and character.Analysis involves the detailed examination of the constituent parts of the landscape and visual resources in order to understand how they are made up and experienced. It can also include the process of ascertaining the relative importance of the various aspects of the landscape and visual resource.

Presentation of findings (This seems unnecessary here - better in Chapters 6 and 7)

Methods and tools

4.15 The level of detail provided should be appropriate to the scale and type of development, the sensitivities associated with the landscape and its visual amenityy of the receptors and the potential for adverse (negative) or beneficial (positive) effects to occur. It should also be appropriate to each the different stages of the assessment process. Thus For example, at the scoping and site selection, screening and scoping stages, the primary aim is to identify key issues and constraints. For this purpose, fairly broad-brush, a fairly broad-brush preliminary site assessment with mainly desk-based studies may be adequate based primarilyon, for example, on landscape designations, existing landscape character assessments, mapped areas of ancient woodland, and known sites of recreational interest that will influence site selection. Once the preferred site has been selected, and screening and scoping are completed more comprehensive and detailed baseline studies are carried outrequired. The level of detail required must suit the purpose of each stage.

4.16 Landscape and visual baseline studies play an important part not only in the assessment process but also in the design process, providing an overview of the environmental constraints or opportunities that may influence the design of the final development. It is important that the information collated is considered in relation to that for other parallel studies such as cultural heritage and flora and fauna to ensure an integrated approach to design development. Principle sources of background information include the Regulatory Authority, Government Agencies and local special interest groups and organisations. (is this helpful here - maybe better to say more in Chapters 6 and 7)

4.17 It is important to bear in mind that the baseline landscape is dynamic not static. The landscape may already be changing for reasons unrelated to the development. The baseline studies therefore address not only the existing landscape, but also such landscape dynamics askey drivers of change that may be identified , together withand the likely future character of the landscape, without the proposed development, that may result. Account isshould also be taken of any landscape management strategiesy or guidelines that may exist or are in preparation for the area of study. The baseline studies are should be a strictly factual record and analysis of the existing landscape and visual resourcesamenity in the area, and the value or importance attached to them. They must not be confused or combined with impact analysis, which is not attempted appropriate at this stage. The following sections consider separately the landscape and visual baselines in more detail.Methods of assessing the baseline conditions for landscape and visual effects are summarised in Chapters 6 and 7.

Prediction of effects(this is based on the current second edition text from 7.2 - 7.13 with significant additions of new or replacement text and editing/re-writing shown in track changes - all needs to be reviewed).

4.18 Once the key aspects of the proposed change or development that are relevant to landscape and visual effects have been determined, and the baseline conditions established, the effects expected to occur can be predicted. There is no formulaic way of doing this. It is a matter of logical and structured thinking about all the possible interactions throughout the whole life cycle of the development. Opinions may also be sought from the competent authority, statutory

consultees, interest groups and local communities, to build on the advice given at the scoping stage.

4.19 A wide range of potential effects may already have been identified at the screening and/or scoping stages. Some may have been judged insufficiently significant to consider further. Others may have been addressed by mitigation measures incorporated into the scheme design through the iterative design/assessment process. It is the remaining, or residual, impacts that must be predicted and described.

4.20 In most cases it will be essential to give equal and detailed consideration to both:

Effects on the landscape as a resource - its overall character, and the individual elements and aesthetic and perceptual qualities contributing to that character (the landscape effects);

Effects on the use and visual amenity (the visual effects).

Sometimes there may be important effects on the landscape itself, but the development may be in a location that is not highly visible. Equally it is possible, although less likely, that there may be significant visual effects without significant effects on the landscape itself.

4.21 All types of effects need to be covered, including:

Positive effects which are beneficial for the landscape or visual amenity in some way;

Negative or adverse effects which are detrimental for the landscape or visual amenity in some way;

Direct impacts which are directly attributable to some aspects of the proposed development itself;

Indirect impact of which aren't not a direct result of the proposed development itself but result in directly from it, often via a complex pathway or secondary association.

