Landscape Effects

Introduction

Landscape is regarded as an important national resource and in Scotland our natural and cultural inheritance is valued for both its intrinsic beauty and its contribution to regional identity and sense of place.

The Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment seeks to identify and assess potential effects of the proposed development on the landscape resource of the site and its environs, and visual amenity of the site and surrounding areas.

This section examines the landscape and visual impacts associated with the construction and operation of the replacement A887 Allt Lagain Bhain Bridge. The assessment considers the baseline landscape character and features of the area together with the visual context of the proposed bridge and road tie-in and makes an assessment of landscape and visual impacts in relation to this. The assessment was initially prepared with reference to the DMRB Volume 11, Section 3, Part 5 and subsequently updated to reflect IAN135/10.

Criteria for Evaluation of Landscape and Visual Impacts

Landscape

Landscape and visual impacts have been determined by assessing the degree of change resulting from building the new bridge and road tie-ins, removal of the existing structures, removal of trees and associated earthworks on the existing landscape character and features. Main views from the surrounding publicly accessible areas are also considered.

Landscape impacts are those changes which arise as a result of the proposed scheme. Impacts on landscape character areas have been assessed, including both landscape features and designations.

Landscape quality is identified in IAN/135/10 as being ‘the quality or condition of the landscape, which involves consideration of the physical state of the landscape and of the features and elements which make up landscape character’. This definition is in line with current guidance set out in Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 3^rd Edition (2013).

The quality of the existing landscape is determined using criteria as listed below.

Criteria for evaluation of landscape quality

Highest

Consideration of the physical state of the landscape and of the features and elements which make up landscape character which may include:

• Distinctive, unique or outstanding natural landscape character, including significant degrees of amenity and tranquillity.
• Strong landscape structure, characteristic patterns and balanced combination of landform and land cover.
• Appropriate management for land use and land cover.
• Distinct features worthy of conservation.
• No detracting features.
• Sense of place.
• Internationally or Nationally recognised e.g. all or great majority of World Heritage Site and/or National Park and/or National Scenic Area.

High

Consideration of the physical state of the landscape and of the features and elements which make up landscape character which may include:

• Strong landscape structure, characteristic patterns and balanced combination of landform and land cover.
• Appropriate management for land use and land cover, but potentially scope to improve.
• Distinct features worthy of conservation.
• Occasional detracting features.
• Sense of place.
• Nationally recognised e.g. localised areas within National Park and/or National Scenic Area.

Good 

Consideration of the physical state of the landscape and of the features and elements which make up landscape character which may include:

• Recognisable landscape structure, characteristic patterns and balanced combination of landform and land cover still evident.
• Scope to improve management for land use and land cover.
• Some features worthy of conservation.
• Occasional detracting features.
• Sense of place.
• Regionally, locally recognised e.g. all or great majority of Special (Local) Landscape Areas.

Ordinary

Consideration of the physical state of the landscape and of the features and elements which make up landscape character which may include:

• Distinguishable landscape structure, characteristic patterns and combinations of landform and land cover often masked by land use.
• Scope to improve management for land use and cover.
• Some features worthy of conservation.
• Prominent detracting features.

Poor

Consideration of the physical state of the landscape and of the features and elements which make up landscape character which may include:

• Weak or degraded landscape structure, characteristic patterns of landform and land cover often masked by land use.
• Mixed or single land use dominates and/or is evident.
• Lack of management and intervention has resulted in degradation and disturbed or derelict land which could require treatment.

The defined landscape character areas have also been assessed according to their landscape sensitivity, which is informed by landscape quality. Landscape sensitivity refers to the degree to which the landscape could accommodate change due to road development without causing detrimental effects on character and quality. Landscape sensitivity is defined below.

Criteria for Evaluation of Landscape Sensitivity to Change

High

Highest or very attractive quality landscape that would be unlikely to tolerate change and effective mitigation would be difficult to achieve.

Medium

Good or ordinary landscape quality that would be tolerant of a small degree of change and effective mitigation would be possible, but results could take time to be effective.

Low

An ordinary or poor quality landscape that would be tolerant of a large degree of change and effective mitigation would be readily achievable.

The magnitude of impact is determined using the below as a guide.

