11 Landscape & Visual IMPACT Assessment

This section presents the Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) from the construction and operation of the proposed LNG terminal at Black Point, adjacent to the existing Black Point Power Station.

11.1 Assessment Methodology

The main components of the LVIA are as follows:

· Description of the project;

· Review of planning and development control framework;

· Baseline study of landscape resources;

· Landscape impact assessment during construction and operation;

· Visual impact assessment during construction and operation;

· Recommendations for landscape and visual mitigation measures for both construction and operation stage;

· Assessment of night lighting and glare;

· Baseline study of landscape character;

· Landscape character impact assessment during construction and operation, and;

· Assessment of residual impact and conclusion on the acceptability of the Project.

11.2 Introduction and Project Description

The background to the project and the general description of the LNG terminal at Black Point is presented in Section 3.

The following description of the major visual components of the LNG terminal and supporting infrastructure is based on the preliminary design and will be subject to refinement at the detailed engineering design stage. The preliminary layout plan, which shows the key visual features of the proposal, is illustrated in Figure 11.1.

It must be noted that the layout presented in Figure 11.1 has been selected from a number of alternative site layouts in view of its minimisation of landscape and visual impacts to the Project area. The design, dimensions and location of the LNG terminal’s structures indicated in the preliminary layout are thus the result of a preliminary assessment which has enabled the optimisation of the LNG terminal’s design/layout in relation to the Project area’s landscape character (i.e. morphology, exposure to sensitive receivers, etc.).

11.2.1 Site Area

The LNG Terminal will be constructed on approximately 21ha of land. This will be a combination of:

· 5 ha of level land which will require excavation.

· 16 ha of land which will be created by reclamation.

11.2.2 Construction Impacts.

Figure 11.2 shows the extent of construction areas. The approximate areas are as follows:

· Excavation / Site Levelling – 42,000 m²

· Reclamation – 163,000 m²

· Cut / Slope stabilisation – 34,000 m²

11.2.3 Land Excavation

Excavation of around 5 ha of land on the northeast corner and northwest edge will require levelling, grading and blasting. This area will be used primarily for locating two of the LNG storage tanks.

The initial phase of site formation, including site clearance and excavation of vegetation, topsoil and top fragmented layers of rock, will be excavated by machine. The remaining excavation will be conducted by drilling and blasting. The fragmented rock will be used for the reclamation of the seawall core, secondary and primary armour layers, road embankments and can also be crushed for use as road base, sub-base, selected fill and blinding for buildings. Spare rock will be disposed of off-site in accordance with relevant regulations.

Site formation will involve cutting into the side slopes of Black Point. The major visual components of this work will be the resultant cut-slopes up to a maximum height of 105m.

11.2.4 Land Reclamation

Reclamation of about 16 ha of land will be created off Black Point using excavated material, marine sand fill and if suitable and available, public filling materials. The works will involve construction of a vertical and sloping seawall. The reclamation area will be used primarily for the LNG terminal process area and other associated facilities, such as the lay down area and administration buildings. A future third LNG storage tank can be constructed on the reclaimed area.

A permanent seawall comprising sloping (approximately 680 m long) and vertical (approximately 430 m long) block-work will be constructed around the seaward boundary of the reclamation to protect the reclamation site from wave and tidal action.

11.2.5 LNG Jetty

The LNG jetty will comprise of one approximately 130 m long trestle leading to the jetty structures and unloading arms for LNG carriers to unload LNG. The trestle will be supported on piles and a concrete deck will be placed on top to serve as an access road to the jetty. The steel structure will also support pipe racks and associated facilities.

11.2.6 LNG Terminal Facilities

The LNG Terminal Facilities and expansion areas will include installation of the following:

(Note: all dimensions are approximate based on a preliminary design)

· Two cryogenic LNG Tanks with space for a third tank for future expansion, nominal size of 90m diameter by 49m high to the top of the dome and capacity each of 180,000 cubic metres. Alternative tank sizes may be considered by CAPCO, however the capacity of the tanks will be similar. The potential size of these tanks could be approximately 64m high with a smaller diameter. In order to assess the worst case scenario, a total tank height of 70m PD (64m tank + 6m) is shown in the photomontages.

· Process Area

· Low Pressure and High Pressure pumping systems

· Vaporization (Re-gasification) Area including 6 sea water vaporizers

· Vents - the low pressure vent is 50m in height and the high pressure vent is 60m in height.

· Maintenance Workshop (40m x 20m x 15m high)

· Administration Building (50m x 20m x 4m high)

· Guard House (10m x 5m x 4m high)

· Utility Area (40m x 20m x 4m high)

· Control Room (30m x 25m x 4m high)

· Compressor Shelter (20m x 20m x 8m)

· Unloading arms

· Jetty control pulpit on jetty head (10m x 5m x 4m)

The major visual component will be the proposed LNG Tanks. Separate buildings will be required for the Process Area, Maintenance Workshop, Administration Building, Guard House, Utility Area, and Control Room. While these buildings will be smaller visual components they will contribute to the overall industrial appearance of the site. Emergency Vehicle Access (EVA) will be within the constructed area and no additional EVA access is to be created.

11.2.7 LNG Carrier

LNG can be transported to the receiving terminal in carriers of differing sizes. An LNG carrier of 125,000 cubic metres is approximately 285m LOA, 43m beam and a draft of 11.3m. A class of LNG carriers of up to 215,000 cubic metres may also be considered by CAPCO and an LNG carrier of such volume would be 315m LOA, 50m beam and 12m draft.

The transit of the LNG carrier to the Black Point receiving terminal within HKSAR waters, will be via the pilot pickup point to the South of Lamma Island close to the boundary of HKSAR waters. When secured alongside at the jetty, unloading arms will be connected to the carrier.

The discharge of LNG from the carrier takes approximately 18 hours. It will also take approximately 3 hours is required for mooring, cool down, connecting the unloading arms, and cargo measurement. In addition approximately 3 hours for cargo measurement, arm purging, disconnecting arms, and unmooring. It is envisaged, based on the terminal throughput, that one LNG carrier will berth at the terminal every five to eight days.

In view of this frequency, the Visual Impact Assessment and associated photomontages in Section 11.17 include the carrier moored alongside the LNG jetty.

11.2.8 Construction program

The construction program is outlined in Part 3, Section 3 of this EIA.

The landscape and visual mitigation works are to be carried alongside the construction of the terminal where technically feasible.

11.3 Legislation Requirement and Evaluation Criteria

The methodology of the LVIA is based on Annexes 10 and 18 in the Hong Kong SAR Government's Technical Memorandum on the Environmental Impact Assessment Process (EIAO-TM) under the EIA Ordinance (Cap.499, S16), entitled "Criteria for Evaluating Visual and Landscape Impact" and "Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment", respectively and the EIAO Guidance Note No. 8/2002 “Preparation of Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment Under the Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance.”

The landscape assessment considers the impact of the proposed development on the existing landscape and particularly on the landscape character units within 500m of the development site.