Cumulative impacts, as described in Paragraphs 3.21 and 3.22.A distinction is drawn between the potential effects addressed during the design development of the scheme and the residual effects after the mitigation measures have been taken into account. In describing the residual effects the likely success, or typical performance, of the mitigation measures and arrangements to ensure their implementation, should also be considered.

Although impact assessment is the responsibility of developers and their advisers, the opinions of the Regulatory Authority, relevant statutory consultees, conservation bodies and, where practicable, local residents should be taken into account. Some agreement may also have been reached with these groups during scoping in order to identify and focus study or debate on the potentially significant effects.

Assessments of both landscape and visual effects are required for most developments. There may, however, be occasions when greater attention is placed on only one aspect, for example, when a development is wholly screened from public or private views, but nonetheless results in an adverse effect on landscape elements or landscape character within the site boundary.

Alternatively, but less likely, a development may have significant visual effects, but insignificant landscape effects.

Sources of effects Landscape and visual effects can arise from a variety of sources and it is important that potential sources of effect arising throughout the life-cycle of the development, their extent, scale, timing and duration are, where practicable, systematically identified. Effects can arise from all types of development including:

changes in land use, for example those arising from mineral extraction, afforestation, recreational use or land drainage;

the development of buildings and structures such as power stations, industrial estates, roads and housing;

changes in land management, such as intensification of agricultural use, which can be a vehicle for biological and landscape change; and less commonly,

changes in production processes and emissions, including those from chemical, food and textile industrial plants.

Nature of effects

Effects can be negative (adverse) or positive (beneficial); direct, indirect, secondary or cumulative and be of different duration, either permanent or temporary (short, medium or long term). They can also arise at different scales (local, regional or national) and have different levels of significance.

Direct and 4.22 Indirect Effects

A direct (or primary) effect may be defined as an effect that is directly attributable to a defined element or characteristic of the proposed development, for example the loss or removal of an element or feature such as a hedgerow, or prominent group of trees.

An indirect (or secondary) effect is an effect that is not a direct result of the proposed development but is often produced away from the site of the development or as a result of a complex pathway or secondary association. Indirect effects can pose particular difficulties as thusthey can arise from consequential changes in the landscape or in visual amenity that may be delayed in time or located some distance from the source of the effect. For example, alterations to the drainage regime in the vicinity of a site, such as a quarry, could result in changes to the vegetative cover and a consequent change to the landscape character downstream.

Indirect effects may also result from associated development including: but not restricted to:

• • upgrading of transport infrastructure and new signs;• • associated mineral extraction and waste disposal requirements;• • new or improved off-site utilities such as water and waste water treatment plants, surface

water drainage systems, gas pipelines, electricity substations and transmission lines, and telecommunications facilities.

4.23 Longer term indirect effects, which could potentially arise as a consequence of the development, could include housing development associated with a large new industrial development; retail development in response to a new road junction; or increased recreational activity following improvements to access. Although such issues cannot be addressed in detail due to lack of information, it may be appropriate to acknowledge them in the assessment, particularly where they could form part of the concerns expressed by consultees and the public. Such longer-term effects will normally be beyond the scope of the detailed assessment and are primarily issues to be dealt with by the Regulatory Acompetent authority as part of the development control and planning process. In such cases the limitations of the assessment should be acknowledged and agreed, where possible, in discussion with the Regulatory Acompetent authority during scoping.

Cumulative Effects 4.24 - 4.25 New brief paragraphs to be written once we know what is going into Chapter 8Cumulative landscape and visual effects result from additional changes to the landscape or visual amenity caused by the proposed development in conjunction with other developments (associated with or separate to it) or actions, that occurred in the past, present or likely to occur in the foreseeable future. They may also affect the way in which the landscape is experienced. Cumulative effects may be positive or negative. Where they comprise a range of benefits, they may be considered to form part of the mitigation measures.

Cumulative effects can also arise from the intervisibility of a range of developments and / or from the combined effects of individual components of the proposed development occurring in different locations or over a period of time. The separate effects of such Individual components or developments may not be significant, but together they may lead to an unacceptable degree of adverse effect upon visual receptors within their combined visual envelopes. Intervisibility depends upon general topography, aspect, tree cover or other visual obstruction, elevation and distance, as this affects visual acuity, which is also influenced by weather and light conditions.

