berrimal wind farm...6.0 landscape and visual impact assessment methodology 42 6.1 sensitivity and...

Berrimal Wind Farm LVIA

Acciona Energy Oceania

21st October 2013

BERRIMALWIND FARM

Landscape + Visual Impact Assessment

AECOM Berrimal Wind Farm LVIA Berrimal Wind Farm

Prepared for – Acciona Energy Oceania – ABN: 98 102 345 719

Berrimal Wind Farm Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

Client: Acciona Energy Oceania

ABN: 98 102 345 719

Prepared by

AECOM Australia Pty Ltd Level 9, 8 Exhibition Street, Melbourne VIC 3000, Australia T +61 3 9653 1234 F +61 3 9654 7117 www.aecom.com ABN 20 093 846 925

21st October 2013

Job No.: 60280574

AECOM in Australia and New Zealand is certified to the latest version of ISO9001, ISO14001, AS/NZS4801 and OHSAS18001.

© AECOM Australia Pty Ltd (AECOM). All rights reserved.

AECOM has prepared this document for the sole use of the Client and for a specific purpose, each as expressly stated in the document. No other party should rely on this document without the prior written consent of AECOM. AECOM undertakes no duty, nor accepts any responsibility, to any third party who may rely upon or use this document. This document has been prepared based on the Client’s description of its requirements and AECOM’s experience, having regard to assumptions that AECOM can reasonably be expected to make in accordance with sound professional principles. AECOM may also have relied upon information provided by the Client and other third parties to prepare this document, some of which may not have been verified. Subject to the above conditions, this document may be transmitted, reproduced or disseminated only in its entirety.



Quality Information

Document Berrimal Wind Farm

Ref 60280574

Date 21st October 2013

Prepared by Adam Kiekebosch, Emily Shaw and Geoff Williams

Reviewed by Adam Kiekebosch

Revision History

Revision Revision Date

Details Authorised

Name/Position Signature

1 21/12/2012 Baseline Assessment Adam Kiekebosch Principal Landscape Architect

As originally signed

2 13/6/2013 Draft Impact Assessment Adam Kiekebosch Principal Landscape Architect

As originally signed

3 21-Oct-2013 Cumulative and Night Lighting assessment added

Adam Kiekebosch Principal Landscape Architect



Table of Contents Figures 6 Tables 7 Executive Summary 1 1.0 Introduction 5

1.1 Purpose of the Study 5 1.2 Study Area 5 1.3 Project Description 5 1.4 Study Methodology 5

2.0 Legislation, Planning & Policy context 10 2.1 Federal Legislation 10 2.2 State Legislation 10

2.2.1 Planning and Environment Act 1987 10 2.2.2 State Planning Policy Framework 10

2.3 Local Planning Policy 11 2.3.1 Municipal Strategic Statement 11 2.3.2 Local Planning Policy 12 2.3.3 Zones and Overlays 12

3.0 Existing Landscape and Visual Character 16 3.1 Methodology 16 3.2 Regional Landscape Context 16 3.3 Study Area Landscape Context 16

3.3.1 Land Use 16 3.3.2 Landform and Hydrology 16 3.3.3 Vegetation 17

4.0 Landscape Character Types 21 4.1 Landscape Character Types 23

4.1.1 LCT1: Avoca River Corridor 23 4.1.2 LCT2: Towns 25 4.1.3 LCT3: Mallee Shrubland 27 4.1.4 LCT4: Undulating Pastoral 29 4.1.5 LCT5: Flat Pastoral 31

5.0 Representative Public Viewpoints 33 5.1 Viewpoint selection 33

5.1.1 Identification of Zone of Theoretical Visual Influence 33 5.1.2 Desktop studies 33 5.1.3 Site visit 33

5.2 Viewpoint descriptions 36 5.2.1 Viewpoint 1 36 5.2.2 Viewpoint 2 37 5.2.3 Viewpoint 3 38 5.2.4 Viewpoint 4 39 5.2.5 Viewpoint 5 40 5.2.6 Viewpoint 6 41

6.0 Landscape and visual impact assessment methodology 42 6.1 Sensitivity and magnitude of change 42

6.1.1 Sensitivity 42 6.1.2 Magnitude of change 42

6.2 Determination of impact significance 43 6.3 Community perceptions of impacts resulting from Wind Farm developments 43