The visual assessment analyses the impact of the proposed development on the existing views and the visual amenity, particularly from the Visually Sensitive Receivers (VSR) within the viewshed. In order to illustrate the visual impacts of the proposed LNG Terminal, photomontages prepared from selected viewpoints compare the existing conditions with the view after construction. The residual impacts are evaluated qualitatively, in accordance with the requirements of Annex 10 of the EIAO-TM.

11.3.1 Planning Issues

There are currently no Outline Zoning Plans (OZP’s) covering the proposed Black Point site (see Figure 11.3). Therefore, the LVIA will be assessed against the baseline conditions of the area.

11.4 LANDSCAPE Assessment

In accordance with Annex 18 of the EIAO-TM, the landscape impact assessment will cover the following:

· Describe the baseline landscape. This section identifies and describes the landscape resources within 500m of the development site. The existing landscape resources can be based on both topography and vegetation. This section will also describe edges as different Landscape Resources (LR’s).

· Map the distribution of the LR’s at Black Point. This section will map both the distribution of the LR’s at present.

· A qualitative and quantitative assessment methodology. This is based on assessing thresholds that can determine the magnitude of change and sensitivity to change of a particular LR.

· Analyse the landscape impact during construction and operation. This section analyses the extent to which these LR’s are affected by the proposal, using both quantitative and qualitative assessments.

· Discuss mitigation measures. This section examines landscape measures that will contribute to reducing any landscape impacts and that will enhance the landscape associated with the development. This may include planting, new landscaped areas and re-vegetation. The residual landscape impacts are also analysed. Mitigation measures during construction and operation will be discussed, at day 1 of mitigation and at year 10 of mitigation. An analysis of the effectiveness of these mitigation measures is provided.

· Provide Conclusions on the impacts of the project. These are discussed along with the Visual Impact and Landscape Character Impacts in Section 11.22.

11.5 Baseline Landscape Description

As specified by the brief, the area for the Landscape Impact Assessment covers the area within 500 metres of the proposed development. The landscape baseline study examines the potential impacts on the site and surrounding areas in terms of both the landscape resources and the landscape character areas.

The landscape character areas and resources of the study area have been categorized according to the presence of common elements. These include factors such as:

· Topography;

· Vegetation type (both species and age);

· Built forms;

· Evidence on human modifications;

· Land use (past and present); and

· Edges.

11.6 Broad Brush Tree Survey

As outlined in the EIAO Guidance Note No. 8/2002 “Preparation of Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment Under the Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance.” A broad-brush tree survey has been carried out.

A total of 10 tree groups were recorded within the proposed Project Area. The tree species were dominated by native tree species such as Ficus superba, Ficus microcarpus, Litsea glutinosa and Microcos paniculata.

None of the trees recorded in the proposed Project Area are rare, protected by law or of high amenity value. Most of the trees have reached maturity and are scattered along the northern coastline of the headland with an average of 3 individuals within a group. Most of them are poor in form and health condition due to overcrowding of the trees and the limited growth space at the verge of the rocky shore. All of the trees are between 2 and 4 metres in height, whilst crown spread is on average 2.5 metres. The understorey was densely occupied by native shrubs and vines including Sapium discolor, Bridelia tomentosa, Cratoxylum cochinchinense and Taxillus chinensis.

The major tree groups are identified in figure 11.11

11.6.1 Landscape Resources

Seven Landscape Resources (LR’s) have been identified as the following:

LR1 Plantation;

LR2 Shrubland;

LR3 Shrubby Grassland;

LR4 Stream/Channel;

LR5 Developed Area;

LR6 Rocky Shoreline; and,

LR7 Power Station Edge

An understanding of the sensitivity to change of the LR’s is important when analysing the overall landscape impact of the project upon the LR’s.

Factors affecting the sensitivity of change for evaluation of landscape are:

· Quality of Landscape Resources;

· Importance and rarity of special landscape elements;

· Ability of the landscape to accommodate change;

· Significance of the change in the local and regional context; and

· Maturity of the landscape.

The degree of sensitivity of the LR’s is classified as follows:

· High –important components or landscape of particularly distinctive character susceptible to small changes;

· Medium –a landscape of moderately valued characteristics reasonably tolerant to change;

· Low –a relatively unimportant landscape which is able to accommodate extensive change.

The following section describes each of the landscape resources.

11.6.2 Plantation (LR 1).

The Plantation is dominated by Acacia confusa, Melaleuca leucadendron, Lophostemon conferta and Cassia surratensis. The plants are generally less than 5 years old and no rare or protected species were found. The plantation also includes an area of orchard that contains mainly Dimocarpus longan and Litchi chinensis.

Figure 11.4 Plantation (LR 1)

Plantation accounts for 4.3 ha of the study area. It is an immature landscape that was the result of human activity. Plantation is considered to have a medium sensitivity to change.

11.6.3 Shrubland (LR 2)

The Shrubland area is dominated by native species including Celtis sinensis, Aporusa dioica, Cassytha filiformis, Gordonia axillaries, Litsea rotundifolia, Sterculia lanceolata and Caesalpinia vernalis. The canopy height is generally 2-3 metres tall.

Figure 11.5 Shrubland (LR 2)

This LR is one of the most commonly occurring LR in the study area and is relatively immature. This area accounts for 46.6 ha of the study area. Shrubland is considered to have a medium sensitivity to change.

11.6.4 Shrubby Grassland (LR 3).

This area consists of grassy areas with shrub species scattered mainly in the gully areas. The dominant species include Ischaemum aristatum, Digitaria sanquinalis and Rhynchelytrum repens. The general height of plants in this area is 0.5-1.5 metres.

Figure 11.6 Shrubby Grassland (LR 3)

This LR accounts for 18.2 ha of the study area. This landscape appears to be immature and the result of regeneration following past clearing. Shrubby Grassland is considered to have a low sensitivity to change.

11.6.5 Stream / Channel (LR 4)

This area consists of a natural stream and two sections of storm-water drainage channel. The drainage channels are man-made and are concrete lined.

Figure 11.7 Stream / Channel (LR 4)

The drainage channels are confined to the northern edge of the hill slope and the stream extends a small way up the hill slope and flows into the drainage channel. This LR covers approximately 0.7 ha of the study area. The natural areas of the stream channel have a medium sensitivity to change, with the man made channels having a low sensitivity to change.

11.6.6 Developed Area (LR 5)

This area is predominantly comprised of the Black Point Power Station. There is some vegetation planted within this area, mostly for landscaping purposes. The dominant species are: Melaleuca leucadendron, Schefflera octophylla, Duranta repens, Cassia surattensis and Bauhinia blackeana.

Figure 11.8 Developed area (LR 6)

This LR covers approximately 43.6 ha of the study area and has a low sensitivity to change.

11.6.7 Rocky Shoreline (LR 6)

This is the dominant natural edge around Black Point. It is generally comprised of rocks with some pockets of vegetation.

Figure 11.9 Rocky Shoreline (LR 6)

The Rocky Shoreline is an attractive feature to mariners and visitors to the headland. This LR occupies approximately 1.25 km of the ocean edge within the study area. The rocky shoreline has a high sensitivity to change.

