9. LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL EFFECTS 9.1. Landscape 9.2. Visual Effects 9.3. Approach and Methods 9.4. Landscape Mitigation 9.5. Residual impacts 9.6. Cumulative effects
9. LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL EFFECTS
This chapter includes the consideration of both landscape and visual issues relating to the proposed Ba Bridge replacement on the A82. Section 9.1 presents the introduction, methods, baseline conditions and predicted impacts relating to landscape and section 9.2 presents the same for visual aspects. As mitigation measures apply to both landscape and visual aspects these are discussed together in section 9.3. Residual landscape and visual impacts are then described in section 9.4 and cumulative effects in section 9.5.
9.1. Landscape
This section presents the assessment of the impacts of the bridge replacement, referred to hereafter as the scheme, on the landscape resource of the study area, and considers the changes in the fabric, character and quality of the landscape that are likely to occur as a result of the implementation of the proposals. It is primarily concerned with:
- direct impacts on specific landscape features and elements;
- more subtle effects on the overall pattern of elements which together determine the landscape character and regional/local distinctiveness;
- impacts upon acknowledged special interests or values such as designated landscapes, conservation sites and cultural associations; and
- the effects of any scheme modifications since previous environmental assessments.
General Approach
The landscape assessment was undertaken in accordance with The design Manual for Roads and Bridges, (DMRB) (Volume 11, Section 3, Part 5); Landscape and Visual assessment Supplementary Guidance (LVASG) Scottish executive 2002; Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Assessment (GLVIA) Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment 2002 and Environmental Resources Management 1998 Lochaber: landscape character assessment. Scottish Natural Heritage Review No 97.
The four main steps in the landscape assessment process are:
- description;
- classification;
- evaluation; and
- impact assessment.
- In undertaking the landscape assessment, consideration is given to the following:
- Data relating to the components of the landscape, its’ character and quality will include reference to baseline information presented in separate chapters of this report (e.g. Ecology and Nature Conservation);
- The value placed on an area is dependant not only on its inherent scenic quality but on its situation, rarity and usage;
- Historical and cultural associations may contribute to the value placed on landscape not generally considered to be of visual or other importance; and
- Landscapes that, although not of a quality to warrant national or regional designation, may be of significant local value.
- Data collection was by way of desk study, consultations and field survey on foot. Since landscape and visual impact assessment are closely related, the data collected have been used for both, as appropriate.
Desk Study
Data collected for other chapters of this report were reviewed to establish the natural elements and processes that contribute to landscape formation. Structure and Local Development Plans were consulted to establish the presence of areas of statutory landscape designation and protection. Current 1:25,000 and 1:10,000 scale as well as historic Ordnance Survey maps were examined.
Data relating to archaeology, ecology, buildings and settlements were reviewed to provide a thorough appreciation of conservation interest. Other human interests were established by analysing data relating to recreation and public rights of way. Information supplied by Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) has been assessed and used to supplement the desk study data collection. The landscape was then classified into broadly homogeneous units of consistent and recognisable character and quality based on:
- The pattern and scale of landform, land cover and built development;
- Special values including national and local landscape designations, Conservation Areas and historical and cultural associations; and
- Specific potential receptors of landscape and visual impact, including important parts of the landscape, residents, visitors, travellers and other groups of viewers.
Field Survey
The study area for field survey is normally selected as 2km each side of the centreline of the scheme. Although the proposed road and bridge may be visible to a degree beyond this distance, it is considered that any potential landscape effect outside this corridor would not be significant. The term significant in the context of landscape or visual impact in this assessment refers to the level at which the changes to the landscape would be clearly perceived and mitigation measures considered essential. In this instance the study area has been extended westwards to include the West Highland Way.
In relation to this assessment the study area was visited at various times during 2007 and February 2008 in order to: a) confirm the information obtained during the desk study; b) to gain any additional in situ details; c) to assess the Zones of Visual Influence (ZVI’s) i.e. identify the area from which the road or traffic may be visible and identify any significant site specific landscape classifications.
Public use of the area was observed during the course of the landscape and visual assessment survey. This can have a direct bearing on landscape as a human resource and is taken into account in the evaluation process.
Impact Assessment Methods: Sensitivity of Landscape Receptors
‘Receptor’ in this context refers to a landscape element or assemblage of elements that will be directly or indirectly affected by the proposed development. They may include topography, geological or man-made elements, woodland, trees and hedgerows, land use and combinations of elements that create distinctive landscape character.