Assessment of Magnitude of Impact on Landscape Character

Major Adverse 

Total loss or large scale damage to existing character of distinctive features and elements, and/or the addition of new but uncharacteristic conspicuous features or elements.

Moderate Adverse

Partial loss or noticeable damage to existing character or distinctive features or elements and/or the addition of new but uncharacteristic noticeable features and elements.

Minor Adverse 

Slight loss or damage to existing character or features and elements, and/or the addition of new but uncharacteristic features and elements.

Negligible Adverse 

Barely noticeable loss or damage to existing character or features and elements, and/or the addition of new but uncharacteristic features and elements.

No Change

No noticeable loss, damage or alteration to character or features or elements.

Negligible Beneficial

Barely noticeable improvement of character by the restoration of existing features or elements, and/or the removal of uncharacteristic features and elements, or by the addition of new characteristic elements.

Minor Beneficial

Slight improvement of character by the restoration of existing features and elements, and/or the removal of uncharacteristic features and elements, or by the addition of new characteristic elements.

Moderate Beneficial

Partial or noticeable improvement of character by the restoration of existing features and elements, and/or the removal of uncharacteristic and noticeable features and elements, or by the addition of new characteristic features.

Major Beneficial

Large scale improvement of character by the restoration of features and elements, and/or the removal of uncharacteristic and conspicuous features and elements, or by the addition of new distinctive features.

The derivation of significance of impacts on landscape character is given in Table 7.1. Both positive and negative impacts can occur and the different levels of significance is outlined below.

Table 7.1 Derivation of significance of impacts on landscape character

Impact Magnitude	High character sensitivity	Medium character sensitivity	Low character sensitivity
Major	Very large/large	Large/moderate	Moderate/slight
Moderate	Large/moderate	Moderate/slight	Slight
Minor	Moderate/slight	Slight	Slight/neutral
Negligible	Slight/neutral	Neutral	Neutral
No change	Neutral	Neutral	Neutral

Significance of Landscape Impacts on Landscape Character

Moderate beneficial

Provides an opportunity to enhance the landscape as the project:

• fits well with the scale, landform and pattern of the landscape;
• enables the restoration of characteristic features through mitigation which have been partially lost or diminished as the result of changes resulting from intensive farming or inappropriate development;
• enables a sense of place and scale to be restored through well designed planting and mitigation measures, whereby characteristic features are enhanced through the use of local materials and species used to fit the proposal into the landscape;
• enables some sense of quality to be restored or enhanced through beneficial landscaping and sensitive design in a landscape which is not of any formally recognised quality; and/or
• furthers government objectives to regenerate degraded countryside.

Slight beneficial

The project:

• fits well with the scale, landform and pattern of the landscape;
• incorporates measures for mitigation to ensure they would blend in well with the surrounding landscape;
• enables some sense of place and scale to be restored through well designed planting and mitigation measures;
• maintains or enhances existing landscape character in an area which is not a designated landscape, nor vulnerable to change; and/or
• avoids conflict with government policy towards protection of the countryside.

Neutral

The project:

• fits within the scale, landform and pattern of the landscape but does not provide benefit;
• is not visually intrusive;
• maintains the existing landscape character; and/or
• avoids conflict with government policy.

Slight adverse

The project:

• does not quite fit the landform and scale of the landscape;
• is not in itself very visually intrusive but would impact on certain views into and across the area;
• will not be completely mitigated for because of the nature of the proposal itself or the character of the landscape through which it passes;
• affects an area of recognised landscape quality; and/or
• conflicts with local authority policies for protecting the local character of the countryside.

Moderate adverse 

The project:

• is out of scale with the landscape, or at odds with the local pattern and landform;
• is visually intrusive and would adversely impact on the landscape;
• will not be possible to fully mitigate for i.e. long-term scarring the landscape as some features of interest would be partly destroyed or their setting reduced or removed;
• has an adverse impact on a landscape of recognised quality or on vulnerable and important characteristic features or elements; and/or
• is in conflict with local and national policies to protect open land and nationally recognised countryside.