7.0 Landscape Impact Assessment 45 7.1 Direct Impacts 45

7.1.1 LCT4: Undulating Pastoral 45 7.2 Potential indirect impacts 45

7.2.1 LCT1: Avoca River Corridor 46 7.2.2 LCT2: Towns 46



7.2.3 LCT3: Mallee Shrubland 46 7.2.4 LCT5: Flat Pastoral 46

8.0 Visual Impact Assessment 48 8.1 Viewpoint 1 48 8.2 Viewpoint 2 50 8.3 Viewpoint 3 52 8.4 Viewpoint 4 54 8.5 Viewpoint 5 56 8.6 Viewpoint 6 58

9.0 Night Lighting Impacts 60 9.1 Introduction 60 9.2 Proposed obstacle lighting scheme 60 9.3 Existing visual setting at night 60 9.4 Potential night lighting impacts 60

9.4.1 Extent of visibility 61 9.4.2 Light spill 61 9.4.3 Impacts upon residential dwellings 61 9.4.4 Impacts upon roadways and other public areas 61

9.5 Mitigation of night lighting impacts 62 10.0 Cumulative Impacts 63

10.1 Introduction 63 10.2 Adjacent Wind Farms 63 10.3 Potential cumulative impacts 63

10.3.1 Area subjected to cumulative impacts 63 10.3.2 Cumulative impacts 63

11.0 Conclusions 68 11.1 Expected Landscape Impacts 68 11.2 Expected Visual Impacts 68 11.3 Potential night lighting impacts 69 11.4 Cumulative impacts 69 11.5 Potential for mitigation 70

11.5.1 On-site mitigation 70 11.5.2 Off-site mitigation 70

12.0 Glossary 71 12.1 Abbreviations 71 12.2 Definitions 71

13.0 References 73 Appendix A 74

Representative Public Viewpoint Photographs and Photomontages 74 Appendix B 76

Detailed Study Methodology 76 Introduction 77 Phase A: Establish existing landscape and visual character baseline 77

Review of legislation and planning policy 77 Desktop analysis of the landscape and visual resource 78 Prepare Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) Assessment 78 Field survey to verify and refine understanding of the landscape and visual resource 79 Definition, description and illustration of the landscape baseline 79 Definition, description and illustration of the visual baseline 79 Landscape character assessment 79

Phase B: Evaluation of the Impacts on the Landscape and Visual Resource 80 Prepare photo montages 85 Prepare Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment report 85



Figures Figure 1 Project Location 7 Figure 2 LVIA Study Area 8 Figure 3 Potential obstacle lighting locations 9 Figure 4 Planning scheme - Land Use Zoning 14 Figure 5 Planning scheme - relevant Overlays 15 Figure 6 Topography and Hydrology 18 Figure 7 Slope Analysis 19 Figure 8 Existing Vegetation 20 Figure 9 Landscape Character Types (LCTs) 22 Figure 10 Typical Character of LCT1 24 Figure 11 Typical Character of LCT1 24 Figure 12 Typical Character of LCT2 - Charlton Main Street 26 Figure 13 Typical Character of LCT2 - Wedderburn Main Street 26 Figure 14 Typical Character of LCT3 28 Figure 15 Typical Character of LCT4 30 Figure 16 Typical Character of an ephemeral water course running through LCT4 30 Figure 17 Typical Character of LCT5 32 Figure 18 Typical Character of LCT5 32 Figure 19 Zone of Theoretical Visual Influence (ZTV) 34 Figure 20 Representative Viewpoint Locations 35 Figure 21 Viewpoint 1 existing view 36 Figure 22 Viewpoint 2 existing view 37 Figure 23 Viewpoint 3 existing view 38 Figure 24 Viewpoint 4 existing view 39 Figure 25 Viewpoint 5 existing view 40 Figure 26 Viewpoint 6 existing view 41 Figure 27 Viewpoint 1 - existing view 48 Figure 28 Viewpoint 1 – photomontage of view with turbines installed (Refer to Appendix A for

further details) 48 Figure 29 Viewpoint 2 - existing view 50 Figure 30 Viewpoint 2 – photomontage of view with turbines installed (Refer to Appendix A for





further details) 58 Figure 39 Location of Coonooer Bridge Wind Farm relative to Berrimal Wind Farm 64 Figure 40 Coonooer Bridge Wind Farm - Zone of Theoretical Visual Influence (to Turbine Hub) 65 Figure 41 Coonooer Bridge Wind Farm - Zone of Theoretical Visual Influence (to Blade Tip) 66 Figure 42 Cumulative Zone of Theoretical Influence - Berrimal and Coonooer Bridge Wind Farms

(to Turbine Hub) 67 Figure 43 Approach to evaluating the significance of change 82