Mitigation measures(this is the current second edition text with minor editing shown in track changes - all needs to be reviewed. Note - this is quite a long section and adds to overall length of this Chapter - options are to incorporate it with Chapter 5 on the project description as it is part of project design, or maybe introduce here but have a separate chapter - like cumulative effects??)4.26 The purpose of mitigation is to avoid, reduce and where possible remedy or offset, any significant negative (adverse) effects on the environment arising from the proposed development and to enhance positive (beneficial) effects. Mitigation is thus not solely concerned with ‘damage limitation’ but may also consider measures that could compensate for unavoidable residual effects. If good environmental planning and design principles are applied, with a flexible approach to design, a high degree of mitigation can be built into the scheme from the outset, which can thereby reduce the extent or scale of adverse effects.

4.27 Mitigation measures may be considered under fall into two categories:-

• primary measures which intrinsically comprise part of the development design through an iterative process; and

• secondary measures designed to specifically address the remaining (residual) negative (adverse) effects of the final development proposals.

4.28 Mitigation measures are generally more effective if they are designed as an integral part of an iterative process of project planning and design. Mitigation is thus used as a design approach that is, where possible, implemented from project inception, when alternative designs or site options are being considered. In such circumstances it can be used to adapt and modify the development to take account of constraints and opportunities, and achieve the optimum environmental fit as part of an environmentally integrated design. Primary mitigation measures that form integrated mainstream components of the project design, are included in the project description. This should focus on factual explanation of the basic design elements, such as: siting, access, layout, buildings, structures, ground modelling and planting, in so far as they affect landscape and visual resources. The design philosophy can also describe the benefits to the design of alternative solutions, introduced to reduce potential negative effects, and indicate how these have been addressed. Secondary measures designed specifically for mitigation of the negative effects of the final development are considered in the assessment of landscape and visual effects. They also meet any formal requirement to identify measures for the avoidance, or reduction of negative effects. (This seems to relate to the point made in Chapter 2 based on IEMA report about the extent to which mitigation as part of design is reported)

4.29 Landscape proposals which are most likely to be a long term success are those which meet the environmental objectives and any technical, locational or financial development constraints. It is also important to demonstrate that long term control and management is secured, including “off-site” measures such as habitat restoration or planting, proposed on land outside the developer’s control, to mitigate a localised negative change in visual amenity. The aim is to effect achieve an overall benefit to landscape character, condition and value, while offsetting any negative environmental effects. (Consultees have asked for more on securing the implementation of the mitigation measures)

Mitigation Sstrategies to address likely negative (adverse) effects

4.30 The ideal strategy for each identifiable negative effect is one of avoidance. If this is not possible, alternative strategies of reduction, remediation and compensation may each be explored. If the consideration of mitigation measures for negative landscape or visual effects is left to the later stages of scheme design, this can result in increased mitigation costs, because early opportunities for avoidance of negative effects are missed. Thus remediation and compensation of residual negative effects are generally less cost effective than avoidance. Some of the main issues associated with the different mitigation strategies are outlined below.

Avoidance

4.31 Avoidance of negative landscape and visual effects can be achieved through careful siting, planning and design. For almost every major development, time, costs and public concern can be reduced if serious environmental constraints can be identified and avoided during the development of the planning and design of the scheme. This may be achieved in the selection of a site that can more readily accommodate the proposed development or through innovative design.

Reduction

4.32 Where negative effects cannot be avoided, the reduction of any remaining conflict with the landscape and other environmental constraints requires detailed consideration of site

characteristics. Setting a development into the ground can often help it to be integrated into the landscape. New landforms and planting, as part of mitigation measures, can increase the ability of the landscape to accommodate development, provided always that they are in keeping with the character of the area and are appropriate to the specific circumstances. However, poorly designed, new landscape features can give rise to negative landscape or visual effects.