11.6.8 Power Station Edge (LR 7)

Figure 11.10 Power Station Edge (LR 7)

This is the man made armour rock edge of the existing Black Point Power Station. It occupies 0.6 km of the ocean edge within the study area. The Power Station Edge has a low sensitivity to change.

11.7 The Distribution of LR’s

Figure 11.11 shows the present distribution of LR’s within the study area of Black Point. The most dominant unit is shrubland (41% of the study area), followed by the Developed Area which is approximately 38.4% of the study area.

Table 11.1 Summary Table of Baseline conditions

This Table shows the dominance of Shrubland and the Developed Area as the most common LR’s. The Rocky Shoreline and Power Station Edge are similar in length within the study area.

11.8 Landscape Resource Impacts

The two key factors that affect the evaluation of Landscape Resource impacts are the magnitude of change and the sensitivity of the Landscape Resources to that change The sensitivity to change for each of the LR’s has been described above and the factors affecting the magnitude of change are outlined below.

Factors affecting the magnitude of change for assessing landscape impacts are:

· Compatibility of the project with the surrounding landscape, i.e. how well does the proposed development fit with its surroundings. For example, a new housing development constructed in an area with other housing developments or built forms will have a higher compatibility.

· Scale of the development, ie; how big is the development relative to its surroundings. For example a 30 storey building constructed on Hong Kong harbour is considered ‘small scale’. However, the same development constructed in Sai Kung would be considered ‘large scale’

· Reversibility of change. This refers to how easily the changes on the landscape can be reversed. For the purposes of this assessment, we have assumed the terminal changes are ‘irreversible’.

The magnitude of change is classified as follows:

· Large – notable change in the landscape characteristics over an extensive area ranging to very intensive change over a more limited area;

· Intermediate – moderate changes to a local area;

· Small – changes to specific landscape components;

· Negligible – no substantial changes to the baseline condition.

The landscape impact is a product of the magnitude of change the Terminal will have and the sensitivity of the Landscape Resources to that change. Table 11.2 shows the significance threshold of the Landscape Resource impacts.

Table 11.2 Significance Threshold of Potential Landscape Resource Impact

Table 11.3 provides some definitions of the significance thresholds for Landscape Impacts.

Table 11.3 Adverse / Beneficial Impact of Landscape Impact

11.9 Unmitigated Landscape Impacts during Construction

Table 11.4 shows the potential impact of the proposed development on each of the LR’s and the potential overall impact based on the preceding Significance Threshold of Potential Landscape Impact Assessment Matrix.

This overall impact does not take into account the effects of remediation / mitigation works after construction. These will be discussed in Section 11.10

Table 11.4 Unmitigated Landscape Impact Significance Threshold Matrix

The proposed development will impact on approximately 6 ha of the land area and 0.68 km of the ocean edges. Figure 11.12 shows the unmitigated potential impacts on the Landscape Resources of Black Point.

11.9.1 Summary of Landscape Impacts

Significant Landscape Impacts

The only potentially high landscape impact is on the Rocky Shoreline. The utilization of natural rocks in the artificial walls will partly compensate, however this is an impact of the development that will not be able to be fully mitigated.

Moderate-Significant Impacts

Approximately 11% of the Shrubland area will be impacted. This impact would be mitigated by remediation works that encouraged the natural regeneration of native plant species commonly found within this LR.

Moderate landscape impacts

There will also be a moderate impact on the Stream/Channel LR’s, however this impact will be on the more modified concrete areas with the more natural areas being unchanged.

Slight/Moderate Impacts

There will be a slight/moderate impact on the Power Station Edge. This area is of low sensitivity and the new terminal will create a new edge of similar appearance.

Slight Impacts

There will be a slight impact on the Developed Area, but the new terminal will create additional areas to replace those affected.

Negligible Impacts

There will be negligible impacts on the Plantation and Shrubby Grassland areas.

11.9.2 Landscape Impacts during operation

It is anticipated that all of the impacts on the Landscape Resources of Black Point will be created during the construction phase, therefore no impacts on the Landscape Resources are expected during operation.

11.10 Landscape Mitigation

The final detailed Landscape Mitigation Measures will be the subject of a Landscape Master Plan that will be submitted for approval to the relevant Authority prior to construction.

As mentioned in Section 11.2, the preliminary layout assessed in this EIA Report has been selected from a number of alternative site layouts in virtue of its minimisation of landscape and visual impacts. The selection of the preferred preliminary layout was determined by a preliminary landscape and visual impact assessment of the alternative layouts.

Due to the operational requirements of the terminal, the opportunities for the establishment of vegetation are small. A compact layout has been adopted to allow for the operations of the terminal, meanwhile also reducing the size of the reclamation as far as possible. Landscape berms along the ocean edge of the terminal cannot be created as this would require additional reclamation which is to be avoided, and landscape elements along this edge would potentially interfere with Emergency Vehicle Access to the site, which is mostly via marine traffic.

The landscape mitigation measures proposed will be installed progressively throughout the construction of the LNG terminal where technically safe and practical. This will assist in enhancing the effectiveness of the mitigation measures from the first day of operation.

The mitigation measures discussed below are proposed to reduce the potential impacts on the existing Landscape Resources and provide a potential enhancement of the existing landscape quality. Figures 11.13 and 11.14 show the approximate locations of the following mitigation measures.

LMM 1 – Cultivation of areas compacted during construction. Areas compacted during the construction phase that are not required during the operations phase, are to be cultivated to a depth of up to 300mm in accordance with the future Landscape Specification.

LMM 2 – Soil stabilisation and embankment planting. During the design process a soil stabilisation and embankment planting strategy will be developed to ensure that all land affected by slope excavation can be replanted. All soil preparation and the selection and provision of suitable growing medium will be completed in accordance with the relevant best practice guidelines.

LMM 3 – Tree and shrub planting. Planting of trees and shrubs is to be carried out in accordance with the Landscape Details and the relevant best practice guidelines. Plant densities will be provided in future detailed design documents and will be selected so as to achieve a finished landscape that matches the surrounding, undisturbed, equivalent landscape types.

Note: LMM2 and LMM3 are to provide a minimum compensatory planting area of 0.74ha of Shrubland.

LMM4 – Utilising natural rock for reclamation. The reclamation areas shall utilise natural rocks for the engineered sea-walls.

LMM5 – Cut Stabilisation. Areas of cut to be stabilised for operational requirements. Materials and finishes of stabilisation to be selected to complement the surrounding landscape where technically feasible. This includes the addition of pigments and aggregates in the finished slope that complement the existing geology of the area.

LMM6 – Bench Plantings. Cut Slopes to have benches created to allow for plantings. Plantings will include Shrubs and climbers to minimise the visual impact of the slope and mitigate impact on vegetation.

LMM7 – Early Planting Works. Where technically feasible, new plantings are to be installed during the construction works. Due to the unknown nature of the construction timing, this mitigation is not shown on Figure 11.13.