Tables Table 1 SPPF clauses relevant to the landscape & visual values of the project 10 Table 2 Municipal Strategic Statement policies relevant to LVIA 11 Table 3 Local Planning Policies relevant to LVIA 12 Table 4 Zones and Overlays relevant to LVIA 12 Table 5 Impact of Wind Farms on visual appeal – NSW (ECC&W, 2010) 43 Table 6 Landscape Impact Assessment – LCT 4 (Undulating Pastoral) 45 Table 7 Visual Impact Assessment - Viewpoint 1 49 Table 8 Visual Impact Assessment - Viewpoint 2 51 Table 9 Visual Impact Assessment - Viewpoint 3 53 Table 10 Visual Impact Assessment - Viewpoint 4 55 Table 11 Visual Impact Assessment - Viewpoint 5 57 Table 12 Visual Impact Assessment - Viewpoint 6 59 Table 13 Summary of Landscape Impacts 68 Table 14 Summary of Visual Impacts 68 Table 15 Levels of Visual Importance 81 Table 16 Significance of Landscape Impacts 83 Table 17 Significance of Visual Impacts 84



1

Executive Summary This Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) has been prepared by AECOM Australia Pty Ltd (hereinafter referred to as AECOM) on behalf of Acciona Energy Oceania Pty Ltd (the Client). The LVIA concerns the proposed Berrimal Wind Farm, located approximately 210km northwest of Melbourne near the town of Wedderburn. The purpose of this report is to assess the potential landscape and visual impacts which may arise as a result of this Berrimal Wind Farm project.

This LVIA has a study area with a radius of 20km from the location of each of the proposed turbine locations. Identification of this 20km study area was based upon the project description, a site visit, information contained within good practice guidance, and experience assessing similarly scaled infrastructure projects.

Baseline Assessment

A baseline assessment was undertaken to understand the existing landscape and visual character of the study area as a basis for assessing potential future landscape and visual impacts which may arise as a result of the project. This assessment included a review of relevant planning policies and legislation to understand any specific landscape or visual designations relating to the study area, as well as a desktop study and field work to understand the various elements that combine to create landscape and visual character. A Zone of Theoretical Visual Influence analysis (refer Figure 19) was also undertaken to understand the potential extent of visibility of the wind turbines within the study area.

The baseline assessment identified a total of five distinct Landscape Character Types (LCTs) within the study area, including:

Avoca River Corridor (LCT 1)

Towns (LCT 2)

Mallee Shrubland (LCT 3)

Undulating Pastoral (LCT 4)

Flat Pastoral (LCT 5)

These identified LCTs formed the basis of the landscape impact assessment, with potential landscape impacts arising from the Berrimal Wind Farm assessed against the existing conditions of each respective LCT.

A total of six representative public viewpoints were identified (refer to Figure 20), and these formed the basis of the visual impact assessment. These viewpoints were selected on the basis that the Wind Farm is expected to be visible from these locations, and that they are views experienced by concentrations of visual receptors (e.g. dominant vehicular routes and public locations in close proximity to groupings of residential dwellings). They are thus considered representative of the range of views that may be experienced by visual receptors within the study area.

Photomontages were produced from each of the Representative Public Viewpoints to illustrate the expected extent of the Wind Farm within the landscape and to aid in communication of expected impacts. These are included within Appendix A.

Landscape Impact Assessment Findings

Direct Landscape Impacts

Direct landscape impacts relate to impacts upon landscape character which may occur upon LCTs as a direct result of the presence of the Berrimal Wind Farm within an area of a particular landscape character. The potential for direct impacts upon landscape character is restricted to LCT 4 (Undulating Pastoral). The expected landscape impacts upon this LCT are minor to moderate.

Whilst the presence of the Berrimal Wind Farm is considered to be a considerable change in character within a relatively restricted area of LCT 4, its presence is not expected to result in a fundamental change in landscape character as the defining characteristics of the landscape (rolling topography, expansive pasture and scattered native trees) will remain intact.



2

Indirect Landscape Impacts

Indirect landscape impacts relate to potential impacts which may occur upon LCTs which are adjacent to the Berrimal Wind Farm site. As these landscape types fall outside of the project area there is no potential for loss or removal of landscape elements such as trees or existing landform. Therefore effects are restricted to changes in landscape character that may occur when modifications within the LCT(s) occupied by the Wind Farm itself indirectly affect perceptions of adjacent LCTs. This is sometimes termed ‘borrowed character’.

The potential for indirect landscape impacts upon the remaining identified LCTs is typically limited by the inwardly focused nature of the landscapes contained within. In the cases of LCT 1 (Avoca River Corridor), LCT 2 (Towns) and LCT 3 (Mallee Shrubland), existing elements, including built form, vegetation and land form, typically combine to restrict views towards the Wind Farm and therefore limit the ability of the turbines to impact upon landscape character. The inherent features of these landscapes are expected to remain intact.