Remediation

4.33 Mitigation measures that rely solely on "add-on" or "cosmetic" landscape measures, such as screen planting, to remedy the negative effects of an otherwise fixed scheme design, are likely to be the least successful. Nevertheless, the sympathetic treatment of external areas should help the integration of a new development with the surrounding landscape. Remediation should be seen as part of the overall process of avoiding and reducing adverse impacts.

Compensation

4.34 Where a negative effect cannot be mitigated to an acceptable degree other compensatory measures or related environmental improvements may offset, or compensate for, unavoidable residual effects. For compensation to be effective, a reliable assessment is needed of the nature, value and extent of the resource that would be lost, so that like can be replaced with like or, where this is not possible, measures of equivalent value are provided. However, it is questionable whether true compensation is ever possible, as for example, a new area of woodland may eventually - over several decades- compensate for the loss of an existing mature woodland in purely visual terms, but may never compensate for the loss of established habitat or amenity value. In general, compensation should be regarded as a last resort. Where habitat creation is attempted, expert advice should always be sought. (Perhaps move to Chapter 6)

Increasingly compensation may be offered or sought by local communities or local authorities as an "appeasement" for unavoidable negative effects due to the scale or character of a new development. Such measures may include offsite planting carried out in the gardens of affected properties to screen negative views of a development, the provision of new local amenity areas or parks, or the creation or provision of a work of art as part of or separate from the development. These measures need not be associated with issues of “planning gain”. (Do we still want to include this - it seems a bit inconclusive as currently worded)

Enhancement

The landscape and visual impact assessment may identify measures to manage necessary change (arising from the development), while maintaining and where possible, enhancing the quality of the environment for local people and visitors. (Refer to Appendix 2 PPG 7 p.3.1) Can we omit this - if specific to a defunct PPG)

4.35 Enhancement, although often linked to mitigation, is a separate issue, which explores the opportunities and appropriateness for a development project to contribute positively to the landscape of the development site and its wider setting. Enhancement proposals are based on a sound initial assessment of landscape character, quality and trends for change in which the following questions may be addressed: Can the development help restore or reconstruct local landscape character and local distinctiveness?

Can it assist in meeting Regulatory Authority landscape management objectives for the area? Can it help solve specific issues such as derelict land reclamation?

Enhancement may take many forms, including improved land management, or restoration of historic landscapes, habitats and other valued features; enrichment of denuded agricultural landscapes; measures to conserve and improve the attractiveness of town centres; and creation of new landscape, habitat and recreational areas. Through such measures environmental enhancement can make a very real contribution to sustainable development and the overall quality of the environment. (Suggest move all this to Chapter 6 as it is specific to landscape effects)

Principles of goodGuidelines for mitigation

4.36 The application of the following good practice principles canshould increase the effectiveness of the mitigation measures in that:

All negative (adverse) landscape and visual effects that are likely to occur throughout the project life cycle, including construction, operational, decommissioning and restoration, should be considered for mitigation, although the statutory requirement is limited to significant effects (this seems important - perhaps it should have been introduced earlier?).

Consultation with local community and special interest groups on the proposed mitigation measures is important and can also be helpful in identifying local needs and preferences

Landscape mitigation measures should be designed to suit the existing landscape character and needs of the locality, respecting and building upon local landscape distinctiveness and helping to address any relevant existing issues in the landscape.

It must be recognised that many mitigation measures, especially planting, are not immediately effective. Advance planting can help to reduce the time between the development commencing and the planting becoming established. Where planting is intended to provide a visual screen for the development it may also be appropriate to assess residual effects for different periods of time, such as day of opening, year 5 and year 15.

The developer should demonstrate a commitment to the implementation of mitigation measures to an agreed programme and budget. Responsibility for the implementation of all the mitigation measures (normally the developer) should be clearly defined.

The proposed mitigation measures should address specific issues, and performance standards identified for the establishment, management, maintenance and monitoring of new landscape features describing exactly what is required for mitigation to be effective. This could be achieved through a method statement, which could also incorporate contingency plans, in the event that mitigation measures prove to be unsuccessful.