LMM8 – Site hoardings to be compatible with the surrounding environment. Where possible site hoardings to be coloured to complement the surrounding areas. Colours such as green and light brown are recommended. As the proposed locations are not yet known this mitigation measure is not shown on Figure 11.13

Table 11.5 Mitigated Landscape Impacts

No mitigation measures are proposed for LR’s 1 and 3 as there will be no impact on these resources. No mitigation measures are proposed for LR’s 5 and 7 as these resources will be replaced with similar resources as a result of the new Terminal.

11.10.1 Effectiveness of Landscape Resource Mitigation Measures

Due to the operational requirements of the LNG terminal, some landscape impacts cannot be mitigated. The trees that are to be removed will be compensated by new plantings in other parts of the headland. This will help restore some of the more degraded areas to a more natural landscape.

11.11 Residual Landscape Impacts

The residual landscape impacts are those that will exist after all mitigation measures have been implemented. Figure 11.15 shows the residual landscape impacts and they are quantified in Table 11.6

Table 11.6 Residual Landscape Impacts

11.11.1 Residual Impact Summary

There will be a residual impact of approximately 4.2 ha on the Shrubland area.

The impact on the Rocky Shoreline will be partially mitigated by the use of natural rocks in the reclamation construction. The primary Emergency Access to the new Terminal is from the ocean, therefore landscape measures such as bunds, planters and associated vegetation cannot be employed along the new ocean edge.

The residual impacts on the Stream/Channel, Developed Area, and the Powers Station Edge will be not be mitigated due to the construction of the new terminal. As the Terminal will also be a Developed Area, the impacts on these LR’s will be negligible.

11.11.2 Landscape Impact Conclusion

The project will affect the Landscape Resources principally as a result of the excavation required for the terminal. However, from the assessment it is concluded that the Landscape Impacts will be acceptable with the implementation of the mitigation measures.

11.11.3 Mitigation Installation and Maintenance Responsibilities

The project proponent will be ultimately responsible for the installation and maintenance of the mitigation measures.

A specialist Landscape Sub-Contractor should be employed by the Contractor(s) for the implementation of landscape construction works and subsequent maintenance operations during a 24 month establishment period.

11.12 VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

In undertaking the visual assessment, the following tasks were undertaken:

1. Define the viewshed that would be potentially impacted and map the areas of visual impact. This section describes the viewshed of the LNG Terminal which is based on both the planning guidelines and the parameters of human vision. This section then utilises Geographical Information System (GIS) software to determine areas that can potentially see the LNG Terminal. This GIS analysis is based solely on topography and does not take into account the screening potential of vegetation, which further reduces the actual viewshed. GIS analysis also maps the visibility of the LNG Terminal from roads and houses.

2. Discuss atmospheric conditions. This section discusses the mitigating effects of weather, particularly sea haze and rainfall.

3. Identify and assess indicative viewpoints as a means of assessing the visual impact on the broader landscape. This section describes a number of key Visually Sensitive Receiver (VSR) viewpoints around the LNG terminal which have been selected as indicative of the range of views from accessible locations within the viewshed. Several viewpoints will also have photomontages or visual simulations prepared which show the existing landscape and the landscape with the proposed LNG Terminal site. The VSRs will be discussed to assess the visual compatibility and severity of any obstructions or visual impacts.

4. Discuss visual mitigation measures. This section examines measures incorporated into the design that will reduce potential visual impacts such as, positioning of structures, planting of vegetation and recommendations for material and finishes. These measures will also help improve the overall amenity of the development. Residual impacts will also be discussed.

5. Assess night lighting and glare impacts. This section examines the potential glare and night lighting impacts associated with the proposal.

11.12.1 Viewshed Determination & Areas Of Potential Visual Impact

The baseline for a visual assessment is an understanding of the existing visual qualities within the region that can be visually affected by a proposed development. This area is referred to as the “viewshed” or sometimes the zone of visual influence (ZVI), or the “visual envelope” All terms refer to the same thing, howeverthis report will use the term “viewshed”.

Defining an appropriate viewshed is the starting point to understand the visual impacts of a development as the area of the viewshed will vary depending on the nature and scale of the proposed development. The larger a development the greater the viewshed as it may be visually apparent for a greater distance. Once the viewshed is established, locations can be identified within the viewshed that are either particularly sensitive or indicative of the visual impact for a number of locations. In some circumstances, viewpoints may be identified beyond the viewshed to recognise the visual impact on locations of particularly high sensitivity.

As the viewer moves further away from the LNG Terminal, the visual impact decreases until the LNG terminal is no longer visible. However, before the point of invisibility is reached, the LNG Terminal has reduced in scale such that it no longer has a significant visual impact on the landscape. In most landscapes, especially those which have some degree of human intervention, the limit of the viewshed is defined as that point at which the LNG Terminal would have an insignificant effect on the view.

11.12.2 Types of Viewshed

In recognising that the viewshed is not the limit of visibility, but rather the extent to which an LNG Terminal would have an insignificant visual impact on the landscape, then the extent of a viewshed differs in the context of different landscapes.

A viewshed in a man-modified landscape is different to a viewshed in a pristine landscape or landscapes where there are no apparent signs of human influence. This is because in landscapes that appear ‘natural’ or pristine, a man made element such as an LNG Terminal, can visually influence the landscape for as long as a viewer can discern that newly introduced element. A man made element in a pristine landscape irrevocably changes a pristine landscape from natural to man modified. Therefore, viewsheds in pristine areas are extended to the limit of human visibility.

However in man modified landscapes, in which there are many other existing built forms or modifications to the landscape, the viewshed extends to that distance at which the LNG Terminal become a minor element in the landscape to all but the most sensitive of viewers. The LNG Terminal may still be visible beyond this viewshed, however it is considered that beyond this viewshed the visual impact will be insignificant.

The viewshed then is that area that is most likely to be visually impacted and once again, it is stressed that particularly sensitive locations beyond the viewshed may still need to be reviewed.

11.12.3 Viewshed Determination

The visual impact of a development can be quantified by reference to the degree of influence on a person’s field of vision. The following diagrams illustrate the typical parameters of human vision and are based on anthropometric data (Human Dimension & Interior Space – A Source Book of Design Reference Standards, Julius Panero and Martin Zelnik, The Architectural Press Ltd. London, 1979). This data provides a basis for assessing and interpreting the impact of a development by comparing the extent to which the development would intrude into the central field of vision (both horizontally and vertically).

Horizontal cone of view

The central field of vision for most people covers an angle of between 50^O and 60^O. Within this angle, both eyes observe an object simultaneously. This creates a central field of greater magnitude than that possible by each eye separately. This central field of vision is termed the 'binocular field' and within this field images are sharp, depth perception occurs and colour discrimination is possible.

Text Box:
Figure 11.16 Horizontal Field of View These physical parameters are illustrated in Figure 11.16 opposite.

The visual impact of a development will vary according to the proportion in which a development impacts on the central field of vision. Developments, which take up less that 5% of the central binocular field, are usually insignificant in most landscapes (5% of 50^O = 2.5^O).

In assessing the visual impact of the proposed LNG Terminal it is assumed that the largest horizontal component is the entire terminal, which is approximately 400m wide.