Large adverse

The project:

• has considerable variance with the landform, scale and pattern of the landscape;
• is visually intrusive and would disrupt fine and valued views of the area;
• is likely to degrade, diminish or even destroy the integrity of a range of characteristic features and elements and their setting;
• is substantially damaging to a high quality or highly vulnerable landscape, causing it to change and be considerably diminished in quality;
• cannot be adequately mitigated for; and/or
• is in serious conflict with government policy for the protection of nationally recognised countryside.

Very large adverse

The project:

• is in complete variance with the landform, scale and pattern of the landscape;
• is highly visual and extremely intrusive, destroying fine and valued views both into and across the area;
• will irrevocably damage or degrade, badly diminish or even destroy the integrity of characteristic features and elements and their setting;
• causes a very high quality or highly vulnerable landscape to be irrevocably changed and its quality very considerably diminished; ad/or
• cannot be mitigated for, that is, there are no measures that would protect or replace the loss of a nationally important landscape.

Visual Impact Assessment

The Visual Envelope (VE) is defined in the DMRB as the area from which a proposed scheme feature is potentially visible. It further states adverse visual impacts in flat areas at more than 1,000 m from the road are unlikely to be significant. Key visual receptors have been identified and the VE was therefore used to define the limits of the study area for the visual impact assessment. An analysis of the likely degree of change resulting from the proposed scheme has been made.

The sensitivity of each visual receptor is assessed, as defined below.

Visual receptor sensitivity

High

Viewers with high interest in their everyday visual environment and/or with prolonged and regular viewing opportunities, such as:-

• residents; or
• users of outdoor recreational facilities whose attention or interest could be focused on the landscape e.g. walkers and horse riders.

Medium

Viewers with moderate interest in their environment and discontinuous and/or irregular viewing periods, such as:-

• workers (outdoors); or
• users engaged in outdoor sport or recreation other than appreciation of the landscape e.g. golf, hunting, angling or water based activities.

Low

Viewers with a passing interest in their surroundings and momentary viewing periods, such as:-

• drivers/travellers/passengers of moving vehicles; or
• people at their place of work

The scale or magnitude of visual change relates to the extent of change upon visual amenity as a result of the proposed scheme. Visual impacts have been determined by:

• The change in view with respect to loss or addition of features in the view and changes in its composition including the proportion of view occupied by the proposed scheme.
• The degree of contrast and/or change in the landscape with the existing landscape elements and characteristics.
• The duration and nature of effect.
• The angle of view in relation to the main activity of the receptor.
• The distance of viewpoint from the proposed development.
• The dominance of the impact feature in the view.

Definitions used to determine the magnitude of visual impact are shown below.

Assessment of magnitude of visual impact

Major

The proposed scheme would dominate or form a significant and immediately apparent part of the view that affects and changes its overall character or it would cause a very significant deterioration in the existing view.

Moderate

The proposed scheme would form a visible and recognisable new element of the view within the overall character and a noticeable deterioration in the existing view.

Minor

The proposed scheme would constitute only a minor component of the wider view and would cause a barely perceptible deterioration in the existing view.

Negligible

Only a very small part or no part of the proposed scheme would be visible. No discernible deterioration or improvement in the existing view.

No change

No observable change in view.

The significance of the visual impact is determined by correlation of the sensitivity of the visual receptor and the magnitude of impact with the resulting significance of visual effect matrix detailed in Table 7.2.

Table 7.2 Significance of visual effects

Impact Magnitude	High	Medium	Low
Major	Very large/large	Large/moderate	Moderate/slight
Moderate	Large/moderate	Moderate/slight	Slight
Minor	Moderate/slight	Slight	Slight/neutral
Negligible	Slight/neutral	Neutral	Neutral
No change	Neutral	Neutral	Neutral

Policy/Regulatory Framework

Planning

• Highland-wide Local Development Plan (HwLDP) is the Highland Council’s vision for the whole area (Highland Council, 2012). It sets out how land can be used by developers for the next 20 years, but excludes the area covered by the Cairngorms National Park, which has its own plan.

• Planning Advice Note (PAN) 75 Planning for Transport. This PAN aims to create greater awareness of how linkages between planning and transport can be managed. It highlights the roles of different bodies and professions in the process and points to other sources of information.

• Scottish Planning Policy, Scottish Government, 2014.