A programme of monitoring, appropriate to the development, may be agreed with the Regulatory Authority in order that compliance and effectiveness can be readily monitored and evaluated.(Is everyone happy with these principles which are at the moment unchanged - or we want to re-work the whole section on mitigation, maybe located in Chapter5??)******

Evaluation of the effects

4.37 The EU Directive and UK country regulations refer to projects "likely to have significant effects on the environment". Much has been written about the interpretation of 'significant' both generally in EIA and specifically in LVIA. The emphasis on significance means that identifying and describing the effects of a project is not enough in itself. The effects must also be evaluated in a way that allows a final judgement to be made about their significance. The most significant effects are the ones most likely to influence the final decision by the competent authority or to be the focus of attention in any subsequent appeals and enquiries.

4.38 Judgement about the relative significance of effects plays a part in both the screening and scoping stages of an EIA, as outlined above, but is most important when evaluating the predicted impacts. Significance is not absolute and is based on value judgements. It is vital that the basis of such judgements is understandable and transparent so that the underlying assumptions and contributing judgements can be examined by others. All types of effects must be evaluated, whether they are characterised as direct or indirect, positive/beneficial or negative/detrimental. or cumulative. Judging significance depends on consideration of a number of criteria2 which include:

The importance or value attached to the receptor affected and the level at which it is valued (whether international, national, regional or local);

The sensitivity of the receptor to the type of change or development proposed;

The magnitude or size of the effect;

The geographical extent of the area over which the effect will be felt;

The duration of the effect;

The reversibility of the effect.

4.39 All of these criteria are important and a comprehensive assessment of significance should ideally consider them all. Terminology is important to understanding and clear, consistent use of words is desirable. In Chapters 6 and 7 the meanings of word such as value or importance, sensitivity and magnitude are discussed as they relate to landscape effects and to visual effects. Definitions are also included in the glossary in Annex XX. The use of the words sensitive or sensitivity requires particularly careful consideration since it is used in different ways in EIA legislation and guidance. They are used in the EIA Directives and Regulations in two main ways ways, both defined with reference to screening projects for significant effects which may suggest that EIA is required, and referring to:

‘Sensitive areas’, which should be considered in the first stages of the screening process. The areas listed are deemed to be sensitive because their value or importance is recognised by some form of international or national (and sometimes local) designation;

2 Based on list in Department for Communities and Local Government (2006) Environmental Impact Assessment: A guide to good practice and procedures. A consultation paper. Paragraph 116, Page 30.

‘Environmental sensitivities’ of areas likely to be affected by development, which is one of the criteria for case by case screening. The regulations state that such sensitivities must be considered with particular regard to;

- existing land use;- relative abundance, quality and regenerative capacity of natural resources in- the area;- absorption capacity of the natural environment.

4.40 Since screening is concerned with identifying potentially significant effects, these meanings of sensitivity have also been used to judge the significance of predicted impacts in the full EIA process. They have sometimes been conflated into one criterion of sensitivity, meaning both value/importance and actual environmental sensitivity, including ability to absorb change. This has particular relevance to evaluating landscape effects, because the idea of landscape sensitivity has also come to be used in the second way in a more general landscape planning context. This is considered further in Chapter 6.

Who makes the judgements

4.41 Judgements of the landscape and visual effect against the individual criteria and in terms of their overall significance should be made by experienced landscape professionals. A single judgement by one person, however experienced, is likely to be less reliable than judgements agreed by a panel of experts so a team approach is likely to be beneficial, allowing individual judgements to be compared. The opinions of statutory consultees, interested organisations and people and communities who may be affected can also contribute to the judgements that are made.