Table 11.7 Visual Impact based on the Horizontal Field of View

Vertical Field of View

Text Box:
Figure 11.17 Vertical Field of View A similar analysis can be undertaken based upon the vertical line of sight for human vision. As can be seen in the Figure opposite the typical line of sight is considered horizontal or 0^O. A person’s natural or normal line of sight is normally a 10^O cone of view below the horizontal and, if sitting, approximately 15^O.

Objects, which take up 5% of this cone of view (5% of 10^O = 0.5^O) would only take up a small proportion of the vertical field of view, and are only visible when one focuses on them directly. Objects that take up such a small proportion of the vertical view cone are not dominant, nor do they create a significant change to the existing environment when such short objects are placed within a disturbed or man-modified landscape. They may however be more noticeable in a pristine environment.

The table below shows the relationship between impact and the proportion that the development occupies within the vertical line of sight.

Table 11.8 Extent of impact based on distance to tank

These calculations suggest distances at which the magnitude of visual impact of the LNG facility is reduced with distance. At distances greater than 6000m, a fully visible LNG storage tank would be an insignificant element within the landscape.

These calculations seem closer to the observed distances at which levels of impact seem to change. It is stressed that these ranges are a guide only.

An apparent discrepancy will occur when analysing horizontal and vertical parameters separately. Generally, the more conservative figures form the basis for the assessment. In this example it is proposed to extend the viewshed to 9,000m, although it could be argued that a lesser extent would also be valid.

For the proposed LNG Terminal it is proposed that the following distances are used for the Viewshed analysis.

Table 11.9 Viewshed and Degrees of Visual Influence

It must be noted that the areas that define the viewshed are a guide only. Simply because a viewer moves from 1260m from the Terminal to 1270m, this will not result in the impact moving from ‘Visually Evident’ to ‘Potentially Noticeable’. Similarly just because a viewpoint is within either of these zones does not indicate that a view within the viewshed will experience an impact. Other factors such as terrain, vegetation and human-made elements in the landscape can reduce or even remove visual impacts within the viewshed.

11.12.4 Areas of potential visual impact

A GIS analysis can determine those areas that can potentially be visually impacted by the development. Such analysis is based on topography only, and shows those areas that would be screened by intervening hills etc. It does not account intervening vegetation or buildings, nor does it take into account small variations in topography, such as road cuttings. Therefore it is quite a conservative assessment of those areas that may be potentially able to view the LNG Terminal and especially the storage tanks.

Figure 11.18 shows an analysis of those areas within a 9km viewshed that may be able to see any part of any of the proposed storage tanks.

The viewshed is divided into two zones. The zone of greatest potential visual impact are those areas that lie within 1260m of the LNG Terminal. Since the terminal is shielded by the Black Point Headland Hill, nearly all of this area (shown in green) is on the ocean side of the terminal.

Table 11.10 Analysis of the areas that lie within the viewshed where any part of the LNG tanks would be visible

This analysis shows that the main views to the entire LNG tank will be from the water. Land based viewing locations are only available within 3.33% of the 310km² viewshed.

A similar analysis showing those areas from which the entire LNG tank would be visible was conducted to identify those areas of greatest potential impact. This analysis showed far less impacts than in the preceding analysis since it precludes areas that may be able to see a proportion but not all of the LNG tank.

Figure 11.19 shows the viewshed where an entire tank is visible. Again, the viewshed is mostly restricted to the ocean areas.

Table 11.11 Analysis of the areas that lie within the viewshed where an entire tank of the LNG terminal would be visible

This analysis demonstrates that the majority of the area that may be potentially impacted lies on the ocean. Land based vantage points are very limited and only represent 3.5% of the total viewshed of 309km².

The next section of the visual analysis will select viewpoint locations on land that lie within those areas that can potentially view the proposed LNG terminal. Those areas are generally restricted to coastlines, where intervening topography cannot screen views, and along ridges in the higher areas that also have views towards Black Point. As there will also be some marine VSR’s affected, these are also assessed.

11.12.5 Atmospheric Factors Which Will Affect Visual Impact

Many climatic conditions result in changes to visibility. For example, sea haze, rainfall and other atmospheric conditions will alter the visibility of the LNG Terminal. The diminution of visual clarity bought about by atmospheric conditions increases with distance. As the much of the areas that can see the development are located on or across the sea, the impact of sea haze and other atmospheric conditions will reduce visibility.

Sea Haze

Sea haze is a climatic condition along coastlines that can reduce visibility even on days when the weather is fine. Wind which blows across the ocean can cause a sea haze, limiting views to the site and the proposed LNG Terminal from surrounding areas. Sea haze is unlikely to have much impact on the visibility of the LNG Terminal when viewed from close proximity. (i.e. less than 1.2km). When the same features are viewed from greater distances within the viewshed the effect of sea haze will greatly reduce visibility and any potential visual impact. This was illustrated in 2005 when ERM was first asked to assess Black Point. In the first six months of 2005 there were very few days of sufficiently clear visibility to undertake a photographic survey from vantage points around the site.

Rainfall

The effect that rainfall has on visibility can be measured in two ways. Firstly the event of falling rain reduces visibility as the water droplets obscure vision. This varies greatly depending on the heaviness of the precipitation, but even light rain obscures distant objects greatly.

Secondly, the event of rain, particularly sustained rain periods, reduces visitor numbers. Therefore, the visual impact is reduced on those days as less viewers are visiting the area and looking at the site.

Figure 11.20 Hong Kong Weather. Source: Hong Kong Observatory.

Figure 11.20 shows that during the wetter months, particularly from May through September, Hong Kong receives on average approximately 10 millimetres per day. Thus during these rain periods, visibility is reduced.

11.12.6 Assessment Scenarios

Whilst the above section 11.12.5 describes some of the climatic conditions that reduce the visibility of the LNG Terminal, the following assessment will be based on a worst case scenario that assumes perfectly clear viewing conditions. Mitigation measures will then be proposed reduce these impacts.

11.12.7 Baseline Visual Character

The area within the viewshed is of varying visual character and quality. The dominant features that define the visual character are:

The hill slopes of Castle Peak and the surrounding area. These slopes are characterised by a mix of vegetated areas and rocky outcrops;

The coastal edges which vary between the rocky shoreline to the sandy beaches further to the east;

The ocean areas;

The small villages areas such as Lung Kwu Tan, and;

The large industrial facilities such as Castle Peak Power Station, The Cement Plant and the existing Black Point Power Station.

These elements create a visual character that is appealing but has been heavily modified in certain areas.

11.13 VSR Assessment

There are a number of factors that must be considered when carrying out the visual impact assessment on the VSR’s.

VSR Sensitivity

The first set of criteria relate to the sensitivity of the VSR’s. They include:

· Value and quality of existing views;

· Availability and amenity of alternative views;

· Type and estimated number of receiver population;

· Duration of frequency of view; and

· Degree of visibility.

The views available to the identified VSRs are rated in accordance with their sensitivity to change using high, medium or low and are defined as follows:

· High –

i. The nature of the viewer groups expect a high degree of control over their immediate environment, (eg people residing in their homes); and

ii. The viewer groups are in proximity to the Project. This may include viewers aboard recreational marine vessels.