Evaluation of the sensitivity of receptors to change combines a review of value or importance of the main landscape elements, which together comprise each character area, with their susceptibility to change.
For the purpose of this assessment, landscape value or importance has been defined as "the importance ascribed to the landscape by public perception, value to the community or professional judgement." In this case the public use of the moorland and the road (as observed during the course of the landscape and visual assessment survey) together with professional judgement on landscape quality (see below) was used to ascertain the value of the landscape. The value of the landscape has been classified using the criteria set out within Table 9.1.
Table 9.1 Landscape Value Criteria.
Landscape Value |
Criteria |
|---|---|
High |
A landscape, element or feature of national importance, or of particular importance locally with strong positive character and/or rarity and in particularly good condition. |
Medium |
An attractive landscape, element or feature in relatively good condition or of regional or particular importance locally. |
Low |
A landscape, element or feature with few redeeming qualities or negative character and in a poor or degraded condition. |
Landscape quality and condition contributes towards the assessment of both value and susceptibility to change and hence landscape sensitivity. The assessment of landscape quality concerns the public perception of aesthetic and visual attractiveness of the landscape, and considers the following:
- Visual factors (proportion, scale, enclosure, texture, colour, views);
- Pattern and composition of features;
- Purity of character;
- Degree of tranquillity; and
- Condition.
‘Susceptibility’ is equivalent to "vulnerability to degradation" described in DMRB as "the capacity of the landscape to accept change of the type and scale proposed through the introduction of new features or the loss of existing components." In order to evaluate susceptibility the following aspects were considered based on professional judgement:
- Landscape character and context;
- Landscape quality;
- Current and future likely landscape trends;
- The nature and extent of landscape components and their importance and positive or negative contribution to the landscape character area within which they are situated and also to the wider landscape; and
- Rarity.
The criteria used to evaluate the overall landscape sensitivity are outlined within Table 9.2.
Table 9.2 Landscape Sensitivity Criteria
Sensitivity |
Criteria |
|---|---|
High |
Landscape or landscape elements of particular distinctive character, highly valued and considered susceptible to relatively small changes. |
Medium |
A landscape of moderately valued characteristics considered reasonably tolerant of change. |
Low |
A landscape of generally low valued characteristics considered potentially tolerant of substantial change. |
Negligible |
A landscape of low valued characteristics considered tolerant of substantial change. |
Impact Assessment Methods: Landscape Magnitude of Change
An evaluation of the magnitude of the proposed changes caused by the scheme was carried out based on a review of the nature and scale of the change, together with its duration and degree of permanence, using the criteria outlined in Table 9.3. The evaluation of change is based on the existing situation.
Table 9.3 Landscape Magnitude of Change Criteria
Magnitude |
Criteria |
|---|---|
High |
Profound change in landscape characteristics over an extensive area to very noticeable change over a more limited area. |
Medium |
Prominent changes in landscape characteristics over a wide area to less prominent change in a more limited area. |
Low |
Minor changes in landscape characteristics over a wide area. |
Negligible |
Minor or virtually imperceptible change in any area or landscape components in a relatively limited area. |
Impact Assessment Methods: Significance of Landscape Impact
An initial indication of impact significance (adverse or beneficial) was gained by combining sensitivity and magnitude in accordance with the matrix provided in Table 9.4. Given that the criteria represent levels on a continuum or continuous gradation, professional judgement and awareness of the relative balance of importance between sensitivity and magnitude was also required.
Table 9.4 Significance of Impact
Sensitivity |
Magnitude |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|
High |
Medium |
Low |
Negligible |
|
High |
Major |
Major/Moderate |
Moderate |
Slight |
Medium |
Major/Moderate |
Moderate |
Moderate/ Slight |
Negligible |
Low |
Moderate |
Moderate/Slight |
Slight/Negligible |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Slight |
Slight/Negligible |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Impacts of moderate and above are considered significant, as this is the level at which the changes to the landscape would be clearly perceived and mitigation measure considered essential. Impacts below moderate are not considered significant.
Regional Context
The scheme lies approximately 19 km north of Tyndrum and extends for a distance of about 40m. For the purpose of the landscape assessment the study area extends 2 km each side of the length of the scheme. The study area is shown in Figure 4. The A82 provides the strategic road network’s southern entrance to the Highlands, providing access to Fort William to the north and Mallaig to the north-west. It caters for both commercial and public traffic travelling between the Highlands and the south, and numerous visitors to the area, including tourists, walkers and climbers, who are attracted by the unique scenery and recreational opportunities of the Western Highlands.