Views towards the Wind Farm are expected to be experienced from within LCT 5 (Flat Pastoral), however the presence of the wind turbines within the wider landscape is not expected to impact upon the critical elements of LCT 5 and its inherent character is thus expected to remain intact.

Whether or not these impacts are perceived as being adverse, positive, or neutral is considered to be subjective and influenced by the unique perspectives of individual receptors (refer to Section 6.3).

Visual Impact Assessment Findings

The fairly uniform landscape character of the study area (dominated by LCT 4 (Undulating Pastoral) and LCT 5 (Flat Pastoral)) typically results in a commensurately uniform set of viewing conditions across the study area, with minor variations occurring as a result of localised topographic and vegetative conditions. This, coupled with very little variation in the type of visual receptors whom will experience views (local residents and workers predominating and also being the most sensitive due to their familiarity with their surroundings and the frequency with which they experience views), means that the major defining factor in the level of visual impact expected from individual representative viewpoints is the proximity of the viewpoint to the turbines.

The greatest levels of impact are expected from representative public viewpoints 3, 5 and 6 (Moderate). These are relatively close to the Wind Farm (between 2.1 and 2.4km away), meaning that the turbines are clearly noticeable within the views and, in occupying a large proportion of the view, form a considerable change in visual character when compared to the existing conditions.

The potential for visual impacts lessens with distance from the Wind Farm, with representative public viewpoints 1, 2 and 3 assessed as only having minor to moderate potential impacts. From these viewpoints, the turbines typically appear as smaller elements within the view and therefore exert less influence upon the existing visual character.

Whether or not these impacts are perceived as being adverse, positive, or neutral is considered to be subjective and influenced by the unique perspectives of individual receptors (refer to Section 6.3).

Potential night lighting impacts

The Berrimal Wind Farm may require obstacle lighting to be fitted to the top of the hub of up to 13 turbines.

Whilst single point and consolidated groupings of light sources are typical of the study area (associated with the dwellings scattered throughout), these existing light sources are typically constant and therefore tend to be less visually dominant or noticeable than a flashing group of lights as would be associated with the Berrimal Wind Farm.

Should obstacle lighting be required within the Berrimal Wind Farm, it will result in the presence of a series of flashing lights in a portion of the night landscape which previously was free of artificial light sources.

Given lower levels of use and activity within the landscape and reduced traffic volumes on roadways outside of daylight hours, fewer receptors are expected to be exposed to views of the lighting than are exposed to daytime views of the wind farm.



3

Given the type of lighting involved and associated shielding, light spill towards the surrounding landscape is not expected to be experienced, with the function of the lighting to provide a single point light source rather than to illuminate the surrounding area.

The obstacle lighting is not expected to be visibly dominant from within dwellings or their immediate surrounds when internal and external dwelling lighting is in use. When dwelling lighting is not in use, or where it is of relatively low intensity, the wind farm lighting may be clearly evident where direct views to the turbines are available from residential dwellings or their immediate surrounds. In locations where screening may not be permissible, the lighting may create a visual intrusion upon the receptors associated with each dwelling, with impacts greatest upon the dwellings in close proximity to the wind farm (within 3 km) to the south west and north east of the wind farm.

The obstacle lighting is expected to be visible from the Calder Highway, Charlton-St Arnaud Road and Logan-Wedderburn Road. Given the distance of these roads from the wind farm, and the fact that views towards the turbines from all of these roads are perpendicular to the path of travel, night lighting impacts upon users of these roads are not considered significant.

The local road network which traverses the study area between these roads will experience a range of views towards the turbine lighting. Adverse impacts would likely be experienced from these roads, particularly in close proximity to the turbines. The extent and significance of these impacts is highly dependent upon the particular sensitivities of individual receptors, but given that receptors are moving through the area and not experiencing any particular view for a long duration, they are considered to be moderately significant, with impacts decreasing with distance from the turbines.

Whilst views towards the lighting are theoretically possible from Charlton, impacts are considered to be negligible given the distance to the turbines, the screening role of intervening built form within the township, and the existing volume of artificial light sources within Charlton (which will serve to diminish visibility of the obstacle lighting).

Views towards the lights are not expected from Wedderburn.

Cumulative impacts

The presence of multiple wind farms within a broad area can change receptor perceptions of the landscape as a result of repeated exposure to wind turbines.