· Medium -

i. The nature of the viewer groups expect a medium degree of control over their immediate environment, (e.g. drivers and passengers in vehicles);

· Low –

i. The nature of the viewer groups do not expect a high degree of control over their immediate environment, (eg people at their place of employment or temporarily in attendance at the VSR location).

Magnitude of Change

This set of criteria is related to the specific details of the proposal and how it relates to the existing landscape and the visible magnitude of change it will cause.

The criteria to be assessed are:

· Compatibility of the project with the surrounding landscape;

· Scale of the development;

· Reversibility of change;

· Viewing distance;

· Potential blockage of view; and

· Duration of impact under construction and operation phases.

The magnitude of change to a view is rated as negligible, small, intermediate or large and are defined as follows:

· Large: major change in view.

· Intermediate: moderate change in view.

· Small: minor change in view.

· Negligible: no discernible change in view.

The degree of visual impact or significance threshold is rated in a similar fashion to the landscape impact, ie significant, moderate, slight and negligible. The impacts may be beneficial or adverse, however with this project, it is assumed that all visual impacts will be adverse.

Therefore, the visual impact is a product of the magnitude of change to the existing baseline conditions, the landscape context and the sensitivities of VSR’s. The significance threshold of visual impact is rated for the construction phase and for Day 1 and Year 10 of the operation phase as described in Table 11.18

11.13.1 Photomontage Preparation

The visual assessments are also partly based on photomontages, which show the view with and without the terminal.

Photographs that form the base of the photomontages are taken with a 70mm Nikon lens on a 35mm film single lens reflex camera. A 70mm lens has a picture angle of 34.34^Oand a horizontal angle of view of 28.84^O. (http://www.europepress.com/lenses/nikon_standard_zoom.htm). When two photographs taken with a 70mm lens are overlapped approximately 1/3, the resultant image has a picture angle of approximately 50^O, which is very similar to the central cone of view of human vision.

Figure 11.21 Two photographs overlapped 1/3 to create an image approximately the same as the central cone of view of human vision

As discussed above, the central field of human vision is approximately 50^O - 60^O. Two photographs taken with a 70mm lens with approximately 1/3 overlap best show this static view. A 50mm lens (picture angle 48.45^O, horizontal field of view 39.59^O) is often used for visual assessments as it is called a ‘normal lens’ because it produces roughly the same picture angle as the human eye (about 50°). However, the 70mm lens slightly increases the apparent size of objects in the middle and far distance and hence increases the apparent size of the terminal in the photomontages. For this reason this 1/3 overlap technique has been adopted for the photomontages preparation within this report.

11.14 Visual Impact Assessment from Visually Sensitive Receivers (VSR)

Figure 11.22 shows the indicative viewpoints from publicly accessible locations, which have been selected for analysis.

These viewpoints have been selected to represent the range of views from accessible locations. The selected viewpoints are within publicly accessible areas, which are:

· Public Areas (VSR1 and VSR6);

· Road Network (VSR3, 4 and 5); these include views seen by visitors and the local community when traversing though along roads; The proposed Shenzhen Western Corridor/Deep Bay link may potentially have glimpses of the development, however it is outside of the viewshed, therefore the visual impacts it assumed to be negligible.

· Ocean viewpoints (VSR 2); these include views seen by people on ferries and local boats;

· Villages; there are no views from villages . The proposed LNG Terminal will not be visible from the village areas of Lung Kwu Sheung Tan and Lung Kwu Tan as the topography of the area completely screens views. This is visible in Figures 11.18 and 11.19, where the seen area of the Terminal does not cover any of the village areas. Similarly, whilst the GIS anaylsis has shown that parts of Sheung Pak Nai may have glimpses of the development, site visits to the area have shown the terminal will not be visible.

11.15 Views from Public Areas

The two viewpoints below were selected to represent impacts on Visually Sensitive Receivers in public areas:

VSR 1 Lung Tsai Beach

VSR 6 Lung Kwu Chau

11.16 Views from Road Network

The local road network provides opportunities to view the LNG Terminal from publicly accessible locations. Indicative viewpoints have been selected from the surrounding road network and have generally been chosen at locations where views are uninterrupted by roadside vegetation and road cuttings etc. The anaylsed viewpoints are:

VSR 3 Above Black Point

VSR 4 Elevated view from Lung Mun Road

VSR 5 Lung Mun Road (Lower View)

11.17 Views from the Ocean

The ocean also provides opportunities for views of the proposed LNG Terminal. The GIS analysis has clearly shown that the greatest potential viewing locations are from the surrounding ocean, not from the land.

To simulate the potential impacts on ocean VSR’s a photomontage has been prepared from the eastern edge of the ferry lane. The analysed viewpoint is VSR 2, the Ferry Lane.

11.17.1 VSR1 – View from Lung Tsai Beach

Lung Tsai Beach is located approximately 2,940 m south east of the proposed terminal. This VSR is a public area.

Figure 11.23 VSR1 Lung Tsai Beach

Photomontage 1 on the following page shows that views from much of Lung Tsai beach are screened by Black Point Headland. This viewpoint was selected as it represents a worst-case scenario since from this angle a small part of the terminal (the vents) will be visible.

Table 11.12 Sensitivity / Quality of VSR

Table 11.12a Magnitude of Change

Table 11.12b Significance Threshold during Construction

Table 11.12c Significance Threshold during Operation

Given the long distance from this viewpoint and the high availability of other views, the visual impact is Slight-Moderate.

11.17.2 VSR2 – View from Ferry Lane

This viewpoint is taken from the ferry lane edge closest to the terminal. This viewpoint is 2010 metres to the north west of the site and is an example as a view from the ocean.

Figure 11.25 VSR2 Ferry Lane

Photomontage 2 on the following page shows that the LNG terminal will be visible, however due to the changing seascape and the presence of similar existing nearby facilities, its visibility will be reduced.

Table 11.13 Sensitivity / Quality of VSR

Table 11.13a Magnitude of Change

Table 11.13b Significance Threshold during Construction

Table 11.13c Significance Threshold during Operation

There will be a Moderate impact from users of the ferries.

11.17.3 VSR3 – View from Above Black Point

This viewpoint is from the end of the restricted access road above the existing Black Point Powers Station. This viewpoint is approximately 1,035m from the terminal.

Figure 11.27 VSR3 Above Black Point

Photomontage 3 on the following page shows that the view is dominated by the existing Power Station facilities rather than the proposed terminal. This VSR is a view from the Road Network. There are also very low visitor numbers to this location.

Table 11.14 Sensitivity / Quality of VSR

Table 11.14a Magnitude of Change

Table 11.14b Significance Threshold during Construction

Table 11.14c Significance Threshold during Operation

The proposed Terminal is sited within the view of the existing Black Point Power Plant Facility, therefore there will be a Slight visual impact.

11.17.4 VSR4- Elevated View from Public Road(Lung Mun Road)VSR4– Elevated View from Public Road (Lung Mun Road)

This VSR is from the Road Network. The viewpoint was selected as it is the closest view from the Lung Mun Road and it is approximately 1230 metres from the terminal.