Study area

For the visual impact the study was confined to the Zone of Visual Impact (Figure 7.2), defined as the theoretical boundary at which the proposed scheme would be visible and largely depending on surrounding topography and habitats. The landscape study area was considered within its wider setting in relation to existing Landscape Character Assessment. A search for areas with existing landscape designations was undertaken within 10 km of the proposed scheme footprint.

Character of the Existing Baseline

Landscape

• The proposed works are not located within a National Scenic Area (NSA), National Park or Special Landscape Area.
• The bridge is located in a rural location (Figure 7.1) with views of the surrounding woodland and hills beyond.
• The verges are mainly grass and are fringed with intermittent broadleaf trees.
• Land use within the study area is predominantly a mixture of rough pasture and broadleaf woodland.
• There is an old masonry arch bridge directly adjacent to the trunk road bridge which adds interest to the landscape.
• The trunk road follows the line of the nearby River Moriston and is currently single track with passing places at this location.
• There are no public footpaths within the proposed scheme, however, there is an old drove road which runs to the north of the proposed scheme linking Fort Augustus to Tomich (Strathglass). This is part of the long distance drove route between Wester Ross and on to the south via the Corrieyairack Pass (see Scotways Heritage Paths Project website).
• There is minimal development within the area of the proposed scheme. There is, however, major linear infrastructure in the form of the Beauly to Denny power line which has recently been upgraded and runs to the west of the proposed scheme.

A review of Landscape Character Assessment within the study area shows the site lies within the Wooded Glen landscape type, as identified in the Inverness District Landscape Character Assessment (SNH Review No 114). The key characteristics of the Wooded Glen are:

• Broad glen with steep upper slopes undulating lower slope and a narrow floor mostly occupied by river terraces.
• Character strongly influenced by human occupation.
• Mix of broadleaf woodland, small plantations and pastures covering the lower slopes.
• Large plantations and open moorlands covering the upper slopes.
• Limited visibility with the glen floor creating an intimate semi-enclosed landscape.
• Areas of open hill ground allowing distant views of the glens creating a feeling of openness and exposure.
• Varying pattern of woodland on the glen sides and hill tops.
• Broadleaf woodland common along steep gully sides, lining river banks and often associated with farmland, sheltering farmsteads and dividing fields.

Features of cultural heritage interest within the landscape are described in Chapter 5: Section 5.5.

There is a recognisable structure and features worthy of conservation, however, given the lack of landscape designation at a local, regional or national level, the landscape value is considered to be Ordinary.

The landscape quality would be susceptible to a medium level of change and effective mitigation is considered possible although this may take time to be effective. The sensitivity is, therefore, considered to be Medium.

Visual

The A887 trunk road forms part of the main route between Inverness and the Isle of Skye and is used by commercial, local and tourist traffic.

Zone of Visual Influence

The Zone of Visual Influence (ZVI) of the proposed scheme as well as the extent and the location of visual receptors used to assess baseline conditions is shown in Figure 7.2.

The ZVI is determined by the surrounding topography and is restricted to the areas north and south of the bridge. Much of the area to the west of the proposed scheme has restricted views due to the presence of surrounding forest.

Existing Views

There are no public viewpoints that afford an overview of the proposed scheme. The surrounding area is accessible and views can be obtained from the old drove road that runs north under the power line and past the 380 m high Meall na Doire hill. In addition, views can be gained from the minor road leading to Inverwick on the south side of the river. The existing A887 is screened by trees particularly in the summer. In winter, the moving cars make the trunk road a more visible element within the landscape.

The visibility of the elements within the site will change in relation to the location of the viewer. The different type of views can be categorised as:

• External: where the site is viewed from various viewpoints and distances allowing it to be considered in its wider landscape context.
• Internal: where the site is viewed while travelling along the A887. The view will vary according to season.
• Sequential: viewing the changing aspect during approach whereby the context and different angles of view vary with distance from the proposed scheme.

Receptors

The nearest houses are at Torgyle to the south and Dundreggan to the north. The bridge is not visible to any of the properties and so they have not been identified as visual receptors. The A887 runs through a rural area at this point and there are few permanent receptors. The receptors chosen reflect the view from the road, for walkers using the drove road and from vehicles using the minor road on the far side of the river. The receptors (shown in Figure 7.2) are detailed in the following section.