The Coonooer Bridge Wind Farm has been approved by Buloke Shire Council, and is located approximately 3.6km west of the Berrimal Wind Farm. It will comprise a total of 6 no. wind turbines in any of the 6 approved locations (refer Figure 39), and the turbines will have a maximum blade tip height of 150m, hub height of 90m, and rotor diameter of up to 125m.

Given the Berrimal and Coonooer Bridge Wind Farms are located in close proximity to each other, it is expected that from the majority of viewpoints they will be viewed together and read as one wind farm. As such, cumulative impacts from many areas are diminished as opposed to the case where the wind farms are geographically disparate. Given the consolidation of the turbines within a geographically restricted area, there are not expected to be significant additional impacts upon perceptions of the broader landscape beyond those that would be experienced if either of the Wind Farms were considered in isolation.

The greatest cumulative impacts are expected upon dwellings which are located between the two Wind Farms. From these locations, turbines will be visible in two directions and as such impacts are increased, with a greater percentage of the landscape from these viewpoints occupied by the turbines.

Potential for future mitigation

The scale of the wind turbines (up to 185m in height) typically limits the extent to which on-site mitigation (i.e. within the boundary of the Wind Farm itself) can be employed to effectively mitigate landscape and visual impacts upon the surrounding landscape and associated receptors. On-site mitigation should focus upon screening smaller scale elements such as substations and ancillary buildings.

The most effective mitigation measures therefore are those that can be employed in a site specific context to limit views of the turbines from specific viewpoints. Viewpoints that may warrant such mitigation include nearby residential dwellings and properties with direct views towards the turbines.



4

Here, strategic vegetative planting can be employed to screen views towards the Wind Farm and therefore reduce visual impacts experienced by nearby receptors. The existing mature vegetation located along roads proximate to the site offer some form of visual screening. This mitigation should be focused in locations where sensitive receptors are expected to experience views frequently or for long durations, such as from dwellings, driveways or outdoor residential spaces.

It should be noted that viewpoints from private property have not been assessed within this study – rather representative public viewpoints, considered indicative of the views that may be experienced from the immediate surrounding area, have been assessed in their place. Therefore consultation with land owners will be required to determine the extent to which off-site mitigation may be required. This is particularly pertinent given the range of both positive and negative perceptions within the community regarding visual impacts associated with wind turbines.

Given the scale of the Wind Farm and the extent to which it is expected to be visible within the wider landscape, effective mitigation is not considered feasible within public areas (for example to mitigate impacts upon views from public roads).



5

1.0 Introduction

1.1 Purpose of the Study

This Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) has been prepared by AECOM Australia Pty Ltd (hereinafter referred to as AECOM) on behalf of Acciona Energy Oceania Pty Ltd (the Client). The LVIA concerns the proposed Berrimal Wind Farm, located approximately 210km northwest of Melbourne and close to the town of Wedderburn (refer to Figure 1). The purpose of this report is to assess the potential landscape and visual impacts which may arise as a result of this Berrimal Wind Farm project.

This report provides a detailed assessment of the existing landscape and visual values for the study area, and subsequently assesses the potential impacts upon these values which may arise as a result of the project. The findings of this report will then be used to inform the provision of both on and off-site mitigation measures (if required), which will be prepared as part of a separate study.

1.2 Study Area

The LVIA study area has a radius of 20km from the location of each of the proposed turbine locations (refer to Figure 2). Identification of this 20km study area was based upon the project description, a site visit, information contained within good practice guidance, and experience assessing similarly scaled infrastructure projects.

1.3 Project Description

The Berrimal Wind Farm is located in the Buloke Shire Council in northwest Victoria. The site is approximately 25km northeast of the town of St Arnaud, 18km south of the town of Charlton and 17 kilometres west of Wedderburn. The site stretches along a 5 kilometre ridgeline that covers an area of approximately 545 hectares (ha).

The project will consist of up to 24 x 3MW wind turbine generators and associated infrastructure including hardstand areas, access tracks, underground cabling, a substation, a maintenance facility, and up to four permanent wind monitoring towers. There is also potential for a concrete tower casting plant. During construction, temporary facilities located within the site will include a site office and amenities, waste transfer facilities, secure and bunded hazardous materials storage facilities and a concrete batching plant.