Landscape Policy and Other Statutory Designations
National Policy
National Planning Policy Guidelines (NPPG’s) No.1 The Planning System (revised 2000) identifies planning objectives in relation to sustainable development, economy and transport. In common with any other major development proposal, road improvements in areas protected by national designations including Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) and National Scenic Areas (NSAs) are subject to the same constraints and to the provisions of development plan policies. Accordingly if a road improvement in a designated area cannot be avoided it should give rise to as little damage to the natural and built and landscape environment as is practicable. In addition, any maintenance, construction or restoration should be carried out to the highest environmental standards.
Ba Bridge is within the Rannoch Lochs Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), the Glen Coe National Scenic Area (NSA) and Rannoch Moor Special Area of Conservation (SAC) and adjacent to the Rannoch Lochs Special Protection Area (SPA) which comprises a cluster of eight oligotrophic lochs centred upon Rannoch Moor shown in Figure 3 (Appendix A).
Highland Structure Plan March 2001
Policy G.2: safeguards against adverse impact on landscape and scenery particularly within designated areas.
Policy N.1: States that new development should seek to minimize their impact on the nature conservation resource and enhance it wherever possible.
Policy L.4: The policy promotes the desirability of maintaining and enhancing present landscape character.
The Lochaber Local Plan
Amenity Woodland 3.6.6 provides protection of development impacting adversely on established woodland and trees important to the landscape, wildlife and amenity.
Scenic Safeguards 3.6.13 seeks to conserve areas of landscape importance including open areas above the tree-line, designated gardens and landscape.
Both the Highland Structure Plan and Lochaber Local Plan endorse the recommendations regarding landscape character proposed in the Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) Review No.97 Lochaber: Landscape Character Assessment.
Land Use
The study area is managed primarily for game and nature conservation. Water-sports and fishing are prohibited. There are informal tracks from the lay-bys leading eastwards to the boathouse and inland westwards. These tracks are not readily apparent and due to their soft waterlogged condition are only suitable for walkers wearing sturdy waterproof footwear. It is apparent that they are used mostly by travellers who make short impromptu stops at the lay-bys to look at the view, take photographs, a short walk, rest or simply enjoy the atmosphere.
The primary land use of the specific area of the scheme is of course for a road. The A82 was constructed in the 1930s and was the only paved road in the area. Its predecessor, an old military road dating back to the 18th century, is approximately 3 km west of the site outwith the study area. The West Highland Way, an important long-distance Right of Way, converges with this section of the military road.
Land Cover
Rannoch Moor consists of an extensive mosaic of wet and dry heather moorland with areas of rough grassland and bracken. Clumps of rushes and mosses occur in the waterlogged hollows and adjacent to the water bodies and small, dense stands of native downy-birch woodland are present on the islands among the lochans. Further patches of willow scrub and stunted birch and rowan occur adjacent to the road, where the embankments provide a degree of shelter, and randomly elsewhere across the moorland, often in association with the isolated boulders. This poorly-drained low-level plateau supports a rich variety of bog, heathland, peat and nutrient-poor water habitats. The land cover within the study area is typical of the Rannoch Moor vegetation and terrain except that the study area has a proportionately greater area of standing and running water.
Nature Conservation
Details of the nature conservation interests of the study area are set out in Chapter 8, Ecology and Nature Conservation. In the context of landscape the ecological significance of the area is inextricably linked to the dynamics of the landscape and its character.
Landscape Classification, Character and Description
The study area shown on Figure 4 lies within the Blanket Bog Landscape Character Type as defined by Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) Review No.97 Lochaber: Landscape Character Assessment.
The key characteristics of the Lochaber blanket bog are:
- Vast waterlogged landscape, although one whose scale is reduced by low hanging cloud and mist;
- Amphitheatre setting - a massive basin encircled by curtain of hills which are often accentuated by cloud draped summits;
- Large scale recurring land cover pattern of grass, rush and heather, scattered glacial erratics and mounds, pools and lochans with a few stunted trees;
- Lochans with trees and rocks, provide local foci within the landscape;
- Small scale pattern of seasonal flowers and lichens draw the eye from the expanse into the detail of the bog surface and
- Minimal human influence, giving a wild and remote landscape character.
The Blanket Bog landscape type occurs in only one location in Lochaber, at Rannoch Moor on its eastern edge. It is associated with an intrusion of granite within the Grampian Mountains forming a large basin amidst the surrounding quartzite, schists and volcanic rocks. These resistant rocks form a curtain of hills that frame views across the bog and emphasize the scale of its vast expanse. The high rainfall in the area is retained within the basin causing water logging, pools, lochans and deep layers of peat.