Presenting the evaluation

4.42 In presenting the significance of effects in LVIA the aim should be to achieve clarity and transparency. This should help to provide information in a way that will help decision-makers, who are not usually expert in the field, to reach an informed decision. The following principles should help in achieving this:

Narrative text describing the landscape and visual effects and the judgements made about their significance is, if well-written, likely to be most helpful to non-experts in aiding understanding of the issues;

Criteria used to evaluate significance should be clearly defined and any steps which combine different criteria should be fully explained;

Tables and matrices should only be used to support and summarise narrative descriptive text, not to replace it;

Numerical scoring or weighting of criteria is generally to be avoided, or at least treated cautiously, since it can suggest a spurious level of precision in the judgements and encourage inappropriate mathematical combining of scores;

Verbal scales with three to six categories are preferred as the means of summarising judgements for each of the contributing criteria;

Two way matrices or tables can be useful if judgements about overall significance are based on only two criteria. If there are more than two the judgements are best summarised in a table in which each predicted effect has a profile of judgements across the range of criteria;

Combining judgements on individual criteria to reach an overall judgement of significance should be done as consistently as possible and in a way which is transparent.

4.43 The final overall judgement of the significance of the predicted landscape and visual effects is usually summarised in a series of categories of significance. These vary considerably from project to project but they should be appropriate to the nature, size and location of the proposed development and should be consistent as far as possible across the different topic areas in the EIA. The categories are usually on a verbal scale with between three and six points ranging from minor to severe or substantial impacts. The words used in each category vary but usually include variations on minor, moderate and substantial, as illustrated by Figure 4.XX, which draws on examples from LVIAs (These are the examples from Appendix 6 of the current guidelines but numbers do not coincide).

Figure 4.XX Categories of Significance used in LVIAs

Example 1 Negligible Very Low Medium-Low

Medium Medium-High

High Very High

Example 2 Slight Moderate SubstantialExample 3 Negligible Minor Moderate MajorExample 4 Minor Moderate Major Severe

4.44 To reflect the most recent guidance from Government3 it is suggested that LVIAs should standardise around the following categories of significance for landscape and visual effects, which are discussed further in Chapters 6 and 7:

Negligible Minor Moderate Major Extreme (or Severe)

(could make this into a full table with descriptors as in CLG but tailored to landscape and visual??)

4.45 It is good practice for any tabular summary of significance to be accompanied by a final statement summarising the most significant effects that are likely to influence the outcome. An example is provided in Box XX.

Box XX: Example of a written summary of significant landscape and visual effects

“In summary therefore we consider that the operation of the funicular would result in effects of major significance on the landscape of Cairngorm. Although new development would provide an opportunity to rationalise existing structures, the new buildings would be larger and, together with the funicular track and moving carriages would be highly visible from some distance. The visual intrusion of the enlarged ‘Ptarmigan’ building on the skyline in particular is of major significance and national policy importance. On the whole the landscape and visual effects of the funicular and associated buildings are judged to affect the overall quality and visual amenity of the area negatively. This is also of national policy importance.”

3 CLG, as previous footnote, from Box on Page 40.

Source: Environmental Statement for Cairngorm Funicular. Land Use Consultants. 19?? (Note - I happen to have this one to hand but it is not very recent and there are probably better examples.

Ch 5 The development to be assessed: what do you need to know? The development process from inception to removal Description of the development relative to LVIA Masterplanning and the building-in of mitigation to the development proposal Summary/checklist

Ch 6 Landscape Impact Assessment (includes townscape and seascape) Baseline

- Scope (consultations)- Static (point in time) or evolving

Significance Mitigation

-Testing effectiveness and validity Summary/checklist

Ch 7 Visual Impact Assessment Baseline

- Scope (consultations)- Static (point in time) or evolving

Significance Mitigation

-Testing effectiveness and validity Summary/checklist

Ch 8 Cumulative Impact Assessment Baseline

- Scope (consultations)- Static (point in time) or evolving

Significance Mitigation

-Testing effectiveness and validity Summary/checklist

Ch 9 Visual representation/illustration Maps, sketches and 2D and 3D diagrams Computer modelling, visualisations and photomontages Role of GIS References to other guidance

Appendices, glossary, index, bibliography etc

References

ELCScottish Landscape Forum (2007) Scotland’s Living Landscapes - Places for People. Report of the Scottish Landscape Forum to Scottish Ministers. Available at:http://www.snh.org.uk/pdfs/strategy/landscapes/Report%20to%20Ministers%20-%20March%202007-2.pdf

Natural England (2010). All Landscapes Matter - A Position Statement. Natural England, Peterborough.