Landscape

1  LANDSCAPE PHILOSOPHY

1. A Setting for the Proposed Energy from Waste Facility

The main aspect of the landscape philosophy for the design for the Energy from Waste site is to provide a suitable setting for the proposed development acknowledging that it cannot be screened but that it can be enhanced by providing it with a setting of a type and scale that assists its appearance, particularly from sensitive viewpoints to the east of La Collette.

Part of this provision of a suitable setting is the improvement of the appearance of the existing landform of the ash mound adjacent to the site by adding material that would remove the utilitarian engineered terraced appearance and create a smooth rounded profile that will be an attractive landform to look at. In addition, to complete the landform for the setting, another mound of similar scale to the re-modelled ash mound would be provided south of the Energy from Waste site after that area has been used for the planned disposal of ash from the power station. Together these landforms would provide the setting.

An essential part of this concept is the avoidance of the site encroaching into the coastal zone of La Collette. This would be achieved by creating a link between the two mounds to provide a low level screen to contain ground clutter and activity associated with the Energy from Waste site. It would be formed in an earth bank, raised at the toe by a line of gabions, and supported at the back by a retaining wall to create a 1:3 slope leading up to the top of the retaining wall. There would be a fence on top of the retaining wall to ensure all low-level activity is screened out of sight in views from the east. The layout of the emergency access along the outer edge of La Collette (the "promenade") would maximise the width for planting so that the bank would provide a minimum width of 10 metres to contain new planting increasing to approximately 20 metres where possible to allow an increase in level of the height of the embankment. The bank would then be planted with trees and shrubs to initially soften the appearance of the fence and later hide it in views from the east.

2. A Screen for the Fuel Tanks

Another important objective for the landscape treatment along the eastern side of La Collette is to screen the existing fuel tanks within the industrial area on La Collette for views from the east. The proposed Energy from Waste facility would, when constructed, obscure these tanks in the

views from Havre des Pas and for part way round the bay of La Greve D'Azette, but beyond these areas the fuel tanks would be visible beyond the end of the Energy from Waste buildings. In these circumstances the importance of the embankment and fence, but more so the tree planting on the embankment, is confirmed, because it is likely that until the tree planting has grown to be higher that the fence, the tops of the tanks would be visible for these locations over the top of the fence.

3. Landscape Integration

It would be important to link the setting for the Energy from Waste site into the broader area adjacent to La Collette in order to satisfactorily integrate the proposed development into its surroundings. To achieve this new planting would be used on the re-modelled ash mound, (and that proposed across the 1:3 embankment described above), to relate to the existing vegetation on Mount Bingham, the area adjacent to La Collette in views from the east. Here evergreen oak (Quercus ilex), pines (Pinus nigra) and sycamore (Acer pseudoplatantus) are well established mature trees proving their suitability for exposed saline conditions. Therefore these species and others that would withstand the exposure and saline conditions that would occur on La Collette would compose the palette of plants to be used for the new landscape.

4. A "Natural Character" Low Maintenance Landscape

Apart from being composed of exposure and saline tolerant plant species the landscape planting would aim to create an informal, low maintenance environment of naturalised character in which rough grass areas would consist largely of wild grass species and wild flora. This would be achieved by the use of low nutrient soil to form the seeding areas. Higher fertility soil would be used for tree planting areas to enhance their growth prospects, particularly for the planting across the embankment between the mounds. If such soil is used it would be important to ensure an appropriate weed control programme is in place to maintain the new planting during its critical establishment stage. The new planting would be small sized forestry transplants and whips provided with suitable sized tree and shrub shelters primarily to assist their establishment and also to protect them from rabbits if present or other creatures that would damage new plants. It would also be an advantage to use mulch mats for tree planting, these assist in reducing weed competition and in conserving moisture.

5. Indication of Future Intent

The future mound to the south, referred to above, would be formed several years after the construction of the Energy from Waste facility, the re-modeling of the ash mound and the formation on the embankment along the promenade. In order to communicate a firm intention to the public to complete the whole landform it would be useful to leave the southern end of the embankment at a level that indicates further work lies ahead. Given this situation, the layout of

the emergency access allowing the creation of a wider area at the southern end of the embankment has added importance beyond that of maximising the area for raising the landform and for planting in that location.

2  METHODOLGY FOR ASSESSMENT OF LANDSCAPE & VISUAL IMPACTS

EFFECTS

1. Introduction

The landscape and visual assessment have been undertaken with reference to the Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment' prepared by the Landscape Institute (LI) and Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (IEMA), 2002.