The glacial debris, hummocks, waterlogged ground, remnants of old tree stumps, erosion and coarse vegetation and occasional scrub combine to create a somewhat chaotic appearance. The A82 imposes its character upon the area within which it can be seen or heard.
Like so much Highland scenery this landscape type is strongly affected by both the climate and season; low, gray skies and mists, cold winter winds and rain and a dull, brown sward of heather, grasses, sedges and rushes create a desolate, dramatic character, while summer sunshine illuminates a colourful flora and highlights a craggy backdrop of mountain heights, expanding the scale and uplifting the scene. Clear autumn and winter skies and a low sun can pick out vivid colours and textures and emphasize the stark shadows of snow or frost covered ground.
This stage of the baseline study involves the evaluation of the value of the existing landscape within the study area in accordance with the criteria in
Table 9.1, which are required in order to assess its sensitivity to change (Table 9.2).
The value of the landscape within the study area is relatively consistent. It is within an area of designated conservation value at the highest national level (SSSI, SAC, NSA). The blanket bog landscape type is locally rare and in good condition. The road and bridge structures themselves without the traffic are virtually unnoticeable from a short distance away and are insignificant in the scale of their surroundings.
Despite the impact of the traffic on the A82 the overwhelming scale of the positive landscape attributes warrant the landscape to be assessed as being of high value.
The capacity of this landscape to accept change of the type and scope proposed is assisted by virtue of the scheme consisting of the replacement of an existing landscape element (the bridge and approaches) with a similar profile all contained broadly within the existing road corridor.
The current impact of the traffic will be a constant factor. Notwithstanding the general presumption that small scale changes collectively can cause seriously adverse impacts, it is considered that in this case this landscape could accept change of the type and scale proposed without significantly adverse impact.
This landscape of high value considered reasonably tolerant to change is therefore assessed as having medium/high sensitivity.
This section describes the potential landscape impacts arising from the proposed scheme before the full beneficial impacts of landscape mitigation. The impacts are described and assessed using the same subject areas adopted within the baseline conditions (section 9.1.3) in order to ensure a systematic and constant approach throughout the assessment process. The same systematic approach is applied to assess predicted visual impacts.
The improvement of an existing road can result in positive (beneficial) and negative (adverse) landscape and visual impacts; these impacts may be temporary, permanent, short or long term. They can be direct, indirect or cumulative and include the following:
Direct
- a change in the landform and land use.
- loss or gain of landscape elements both natural and man-made resulting in:
- a change in landscape patterns, character and sense of place;
- vehicles and/or the road structure, including signs, furniture and lighting, becoming more, or less, apparent in the landscape; and
- a change in noise disturbance and amenity.
Indirect
- the occurrence of new development in the vicinity which is attracted by improved access.
- farm severance causing a change in land use.
- a change in vegetation resulting from changed ground conditions and micro-climate.
Cumulative
- piecemeal loss of landscape elements such as hedges, walls, dykes or other traditional features impacting on regional landscape character.
- the impact of several small scale changes to the road character resulting from relatively small scale schemes such as new signage, visibility improvements or small bridge replacements.
- increased level of adverse impacts due to increased use of the road.
- a change in the way the landscape is experienced.
Scheme description
A detailed description of the proposed scheme is provided in Chapter 3 and illustrated by Figure 1 in Appendix A.
Landscape, Policy and other Statutory Designations
The scheme has been designed in accordance with national policy in relation to unavoidable works within a designated area. The scheme cannot be avoided in this location. Accordingly it has been designed to give rise to as little damage to the natural, built and landscape environment as is practicable. It will be built on virtually the same horizontal and vertical alignment as the existing bridge. The bridge appearance will be simple and relatively insignificant in this large-scale landscape.
The scheme will comply with Highland Structure Plan March 2001 and Lochaber Local Plan in relation to the landscape effects upon landscape character, local amenity and nature conservation in that the landscape design will be in accordance with the Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) Review No.97 Lochaber: Landscape Character Assessment and Scottish Executive’s landscape design and management policy, ‘Cost Effective Landscape: Learning from Nature’. This policy requires road development to be properly related to and integrated with local landscape character, to take opportunities to enhance local biodiversity and respect local amenity.