The Wind Farm will consist of up to 24 x 3MW wind turbines with the following maximum dimensions:

Tower height of up to 120m

Rotor diameter of up to 130m

A maximum tip height of 150m

Obstacle lighting may be required to be installed on some of the turbines (in accordance with CASA manual of Standards 139 sections 9.4.3 and 9.4.7). Should it be required, the obstacle lighting would:

Be provided to identify the perimeter of the wind farm at a maximum spacing of 900m (refer to Figure 3 for a plan identifying potential obstacle lighting locations);

Operate at night and in times of reduced visibility;

Be installed on top of the nacelle. To prevent obstacle light shielding by the rotating blades, 2 lights would be provided on top of the nacelle in a way that allows at least 1 of the lights to be seen from every angle in azimuth;

Be medium intensity white or red lights (peak intensity of 2,000 +/- 25% cd for red and peak intensity of 20,000 +/- 25% cd for white) that flash simultaneously across the wind farm, at a minimum rate of 20 flashes per minute (one every 3 seconds);

Be partially shielded such that no more than 5% of the nominal light intensity is emitted at or below 5

degrees below horizontal, and so that no light is emitted at or below 10 degrees below horizontal.

1.4 Study Methodology

A detailed methodology for this LVIA is outlined within Appendix B.



6

Broadly summarised, the study methodology involves the following key tasks:

1. Establish an understanding of the project; namely the location, form and scale of the proposed turbines

and any supporting infrastructure;

2. Understand and describe the existing landscape and visual character of the study area, via desktop

studies and site work, as a means of establishing a baseline against which impacts associated with the

Wind Farm can be assessed;

3. Prepare visualisations which depict the likely visual character of the Wind Farm within the landscape;

and

4. Evaluate expected landscape and visual impacts of the Wind Farm.



7

Figure 1 Project Location



8

Figure 2 LVIA Study Area



9

Figure 3 Potential obstacle lighting locations



10

2.0 Legislation, Planning & Policy context This section summarises the key planning designations, policies and guidance relating to landscape and visual amenity within the LVIA study area at the Federal, State and Local level.

The emphasis of this assessment was to identify elements outlined within legislation, policy and planning documents relevant to the landscape and visual character and identity of the study area. Accordingly, this section describes key designations and issues noted in policy that are directly relevant to landscape and visual amenity values as well as those that are considered to be indirectly relevant to landscape and visual amenity to a significant degree. Although many of the designations and policies do not strictly relate to maintaining and enhancing landscape character and visual amenity, their intentions potentially influence and affect the landscape and visual resources within the study area. The relevant designations, policies and guidelines are discussed below and within Table 1 through to Table 4, and are shown on Figure 4 and Figure 5.

The discussion of relevance to the current assessment considers the following key issues:

Whether the purpose of the designation is related to the protection/management of landscape and/or visual values, and;

Whether the project has the potential to directly or indirectly affect the identified landscape/visual values. Depending on the nature of the specific values the extent of this influence may be affected by factors such as proximity, the presence of intervening landform that may restrict visibility, levels of use etc. It is noted that whether a designation falls inside or outside of the project study area is not of primary relevance to the consideration of potential for landscape/visual impacts since the visibility of project components may extend beyond this boundary; hence the establishment of a distinct LVIA study area as described previously.

2.1 Federal Legislation

There is no Federal legislation relevant to the visual assessment for this project.

2.2 State Legislation

2.2.1 Planning and Environment Act 1987

The most relevant objectives in terms of LVIA are:

(c) to enable land use and development planning and policy to be easily integrated with environmental, social, economic, conservation and resource management policies at State, regional and municipal levels; and

(d) to ensure that the effects on the environment are considered and provide for explicit consideration of social and economic effects when decisions are made about the use and development of land.

2.2.2 State Planning Policy Framework

The State Planning Policy Framework (SPPF) is a dynamic document that informs planning and responsible authorities about the planning policies that need to be taken into account when planning in their respective areas. Of particular relevance to the Berrimal Wind Farm are the clauses covering Environment and Landscape Values (Clause 12) and Built Environment and Heritage (Clause 15). A summary of those aspects of the SPPF with direct reference to landscape and visual issues associated with the project are discussed within Table 1 below.

Table 1 SPPF clauses relevant to the landscape & visual values of the project

Clause Relevance to landscape & visual values of the project 12.04-2 Provides guidance to protect landscapes and significant open spaces that contribute to

character, identity and sustainable environments 15.01-1 Focuses upon the provision of environments that are safe and functional and which

reinforce a sense of place and cultural identity 15.01-2 Strives for urban design outcomes which contribute positively to local urban character and

minimise detrimental impacts upon neighbouring properties



11

Clause Relevance to landscape & visual values of the project 15.01-5 Provides guidance to recognise and protect neighbourhood character and sense of place

with specific regard for the built environment and heritage elements 19.01-1 Stipulates the siting of renewable energy developments in appropriate locations that

minimise effects upon the local community and environment.