The landscape assessment involves an initial desktop study, collating baseline information on the site and its environs and landscape quality. This included a review of the relevant Local Plans and consultation with the relevant departments of the States of Jersey.

A site survey was undertaken to confirm key issues of concern in relation to the landscape and visual quality within the project's environs.

The information collated during the survey was used to assess the potential landscape and visual impacts associated with the proposed project.

2. Identification of Landscape and Visual Impacts

Although landscape and visual assessments are closely related, they are considered separately. Landscape effects result from changes in the physical landscape which lead to changes in landscape character and how the landscape is experienced. Visual effects, however, relate to changes that arise in the composition of available views, the significance of the changes and the overall effect on visual amenity.

3. Landscape Effects

The ability of a particular landscape to accommodate change, referred to as the sensitivity of the landscape, will vary with:

• the existing land use on the site and surrounding areas;
• the presence of existing detractors;
• the pattern and scale of the landscape;
• topography and enclosure;
• the scope for acceptable mitigation i.e. measures in keeping with existing landscape character; and
• the perceived value placed on the landscape.

4. Visual Effects

Visual impact assessment considers the changes in available views due to a development.

The sensitivity of the visual receptor or viewer will depend on the location and context of the viewpoint, the expectations and activity of the receptor and the importance of the view (e.g. recognised viewpoints or those with cultural links). The most sensitive receptors are likely to include those taking part in outdoor recreational activities, those using public rights of way and residents. Other receptors may include people traveling through an area or those that work locally. The scale of visual effects depends on a number of variables. The following factors were considered when determining the scale of visual effects:

• degree of change in the view with respect to the elements seen, the proportion of the view affected (this varies with distance from the proposed development);
• the appropriateness of new features in the wider landscape context (in terms of form, texture, colour, height and materials) and existing detractors;
• the nature, duration and possibly frequency of any effects (this may be linked to climate and typical weather conditions as long-distance views are often prevented by rain and haze); and
• the relative position of the visual receptor and the change (e.g. developments that break the skyline generally have a greater impact than those which do not).

The significance of visual impacts is a factor of both the sensitivity of the receptor and the scale of the effect.

5. Mitigation

The main mitigation for landscape and visual effects would be, in the first place, refinement of the proposed development where possible to minimise impacts. Thereafter, the choice of materials and planting and other design aspects, where appropriate, would be suitable measures.

6. Assessment Criteria

As discussed above, the significance of landscape and visual impacts depends on both the sensitivity of the receptor and the magnitude of the impact. The following criteria are based on the examples set out in the Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (Second Edition) by the Landscape Institute and Institute of Environmental Management & Assessment.

7. Landscape

The sensitivity of the landscape is determined by:

• the existing land use on the site and surrounding areas;
• the presence of existing detractors;
• the pattern and scale of the landscape;
• topography and enclosure;

• the scope for acceptable mitigation i.e. measures in keeping with existing landscape character; and
• the perceived value placed on the landscape.

The magnitude of landscape impact will depend on the scale of change in relation to these factors.

The significance of landscape effects is a combination of the sensitivity of the receptor landscape and the magnitude of impact, as set out in the table below. The assessment has used this table as the initial basis for significance of impact but the assessments of significance has been adjusted if necessary, and justified, to reflect site characteristics and conditions.

HS=Highly Significant, S=Significant, MS=Minor Significance, NS=Not Significant

8. Visual Impact

The sensitivity of visual receptors depends on the location and context of the viewpoint, the expectations of the receptor and the importance of the view. The most sensitive receptors are those involved in recreational activities in areas known for their scenic beauty. Those working or traveling through an area will be less sensitive to changes in views.

The magnitude of visual impact will be determined by:

• the degree of change in the view with respect to the elements seen, the proportion of the view affected (this varies with distance from the proposed development);
• the appropriateness of new features in the wider landscape context (in terms of form, texture, colour, height and materials) and existing detractors;
• the nature, duration and possibly frequency of any effects (this may be linked to climate and typical weather conditions as long-distance views are often prevented by rain and haze);
• the relative position of the visual receptor and the change (e.g. developments that break the skyline generally have a greater impact than those which do not).

The significance of visual impacts is identified by a combination of the sensitivity of the visual receptor and the magnitude of visual impact, as set out in the table below. The visual impact assessment has used this table as the initial basis for significance of impact but the assessments of significance has been adjusted if necessary, and justified, to reflect site based characteristics and conditions.

HS=Highly Significant, S=Significant, MS=Minor Significance, NS=Not Significant