In relation to Landscape, Policy and other Statutory Designations the scheme would result in a direct impact causing minor changes in landscape characteristics over a limited area. The magnitude of change would therefore be negligible adverse and the significance of impact slight adverse.
Land Use
The scheme would cause little or no significant change to the existing land use in that the scheme will replace an existing bridge in the same place. The only disturbance would be to accommodate the site offices in the lay-by, possibly impinging slightly on to adjacent land, and to provide the temporary road diversion during the period of the works. In each case the surface vegetation will be taken up, stored and replaced to reinstate the area to its former condition. In the case of the area next to the lay-by it is envisaged that the reinstatement will be an improvement to that which currently exists in that the area has been despoiled by unauthorized tipping.
The landscape magnitude of impact caused by any change in land use would be negligible. The significance of impact will be slight adverse.
Land Cover
The scheme would have little impact on any noteworthy vegetative landscape elements for the same reason as above.
The landscape magnitude of impact caused by any change in land cover will be negligible adverse. The significance of impact would be slight adverse.
Nature Conservation
In accordance with the predicted impacts on nature conservation set out in Chapter 8 of this document the magnitude of change in landscape character would be negligible. The significance of impact would therefore be slight adverse.
Landscape classification, Character and Description
The significance of adverse impact predicted in relation to land use, land cover and nature conservation is in each case slight. Having in mind the existing adverse impact of the traffic on the landscape character in the vicinity of the scheme the magnitude of change would be negligible.
The significance of impact would therefore be slight adverse.
9.2. Visual Effects
This chapter presents the predicted impacts of the proposed scheme on the views and visual amenity within the study area. Visual amenity is defined as the pleasantness of the view or outlook from an identified receptor or group of receptors.
The assessment determines the degree of change to the views and visual amenity that will occur as a result of the proposed scheme to and from buildings, areas of public open space and footpaths. The buildings, open spaces, roads and footpaths that would have views of the road development are collectively referred to as ‘receptors’. The potential to mitigate adverse impacts has been taken into account in the assessment and the residual impacts identified.
9.3. Approach and Methods
This assessment was undertaken in accordance with DMRB (Volume 11, Section 3, Part 5) with reference to the following documents:
- ‘Landscape & Visual Assessment Supplementary Guidance (LVASG) (Scottish Executive; 2002);
- ‘Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment’ (GLVIA) (Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment; IEMA;2002); and
- Planning Advice Note (PAN) 58; Environmental Impact Assessment (Scottish Executive 1999).
The following data sources were also used in the visual assessment:
- scheme proposal drawings, previous reports and assessments; and
- the field survey undertaken as part of the landscape character assessment supplemented by further field study to identify the impacts and inter-visibility between the proposed road and buildings, public open space, including roads and footpaths.
It is accepted good practise to prepare a Visual Envelope Map (VEM) following the field survey to determine the area of land from which a view of any part of the scheme, including its structure could be seen. This area is referred to as the Zone of Visual Influence (ZVI). The impact on the views from potential receptors within this ZVI are then assessed and presented and shown in the Visual Impact Tables and included as Appendix H.
In this situation where the scheme consists of replacing a relatively small and insignificant landscape element within a large scale landscape it was not considered to be necessary nor critical to make an accurate assessment of the visual envelope. The difficulty in preparing an accurate assessment being that the study area consists of numerous hillocks, hollows and large erratics which obscure views of the scheme when viewed from various aspects. Although there are informal tracks leading from the lay-bys as described in paragraph 9.1.3.3 Land Use, the area is relatively inaccessible and attracts little public access. Visual assessments have been made from recognisable visual receptors and detailed in the Visual Impact Table.
9.3.1. Assessment of Visual Impacts
In order to assess the significance of any impacts, the sensitivity to change of the receptors and the likely magnitude of change were considered as outlined below.
Sensitivity of the Visual Receptors/Viewpoints
The sensitivity of the visual receptors/viewpoints was assessed by evaluation of a range of factors, including:
- the nature and context of the viewpoints;
- an assessment of the expectations of users/receptors;
- the importance and value of the landscape in the view; and
- the nature of the existing view.
‘Importance’ in the context of ‘landscape in the view’ relates to the aspect of the building or viewpoint in relation to the view. ‘Value’ in the context to ‘landscape in the view’ relates to the degree of visual amenity of the view. In the case of roads and footpaths, the type of users and degree of usage is taken into consideration, with business/commercial traffic being less sensitive than visitor/leisure traffic. The criteria used to determine the sensitivity of the receptors to the proposed changes are shown in Table 9.5 below.