VR1: view from drove road. The line of the drove road runs up the west side of Meall na Doire hill (380 m), however, the valley landforms block any possible view of the road from this altitude (Figure 7.3). In both summer and winter the view from the drove road is obscured by trees (Figure 7.4 and Figure 7.5). The current view comprises glimpses of the road, the River Moriston and its flood plain and the surrounding area is dominated by semi-natural broadleaf woodland along with conifer plantation in the distance. This is juxtaposed by the newly-constructed Beauly to Denny line electricity pylons and the visual impact caused by the new access road. This has resulted in removal of the original drove road immediately to the north of this visual receptor.

As walkers using this route are principally there to enjoy the landscape it is considered that the sensitivity is High. This receptor experiences an external view which changes as walkers move along the route.

VR2: view from Inverwick minor road (Figure 7.6 and Figure 7.7). The route is considered to be used infrequently, terminating at Inverwick and is mainly used for local access. There are also likely to be anglers and other recreational users of the countryside in the area. There are occasional views of the A887 road and houses, the main view being a wide vista of hills and forest, and river valley. The view is obscured by trees in both summer and winter. The key characteristics of the landscape character are the surrounding hills and forestry and the form of the river valley. The most obvious form of current land management is the existing arrangement plus the new Beauly to Denny pylon line and associated access track.

It is considered that this visual receptor has an external view of the bridge with High sensitivity.

VR3: view from A887 trunk road (Figure 7.8 and Figure 7.9). This is the most significant receptor in terms of the number of travellers that will view the site. The existing view is dominated by the river and its floodplain and the surrounding forest as the single track road winds its way through the valley. The existing bridge is noticeable only briefly to vehicle travellers as they pass, although pedestrians and cyclists using the route will experience views of the bridge for a longer period of time. There is little evidence of obvious land management and the pylon line, though visible, is less dominant at this visual receptor.

Many of the travellers will be tourists or locals using the road on a regular basis and there is thus a Medium sensitivity to change in the view of the surrounding landscape. This receptor will experience both internal and sequential views.

Landscape Impact

The impacted area of landscape will be restricted to the area of the works which totals 9895m² (based on land purchase requirements). The landscape value is considered to be Ordinary and the sensitivity is Medium.

The main permanent impacts will be:

• loss of areas of trees in the vicinity of the bridge;
• re-profiling of land;
• increasing the width of bridge and tie-ins from single track to double track; and
• demolition of historic masonry arch bridge.

Landscape impacts are detailed as follows and summarised in Table 7.3. Impacts are adverse unless stated otherwise.

The loss of trees will be particularly noticeable at year 1 and the impact would be considered to be Minor Adverse magnitude and Slight Adverse significance, however, this will only comprise a relatively small part of the total area of surrounding woodland and will be considered to be Negligible magnitude and Neutral significance by year 15 through compensation planting. These effects are not considered significant in the context of the EIA Regulations.

The areas of cut and fill are unavoidable and necessary for the construction of the bridge and road tie-ins. Where possible this will be softened and made to reflect the contours of the surrounding landscape. Due to the loss of ground vegetation this will be particularly noticeable at year 1 with an impact of Moderate Adverse magnitude and Slight Adverse significance but will be softened by year 15 with a Negligible Adverse magnitude and Neutral significance.

Table 7.3 Summary of landscape impacts

Potential Impact	Duration of impact	Significance Year 1	Significance Year 15
Loss of trees	Permanent	Slight Adverse	Neutral
Reprofiling of land	Temporary	Slight Adverse	Neutral
Widening of road/bridge	Permanent	Slight Adverse	Neutral
Loss of bridge	Permanent	Moderate Adverse	Moderate Adverse
Construction	Temporary	Neutral (Slight Adverse during construction)	Neutral

The increase in width of the road and bridge will change the character of the road within one of the last remaining single track sections on the A887 trunk road. However, this represents a safety improvement for drivers which must be balanced against the potential landscape impact. The impact will also be softened through appropriate mitigation measures. Overall, it is considered to be Minor Adverse magnitude and Slight Adverse significance at year 1 with a Negligible Adverse magnitude and Neutral significance by year 15. These effects are not considered significant in the context of the EIA Regulations.