Figure 11.29 VSR4 Elevated View from Lung Mun Road

Whilst a GIS analysis showed that the terminal would be visible from here, photomontage 4 on the following page shows that the surrounding vegetation screens the site so that only a small portion of the terminal is visible from this viewpoint.

Table 11.15 Sensitivity / Quality of VSR

Table 11.15a Magnitude of Change

Table 11.15b Significance Threshold during Construction

Table 11.15b Significance Threshold during Operation

Only a small portion of the Terminal will be visible from this viewpoint due to existing vegetation and therefore the visual impacts will be Slight.

11.17.5 VSR5 – View from Lung Mun Road

This VSR is also from the road network and was selected as the topography and break in vegetation may provide views towards the site. This viewpoint is 1555 metres south east of the site.

Figure 11.31 VSR5 Lung Mun Road

Photomontage 5 Vvegetation and the existing infrastructure (container storage facility) affect visibility to the site and therefore the terminal is not visible from this viewpoint.

Table 11.16 Sensitivity / Quality of VSR

Table 11.16a Magnitude of Change

Table 11.16b Significance Threshold during Construction

Table 11.16b Significance Threshold during Operation

The Terminal will not be visible from this viewpoint due to existing vegetation and therefore the visual impact will be negligible.

11.17.6 VSR6 – View from Lung Kwu Chau

Lung Kwu Chau is a remote island located 3650 m to the south west of the site. At this distance atmospheric affects are an important consideration.

Figure 11.33 VSR6 Lung Kwu Chau

Photomontage 6 on the following page shows that from Lung Kwu Chau, the proposed terminal will be visible on clear days.

Table 11.17 Sensitivity / Quality of VSR

Table 11.17a Magnitude of Change

Table 11.17b Significance Threshold during Construction

Table 11.17b Significance Threshold during Operation

There will be a Moderate-Significant impact from Lung Kwu Chau on days of clear visibility. However this impact will be reduced due to the low user numbers.

11.18 VISUAL MITIGATION MEASURES

The final detailed Visual Mitigation Measures will be the subject of a Landscape Master Plan that will be submitted for approval to the relevant Authority prior to construction.

For those VSR’s that may experience an impact, the following Visual Mitigation Measures (VMM’s) are proposed to reduce these impacts and provide a potential enhancement of visual quality.

VMM 1 Design of Structures

Where possible, building structures will utilise appropriate design to complement the surrounding landscape. Materials and finishes will be considered during detailed design.

VMM 2 Colours

Colours for the terminal will be used to complement the surrounding area to the extent possible. Colours such as shades of light grey, and light brown may be utilised to reduce the visibility of the terminal where technically feasible.

VMM 3 Plantings

In addition to the landscape mitigation plantings proposed earlier in this report, appropriate new plantings will be installed to help integrate the new structures into the surrounding landscape.

11.18.1 Alternative Site Layouts

Section 2 of this EIA discusses the layout changes to the Black Point Terminal that have been undertaken in order to provide a comparison and therefore reduce the visibility of the major visible elements.

11.18.2 Mitigated Visual Impacts

Table 11.18 predicts the potential mitigated visual impacts during construction and operation. It also predicts the mitigated visual impacts during construction, day 1 and year 10 of operation.

11.19 Summary of Visual Impacts

Of the 6 VSR’s assessed, there will be a Moderate-Significant impact on VSR6 Lung Kwu Chau, a moderate impact on VSR2 Ferry Lane, a slight-moderate impact on VSR 1 Lung Tsai Beach, slight impacts from VSR3 Above Black Point and VSR4 Elevated Section of Lung Mun Road and a negligible impact from Lung Mun Road.

11.20 Night Lighting and Glare

The above analysis examined the visual impacts of the proposal during daylight hours. While detailed lighting plans and specifications are not available at this preliminary design stage, the following lighting practices will be considered during the detailed design stage.

While detailed lighting plans and specifications are not available at this preliminary design stage, the following lighting practices should be considered during the detailed design stage:

· Security lighting of the site boundary. These will generally be spot lights mounted on the external fencing and will have the beams directed towards the ground.

· General access lighting. This will provide safe access and operational lighting conditions around the site. Baffles will be fitted where possible to reduce upward light spill.

· Emergency lighting. These lights will provide safe levels of illumination to facilitate evacuations or repairs in emergency situations. The use of these lights will be infrequent.

· Aviation lighting. It is anticipated that some lighting will be required at the tops of the storage tanks and vent stacks to provide aviation safety. These lights are typically flashing coloured lights. Whilst visible from large distances, they will not have a large contribution to the overall ambient light levels of the site.

11.20.1 Distances between Source lighting and VSR’s.

Due to its remote location and the location of Black Point Headland Hill acting as a natural visual barrier, the visibility of individual light fittings between the affected VSR’s and the terminal is expected to be low, with any aviation lighting on the tops of the tanks being the most visually prominent lights.

It should also be noted that some of the climatic conditions discussed in Section 11.12.5 also apply to light visibility and are expected to reduce night time visibility. These include rain events and sea haze. However, very occasionally, cloud cover can increase the visibility of night lighting in the form of reflected light. This tends to occur when a heavy cover of low cloud sits above the site and consequently reflects the light from beneath.

11.20.2 The Surrounding Ambient Light of the VSR

Night lighting from the source is more highly visible when one is observing in darkness. As the surrounding ambient light increases, the visibility of distant objects reduces. This includes viewers in cars, near street lights, or inside illuminated homes. Viewers looking towards the site in complete darkness are expected to be low in number.

11.20.3 The Surrounding Lighting Conditions of the Source.

There are numerous sources of existing lighting from Black Point Power Station and the nearby industrial facilities.

11.20.4 Visual impact of night time lighting

The above analysis indicates that potential lighting impacts will typically be low. This is due to the following:

· The lighting for the proposal will generally be spot lights angled downwards and no large scale flood lighting is proposed;

· Most views towards the site will occur in areas with significant ambient lighting levels, therefore greatly reducing the visibility of distant lights;

· There is substantial lighting associated with the nearby industrial facilities;

· All of the major light sources will be pointed inward and downwards to reduce light spill.

11.21 Landscape Character Areas

Four Landscape Character Areas (LCA’s) have been identified according to the existing baseline conditions and the ability of the area to incorporate change.

LCA 1 Black Point Coastal Uplands

This LCA comprises of the vegetated hill slopes with occasional protruding rocky outcrops. The vegetation is made up of shrubland and shrubby grasslands. There is a transmission tower near the summit of Black Point.

Figure 11.35 Black Point Coastal Uplands

LCA 2 Black Point Industrial Urban Landscape

The existing Black Point Power Station dominates this Landscape Character Area. It generally consists of berthing areas, chimney stacks and industrial infrastructure.

Figure 11.36 Black Point Industrial Urban Landscape

LCA 3 Offshore Waters Landscape

The Offshore Waters are characterized by large open expanses of ocean with scattered off shore islands. There are also passing marine vessels, mostly container ships. These areas experience high degree of remoteness.