Table 9.5 Sensitivity of receptors to visual change
Sensitivity |
Criteria |
|---|---|
High |
Where the landscape in the view is considered to be of high value and importance to the receptor and any change would be noticeable and would affect visual amenity. e.g. residential properties with good open views/footpaths |
Medium |
Receptors where the landscape in the view is not perceived as a primary factor and not crucial to their visual amenity. e.g. residential properties, sporting / recreational facilities |
Low |
Receptors where the landscape in the view is relatively unimportant/irrelevant and/or the receptors are not particularly sensitive changes in the appearance of the landscape. e.g. Industry/places of work |
Negligible |
Receptors where the view has little or no impact. e.g. because of distance or it being obscured in some way. |
Magnitude of Visual Change
The assessment of magnitude of change includes the consideration of the likely effects of the change in the landscape on the views and visual amenity, taking into consideration the scale of the change to the landscape, the addition or loss of landscape elements, the change in landscape character and the amount/extent of the view affected.
The main elements of magnitude evaluation include:
- the extent of the receptors view affected by the development as a proportion of the view available;
- the distance of the receptor from the changed landscape;
- the angle of the view relative to the main activity of the receptor;
- the level of integration or contrast created by the road, the traffic on the road and its associated elements within the view; and
- the potential for effective mitigation of adverse impacts and opportunities for landscape enhancement.
The criteria used to determine magnitude of changes are shown in Table 9.6.
Table 9.6 Magnitude of Visual Change Criteria
Magnitude |
Criteria |
|---|---|
High |
The scheme dominates the view and fundamentally changes its character and components. |
Medium |
The scheme is prominent in the view, affecting its character and altering some of its components and features. |
Low |
The scheme is a relatively minor element of the overall view and likely to be scarcely appreciated by a casual observer. |
Negligible |
The changes are minor or virtually imperceptible. |
Significance of Impact
The significance of impact (adverse or beneficial) was determined using a matrix of sensitivity and magnitude, as shown in Table 9.7. As with consideration of landscape impact significance, professional judgement and experience was used to confirm the assessment of significance taking into account that the criteria represents levels on a continuum or continuous gradation depending on the relative importance of sensitivity and magnitude.
Table 9.7 Significance of Visual Impact Assessment
Sensitivity |
Magnitude |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|
High |
Medium |
Low |
Negligible |
|
High |
Major |
Major/Moderate |
Moderate |
Slight |
Medium |
Major/Moderate |
Moderate |
Moderate/ Slight |
Negligible |
Low |
Moderate |
Moderate/Slight |
Slight/Negligible |
Negligible |
Negligible |
Slight |
Slight/Negligible |
Negligible |
Negligible |
For the purpose of this assessment impacts of moderate or greater are considered to be significant, as this is the level at which changes would be clearly perceived and mitigation measures considered essential to ensure that the scheme is properly integrated into and related to its setting.
Visual Evaluation
The ‘Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment’ (IEMA; 2002) state that ‘landscape and visual assessments are separate although linked procedures’. The landscape baseline information, its analysis and the assessment of landscape effects all contribute to the baseline for visual assessment studies.
Accordingly the baseline landscape information has been used in assessing the visual impacts. Further evaluation of visual impacts is considered in Chapter 10 ‘Disruption due to construction’.
Property
There are no residential properties in the study area. There is one building, a boat house, which is a simple shelter for small boats facing due east approximately 220m from the scheme. The building has no windows. It is facing directly away from the scheme and has no facilities within for anything other than boats. It has consequently not been assessed as a significant visual receptor.
Visual Receptor 1 (VR1) The A82
The section of A82 within the study area is relatively straight and level. The distant skyline of mountains beyond the study area boundary dominates the visual attraction from the road. The fore and middle ground are generally subservient from a visual standpoint. The bridge itself is not a prominent element in the landscape, especially from the vehicle travellers’ perspective bearing in mind that the majority of vehicles are travelling at high speed through the study area. The replacement bridge will be slightly more prominent than the existing structure in that the parapets will be formed from a single tubular steel rail above a low concrete structure as opposed to the existing weathered stone. The scheme would also require a small amount of grassland, willow scrub and birch trees to be removed to make way for the temporary road and slight widening of the embankments where the scheme joins the existing road. This would appear as a noticeable scar in the landscape.
It is considered that the view from the A82 (VR1) is of high value and importance and that any change would be noticeable and would affect the viewers’ visual amenity. For this reason it has been assessed as having a high sensitivity to change.