The structure of the historic masonry bridge is not currently visible from the road, only the grassed-over surface is visible. The only real view is when approaching from the north side (Figure 7.10). There is no possible mitigation measure for the loss of the bridge and the impact from this specific aspect must be considered Major Adverse magnitude and Moderate Adverse significance at both year 1 and 15. This is considered to be a significant effect in the context of the EIA Regulations. Note there is no viable alternative to demolition of the bridge (see Chapter 5: Cultural Heritage, Section 5.7). Other potential impacts on features of cultural heritage interest in the landscape is given in Chapter 5, Section 5.6.

There will also be construction-related impacts during the works through:

• presence of plant, vehicles and machinery;
• presence of a site compound; and
• a temporary bridge and associated tie-ins.

These construction impacts are considered to be temporary and unavoidable and during the works are considered to be of Moderate Adverse magnitude and Slight Adverse significance. Provided the site compound area is reinstated, and the site is left clean and tidy, the construction impact is considered to be Negligible Adverse magnitude and Neutral significance at both year 1 and year 15. In the context of the EIA Regulations, these effects are not considered to be significant.

Visual Impact

Visual impact assessment is detailed as follows and summarised in Table 7.4. Impacts are adverse unless stated otherwise.

Table 7.4 Summary of visual impacts

Receptor ID	Sensitivity	Duration of impact	Magnitude	Significance
VR1 View from drove road	High	Permanent	Minor	Slight
VR2 View from Inverwick minor road	High	Permanent	Minor	Slight
VR3 View from A887 trunk road	Medium	Permanent	Minor	Slight

VR1: there will be No Change to views from the drove road during the summer leading to a Neutral significance of effect. However, the new bridge will be more visible during the winter. The view from the drove road will also be brief and will change as walkers move along the route. The magnitude of the impact is considered to be Minor with a Slight significance of effect in winter.

VR2: again there will be No Change to views from the minor road and recreation users on this side of the river during the summer leading to a Neutral significance of effect. During winter, the new bridge will be more visible but with mitigation, the magnitude of impact is considered to be Minor with a Slight significance of effect.

VR3: there will be a Minor impact on the view experienced from the A887. There will be no difference between summer and winter, and the significance of effect is considered to be Slight.

None of the above effects on the visual receptors are considered to be significant in the context of the EIA Regulations.

Design, Mitigation and Enhancement

There are a number of measures that can be incorporated to reduce the residual landscape and visual impact.

• The design will seek to minimise the footprint of the works.
• Topsoil will be carefully stripped and stored separately for the duration of the works.
• Areas required for site compound and temporary bridge will be restored with landforms that fit in with the contours of the surrounding landscape. This principle will also be applied to the general landscaping of the site following completion of the works.
• Site-won topsoil will be used for landscaping to ensure the re-establishment of the ground flora.
• Existing masonry from the demolished masonry arch bridge will be used to face the new parapets to soften the impact.
• Woodland areas that are removed will be replanted using native species of local provenance.
• An appropriate light seed mix will be applied to introduce ground cover while the seed bank re-establishes the native flora.
• The effectiveness of the mitigation should be monitored for up to 5 years post-construction.

The design is currently at an early stage. The relevant roads Operating Company will employ the services of an appropriately-qualified Ecological Clerk of Works (ECoW) to oversee the most sensitive operations during construction. Taking consideration of the design requirements and with the implementation of the proposed mitigation measures, it is anticipated that the proposed scheme will comply with relevant policies and plans including Scottish Planning Policy, 2014.

Summary

Overall it is considered that the visual impact will be minimal. The only receptor with a clear unobscured view of the bridge is from the A887 trunk road (VR3). With the new parapet faced in stone it is considered that visual impact will be minimised and will be Slight significance at most.

The main landscape impact will be the loss of the historic masonry arch bridge. This is irreversible and cannot really be mitigated for. However, it is only really visible in the landscape when approaching from the woodland to the north. The loss of the structure will represent a Moderate adverse impact significance. In the context of the EIA Regulations, this is considered to be a significant effect. However, the overall impact on the landscape character is assessed as a Slight adverse significance.