Figure 11.37 Offshore Waters Landscape

LCA 4 Inshore Waters Landscape

The Inshore Waters experience a greater interaction with LCA 1 as the coastline visually enclose the inshore waters areas. This LCA tends to be calmer than LCA 3 with a reduced sensation of remoteness as the coastline offers sanctuary to the elements.

Figure 11.38 Inshore Waters Landscape

11.21.1 Factors Affecting the Sensitivity of the LCA’s

In order to assess the impact the LNG Terminal will have on the Landscape Character of Black Point, it is important to establish how sensitive the landscape is to change. Generally, the more natural the landscape character, the higher the sensitivity. The following factors will have an affect on the sensitivity of the Landscape Character Areas.

· The general landscape quality and landscape elements of the area;

· The importance and rarity of the area or special features;

· The ability of the LCA to accommodate change;

· Significance of the change in a local and regional context; and

· The maturity of the landscape.

Table 11.19 Landscape Character Sensitivity Matrix

11.21.2 Factors Affecting The Magnitude of Change to the LCA’s

To establish how large the impact will be on the LCA’s, a number of factors must be considered. These include:

· The projects compatibility with the surrounding landscape;

· Duration of the impacts under construction and operation

· The scale of the development (relative to the baseline conditions of the LCA), and

· The reversibility of change.

Table 11.20 Landscape Character Magnitude of Change Matrix

The above table shows that there will be an Intermediate magnitude of change on the LCA’s 1 and 3, a small magnitude of change on LCA2 and a negligible change on LCA4. This is illustrated in Figures 11.39 and 11.40

11.22 Landscape Character Impacts

LCA 1 – Coastal Uplands

Table 11.21 LCA 1 Coastal Uplands Matrix

The table above shows that there will be a moderate-significant impact on the landscape character of the Black Point Coastal Uplands.

LCA 2 – Industrial Urban Landscape

Table 11.22 LCA 2 Industrial Urban Landscape

There will be a slight impact on the landscape character of the Industrial Urban Landscape. This is due to the presence of the existing industrial facilities.

LCA 3 – Offshore Waters Landscape

Table 11.23 LCA 3 Offshore Waters Landscape

There will be medium-significant impact on the landscape character of the Offshore Waters areas.

LCA 4 – Inshore Waters Landscape

Table 11.23 LCA 4 Inshore Waters Landscape

There will be a negligible impact on the landscape character of the Inshore Waters Landscape areas.

11.23 Landscape Character Mitigation Measures

All of the Landscape Mitigation Measures proposed in section 11.10 along with the Visual Mitigation Measures proposed in section 11.18 will also mitigate the impacts on the LCA’s. The final detailed Landscape and Visual Mitigation Measures will be the subject of a Landscape Master Plan that will be submitted for approval to the relevant Authority prior to construction.

A summary of the effectiveness of these measures in reducing the LCA impacts is provided below:

LMM 1 – Cultivation of areas compacted during construction. This will assist in the re-vegetation of these areas. This will contribute to establishing more native plants that are found in the Black Point Coastal Uplands LCA

LMM 2 – Soil stabilisation and planting. The addition of vegetation on the cut slopes will reduce the visibility of the slopes and therefore assist in the ability of the LCA’s to accommodate the project

LMM 3 – Tree and shrub planting. This will contribute to the vegetation common to the Black Point Coastal Uplands LCA.

LMM4 – Utilising natural rock for reclamation. This will help integrate the edge of the reclamation into the natural rocky edge of the Black Point area which will reduce impacts to LCA’s 3 and 4.

LMM5 – Cut Stabilisation. Where the use of shot-crete is un-avoidable, the addition of pigments will help to reduce the visibility of the cut-slopes.

LMM6 – Bench Plantings. The addition of vegetation on the cut slopes will reduce the visibility of the slopes and therefore assist in the ability of the LCA’s to accommodate the project

LMM7 – Early Planting Works. This will help to reduce impacts as early as possible.

LMM8 – Site hoardings to be compatible with the surrounding environment. This will help to reduce the impacts of the terminal during construction.

VMM 1 Design of Structures – The sensitive design of structures will help to complement Black Point Coastal Uplands LCA.

VMM 2 Colours – The selection of suitable complementary colour will help the LCA’s accommodate the terminal.

VMM 3 Plantings - Plantings will reduce the visibility of the tanks and the scale of the terminal.

Design Measures – Reducing the tank height from 70PD to 61m PD will reduce the scale of the terminal.

11.23.1 Avoidance

The refinements discussed in section 11.2 of this report show how the potential impacts on the Landscape Character of Black Point have been mitigated. The impacts on the Landscape Character have been reduced by:

· The reduction of the extent of the reclamation;

· The clustering of the tanks closer together;

· The positioning of the tanks into the hill side of Black Point;

· The overall reduction in the scale of the terminal.

Evaluation Criteria	Residual Impact Type
Evaluation Criteria	Landscape Resources (LR’s)	Landscape Character Areas (LCA’s)	Visual Impacts (VSR’s)
Effects on Public health and health of biota or risk to life	No effects applicable to LR’s	No effects applicable to LCA’s	No effects applicable to VSR’s
The magnitude of the adverse environmental impacts	Overall the impacts on the LR’s will be moderate	Overall there will be negligible-moderate impacts on the LCA’s.	Overall the impacts on the VSR’s will be slight-moderate with some more significant impacts in close proximity to the terminal.
The geographic extent of the adverse environmental impacts	The impacts on the LR’s will be confined to the works area of Black Point	The impacts on Landscape Character will be confined to the Black Point area	The larger impacts in the VSR’s will be largely confined to areas in close proximity to Black Point
The duration and frequency of the adverse environmental impacts	The impacts on the LR’s will be for approximately 4 years during terminal construction.	The impacts on LCA’s will be continuous for as long as the project exists.	The visual impacts will be continuous for as long as the project exists.
The likely size of the community or the environment that may be affected by the adverse impacts	The area of the affected environment will be the works area of Black Point.	The impacts on Landscape Character will be confined to the Black Point.	Visitors to or near Black Point.
The degree to which the adverse environmental impacts are reversible or irreversible	During operation the impacts on the LR’s are irreversible. Construction phase impacts can be mitigated through landscaping measures.	During operation the impacts on the LCA’s are irreversible. Construction phase impacts can be mitigated to the full extent practicable.	During operation the impacts on the VSR’s are irreversible.
International and regional importance	The adverse impacts on the LR’s do not affect an issue of international or regional concern.	The landscape character of the Black Point is valued by recreational visitors to the area. There will be moderate adverse impacts to the existing landscape character of Black Point.	The visual quality of Black Point is valued by recreational visitors to the area. There will be moderate to moderate-significant adverse impacts to the existing visual quality when the terminal is viewed at close range.
Both the likelihood and degree of uncertainty of adverse environmental impacts	The detailed assessment shows there are no uncertainties regarding the impacts on the LR’s	The detailed assessment shows there are no uncertainties regarding the impacts on the LCA’s	The detailed assessment shows there are no uncertainties regarding the impacts on the VSR’s