The difference in appearance and prominence of the new bridge would be relatively minor in the overall view. The magnitude of visual change would consequently be low adverse and the significance of visual impact moderate adverse.
Visual Receptor 2 (VR2) The lay-bys
There are two lay-bys virtually opposite each other approximately 150m north of the bridge. They are used mostly by travellers who make short impromptu stops to look at the view, take photographs, a short walk, rest or simply to enjoy the atmosphere. As the lay-bys are in line with the bridge the only view of the bridge from this aspect is the end view of the parapets. The vast majority of the vision from the lay-bys is unaffected by the scheme.
It is considered that the view from the lay-bys is of high value and importance and that noticeably adverse change would affect the viewers’ visual amenity. For this reason it has been assessed as having a high sensitivity to change.
The difference in appearance and prominence of the new bridge would be almost imperceptible in the overall view. The magnitude of visual change would consequently be negligible adverse and the significance of visual impact slight adverse.
Visual Receptor 3 (VR3) Pedestrians
Currently there is no formal footpath along the A82 in the study area. The scheme will make provision for a footpath across the bridge. There are informal tracks from the lay-bys leading eastwards to the boathouse and inland westwards. These tracks are not readily apparent and due to their soft waterlogged condition do not attract pedestrians to venture far or for long. A high proportion of the study area is covered by open water restricting pedestrian access. Views of the scheme from these tracks diminish noticeably within relatively short distances due to the grand scale of the landscape and relatively minor scale of the bridge. From five hundred metres away the road and bridge with no traffic on it becomes almost imperceptible. It is considered that the view from a pedestrian’s standpoint is of high value and importance. The tracks and informal access to the surrounding area can therefore be assessed as having a high sensitivity to change.
The difference in appearance and prominence of the new bridge from these tracks would be for the most part minor becoming negligible with increase in distance as the bridge blends into the background. The magnitude of visual change would consequently be negligible adverse and the significance of visual impact slight adverse.
Visual Receptor 4 (VR4) The West Highland Way
The West Highland Way is approximately 3km west of the scheme. From this distance the existing bridge is not discernable let alone any changes proposed by the scheme. It has consequently not been assessed as a significant visual receptor.
9.4. Landscape Mitigation
Mitigation of adverse impacts associated with construction of this new road is an iterative process involving a combination of three approaches:
- Prevention of adverse effects at source – e.g. alignment in cutting to prevent unacceptable levels of visual intrusion or such that it avoids any direct impact on designated landscape areas.
- Reduction of adverse impacts that cannot be eliminated by prevention – e.g. environmental barriers, landscape planting design including woodland planting, hedges and tree planting, replacing hedges and other landscape elements.
- The provision of alternative or compensatory measures where appropriate and feasible e.g. the creation of new habitats, contributions to local biodiversity and the wellbeing of local wildlife.
Landscape and visual factors are closely related. The mitigation measures described in this section consequently relate to both landscape and visual impacts.
The landscape design and mitigation objective is to ensure that the completed scheme is properly integrated into and related to its setting having in mind the character of the area and its biological importance.
To achieve this, the following aspects of the bridge improvement design have been considered:
- horizontal and vertical road alignment to achieve best fit with the tie in to the existing carriageway;
- retention and best use of existing vegetation;
- minimising damage to landscape elements; and
- minimising damage to sites of ecological importance.
Landscape planting design, earth moulding and conservation of wildlife and biodiversity enhancement have been and will continue to be considered and developed during the detailed design of the scheme in the effort to reduce impacts and where appropriate take the opportunity to enhance amenity and landscape character.
The procedure set out in the Scottish Executive landscape design and management policy ‘Cost Effective Landscaping: Learning from Nature’ (CEL:LfN) and the principles of landscape design detailed in DMRB (Volume 10) have been followed in order to ensure that all mitigation measures are effective, represent best value for money and make a positive and sustainable contribution to the character and bio-diversity of the landscape.
The principal landscape issue to be addressed on this scheme is to ensure that the scheme is properly integrated into and related to its setting especially in relation to the ecological and scenic importance of the landscape and the tourist interests of the road users.