2.3 Local Planning Policy

The project site itself falls entirely within the Local Government Area (LGA) of Buloke Shire Council. The LVIA study area however also includes land which falls under the jurisdiction of the adjoining LGAs of Loddon Shire Council and Northern Grampians Shire Council. Table 2 through to Table 4 provides a summary of the elements of the Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS), Local Planning Policy and Zones/Overlay designations of each of these LGAs specifically relevant to landscape and visual values. The planning zones covering the study area are shown in Figure 4 and the overlays are outlined within Figure 5. The full policies, zoning designations and overlays referred to herein are available within the relevant Planning Scheme of each LGA.

2.3.1 Municipal Strategic Statement

Table 2 Municipal Strategic Statement policies relevant to LVIA

Clause Relevance to landscape & visual values of the project Buloke Shire Council 21.04 Highlights the importance of the unique characteristics of key urban centres of the Shire

in reference to: The role of major highways in shaping settlement patterns and commercial

development. The strong delineation between urban and non-urban land use, defined by

historic patterns of zoning and servicing. The sympathetic nature of interspersing land uses, i.e. rural, urban commercial

and industrial. 21.07 Highlights the fact that extensive areas of naturally occurring vegetation have been

cleared, resulting in a highly modified environment. Consequently, remnant vegetation is highly valued. Highlights wetlands as a significant component of the natural characteristics of the Shire.

21.08 Highlights the significance of road reserves supporting remnant vegetation for their visual quality against an agricultural landscape. It also discusses the significant contribution heritage assets in the Shire make to the character of the landscape and townships. Road reserves supporting remnant vegetation are identified as being significant for their visual qualities. Reinforcement of this is considered important, as is the diversity of character typically associated with this vegetation. Heritage assets of the Shire are identified as being important as they contribute to the character of the landscape and townships.

21.10-1 Strives to protect the amenity and the presentation of streetscapes and town centres and the quality of recreation facilities.

22.10-3 Protects the features of heritage areas. Loddon Shire Council 21.04-1 Supports the appropriate siting of new industry so as to not compromise residential

amenity and the appearance of the town. The Wedderburn Structure Plan specifically articulates the protection of heritage features and amenity of residential areas.

Northern Grampians Shire Council 21.09 Stipulates the appropriate siting of new industrial development with respect to residential

areas in particular. 21.10 Highlights significant ridge lines in the foothills of, and including the Grampians National

Park.



12

2.3.2 Local Planning Policy

Table 3 Local Planning Policies relevant to LVIA

Clause Relevance to landscape & visual values of the project Buloke Shire Council 22.01 Strives to achieve a high quality and attractive urban environment.

Stipulates that the following should not be compromised by new development. Amenity and character of sensitive land uses such as residential areas within

urban centres. Local heritage values, built character and streetscapes of towns. The presentation of town entrances and streetscapes.

22.03 Establishes the need to protect agricultural areas by installing buffers to development. Important considerations include:

the use of the natural topographical features to screen proposed development the effect on attractive views of the natural landscape the importance of the undeveloped natural vistas along major highways.

22.05 Recognises swamps, wetlands, land subject to inundation, perennial watercourses and intermittent lakes for the landscape features they provide.

22.09 Guides the appropriate location of industrial development. Stipulates that industrial development within Township and Rural zones should maintain the visual qualities of the rural landscape and minimise the impact on residential amenity.

22.11 Stipulates that new uses and development complements the historic, cultural and architectural character and appearance of the surrounding buildings, works, sites or landscapes.

Loddon Shire Council 22.01 Stipulates new uses and developments are to be of a type which is sympathetic to the

historic and architectural character and appearance of the surrounding buildings, works, site or landscape. It further states that landscapes, built character and streetscapes of towns should be considered when designing and siting new development. Highlights the importance of buildings, in relation to their mass and scale, to preserve the historical attributes and visual character of towns and must be sympathetic to the streetscape character and built form of the area.

22.04 Stipulates that new development must be located appropriately with regard to the amenity of residential areas and maintain the visual qualities of the rural landscape.

22.05 Highlights the unique landscape quality of the rural areas and their contribution to the Shire. It further states that new development must protect the landscape quality of these rural areas.

Northern Grampians Shire Council N/A N/A

2.3.3 Zones and Overlays

Table 4 Zones and Overlays relevant to LVIA

Zone/Overlay Relevance to landscape & visual values of the project Buloke Shire Council 36.02 (PPRZ) Nothing specific to landscape and visual values however it does stipulate the protection of

areas of significance where appropriate. 42.01 (ESO) Ensures that development is compatible with identified environmental values. Specific to

landscape and visual character, the MSS and LPP highlights these values as remnant roadside vegetation; water bodies and water courses including wetlands, swamps, land subject to inundation, perennial watercourses and intermittent lakes; and attractive views of the natural landscape.