The design strategy to achieve this is derived from the following considerations:
- appropriate choice of alignment and the new bridge in order to minimise disturbance to moorland vegetation, patches of willow scrub and individual birch and rowan adjacent to the bridge;
- a design has been selected to minimise the bridge profile by reducing the height of piers and abutments and creation of a bridge deck that fulfils the functional and safety requirements of the replacement scheme and minimises the extent of additional land-take to cater for temporary works and increased width of replacement bridge deck and other structural elements;
- use of steel girders, which will weather within a few months to give the appearance of a slightly textured, typically deep brown/ purplish colour, for improved integration with the surroundings;
- partial retention of existing stone piers and stone facing to new concrete abutments, to minimise adverse visual effects;
- careful removal, storage and translocation of existing turfs onto verges and on soft cutting and embankment slopes, to assist in slope stabilisation and rapid re-establishment of vegetation on disturbed soil areas;
- reinstatement of earthworks to achieve a finished appearance that reflects the natural landforms in the locality and sensitively integrates with the surrounding topography, avoiding even and regular cuttings and embankments and grading out tops and bottoms of slopes to avoid sharp angles; and
- compliance with SNH’s consultation response, which requires a method statement, set of principles and landscape restoration plan to ensure that the desired end result for the replacement bridge, topsoil reinstatement and re-establishment of vegetation is achieved.
The successful integration of the scheme into the landscape will depend to a large extent on the re-establishment of semi-natural vegetation over temporarily disturbed areas and verges. The success of semi-natural turf translocation and natural regeneration is dependent on a number of factors including weather, soil conditions, the existence of undesirable seed and the presence of a semi-natural seed bank. Monitoring will therefore be advisable during the growing season after completion of the works and thereafter annually until successful establishment has occurred to assess establishment and identify any special remedial or management measures that may be required.
9.5. Residual impacts
The landscape and visual impacts of the proposed scheme have been assessed as envisaged on a winters’ day after opening before mitigation measures take effect. The residual impacts predict the situation on a day in summer 15 years after opening.
It is anticipated that reinstatement of the earthworks and indigenous vegetation will make a rapid and progressive contribution to properly integrating the works into its setting. Natural regeneration of herbaceous growth and scrub will develop progressively, especially in close proximity to the retaining walls due to the shelter they provide. The latter will help to bond a close relationship between the built structure and natural landscape. The replacement bridge and parapet will naturally discolour progressively losing its new appearance and also develop a sense of unity with the road itself. It will be seen as an unobtrusive and necessary functional element in the landscape and recognised as a bridge of its time in the same way as has the existing bridge.
It is anticipated that the significance of impact on the landscape will reduce from generally slight adverse at the year of opening to negligible adverse fifteen years hence.
9.5.3. Visual Receptors 1, 2, 3, and 4
The difference of the view from the visual receptors (VR1 A82, VR2 Lay-by, VR3 Pedestrians and VR4 The West Highland Way) fifteen years after construction will be negligible due to the reinstatement of the landscape disturbance caused by the works and the weathered appearance of the small scale bridge in the large scale landscape.
The residual significance of visual impact would therefore be negligible adverse.
9.6. Cumulative effects
Cumulative landscape and visual effects result from additional changes to the landscape or visual amenity caused by the road development in conjunction with other developments (associated with or separate to it) or actions that occurred in the past, present or are likely to occur in the foreseeable future. They may affect the way in which the landscape is experienced and can be beneficial or adverse.
The initial programme for the replacement of seven bridges in Rannoch Moor and Glen Coe was identified in the Environmental Scoping Study produced in 2003 as providing potential for cumulative landscape impacts. The main concerns expressed by consultees at this stage were regarding the finished appearance of the bridges and the perceived need for consistency in their final design. These comments have been addressed and the scheme designed accordingly. A consistent approach to the design and finish of the replacement bridges in Rannoch Moor and Glen Coe is being adopted, with the provision of similar elements including concrete parapets with tubular rail, concrete abutments faced with stone from the existing bridges, steel girders, which will weather to achieve maximum integration with the surroundings and granite flag paved footways on either side of the bridge deck.
The landscape impacts of the individual schemes have been and will be assessed individually in accordance with their setting in the landscape. In each case they will be seen as subservient landscape elements, visual amenity given high priority in structural design and reinstatement of any disturbance completed to the highest standards of design and workmanship. The cumulative impact on the Lochaber and Glencoe section of the A82 of this bridge replacement programme is assessed as being negligible adverse.
Disturbance during construction is inevitable but in these sensitive locations particular attention has and will be given to minimise this disturbance. The scale of the works in these large scale landscape settings is relatively small, for a limited period, several miles and years apart and confined to the immediate road corridor where noise, and visual disturbance caused by vehicles is the norm. In this context the cumulative impact on the Lochaber and Glencoe section of the A82 landscape during construction will be slight adverse.