43.01 (HO) Conserves heritage places of natural and cultural significance. The MSS and LPP highlight the importance of protecting the character of heritage places.

Loddon Shire Council 35.03 (RLZ) Protects landscape values of the area.



13

Zone/Overlay Relevance to landscape & visual values of the project 36.03 (PCRZ) Protects and converses the natural environment and natural processes for their

landscape values. 36.02 (PPRZ) Nothing specific to landscape and visual values however it does stipulate the protection of

areas of significance where appropriate. 42.02 (VPO) Recognises vegetation protection areas as locations of natural beauty.

43.01 (HO) Conserves heritage places of natural and cultural significance. The MSS and LPP highlight the importance of protecting the character of heritage places.

Northern Grampians Shire Council 36.02 (PPRZ) Nothing specific to landscape and visual values however it does stipulate the protection of

areas of significance where appropriate.



14

Figure 4 Planning scheme - Land Use Zoning (note: Study Area radius is approximately 20km from the turbines)



15

Figure 5 Planning scheme - relevant Overlays



16

3.0 Existing Landscape and Visual Character

3.1 Methodology

To understand the level of visual modification which may result from the Berrimal Wind Farm project, it is important to understand the existing visual and landscape character of the study area. This establishes a baseline against which an assessment can be made regarding the degree to which the project would alter the existing landscape and/or visual character.

3.2 Regional Landscape Context

The study area is located in the west of Victoria, approximately 250km northwest of Melbourne. It sits to the north east of the Grampians region, close to the northwest border of the Victorian Goldfields and is home to a number of historic townships. These townships sit within a broader landscape typically consisting of both arable cropping and grazing land. Whilst the indigenous vegetation has now been largely cleared to accommodate this land use, scattered pockets of native vegetation still remain, including managed conservation areas and mature native trees scattered throughout paddocks and along roadsides.

3.3 Study Area Landscape Context

3.3.1 Land Use

The study area consists predominately of farmland, interspersed with a number of rural dwellings. This pastoral landscape is dissected by a grid of local, rural roads lined with remnant mature vegetation. These roads are a mix of both sealed and unsealed surfaces.

Small rural townships typical of the broader region include Charlton and Wedderburn. Charlton is located approximately 18km north of the proposed Berrimal Wind Farm site whilst Wedderburn lies approximately 17km to the east. They both consist of a commercial main street with a mix of historic and more contemporary buildings surrounded by a ring of residential areas. Wedderburn also has some rural living areas on the periphery of the township, typically incorporating larger lot sizes and a more rural character than the denser residential properties closer to the centre of the town. Wedderburn also supports a number of public use areas such as the Wedderburn Golf Course and Training Track. The Wychitella Flora and Fauna Reserve lies further east (outside of the study area). Similar to Wedderburn, Charlton also supports public use areas including a recreation reserve and the Charlton Golf Course. There are also a number of light industrial areas within the township.

The Calder Highway runs from the northwest to southeast passing through both Charlton and Wedderburn before continuing on to Bendigo (to the north) and Melbourne (to the south) beyond. Two other arterial roads run on a north-south axis through the study area. The Charlton-St Arnaud Road runs from the rural township of St Arnaud, just outside the study area, through to the Charlton High Street. The Logan-Wedderburn Rd branches off the Wimmera Highway to meet the Calder Highway at Wedderburn. All of these roads are typically sealed with one lane in either direction.

The Sea Lake-Bendigo Railway line runs across the north of the study site, through Charlton towards Sea Lake to the north.

A number of fragmented conservation areas occur in the east of study area. The size of these conservation areas gradually becomes smaller as one moves further south.

Coonooer Bridge, in the west of the study area, is located on the eastern bank of the Avoca River off the Charlton - St Arnaud Road. A small number of houses and public buildings are associated with this area to the immediate east, and are set amongst mature Eucalyptus sp. and unsealed local roads.

3.3.2 Landform and Hydrology

Elevation gradually rises as one moves south of Charlton, ranging from 110 AHD around the town itself reaching a height of 240-250 AHD in the south and west of the study area.

A series of ridgelines begin to rise just north and east of the Berrimal Wind Farm site and expand in a southerly and westerly direction. Slopes along these ridge lines reach above 33% and an elevation of 310-400m AHD.



17

Granite is the dominant geology of the study area, and rocky outcrops of this material punctuate some of the ridgelines creating a contrast to the predominant ‘rolling’ nature of the undulating terrain.

These ridgelines form a visual backdrop to the typically flat areas to the north west of the study area, where slopes are predominantly less than 5%.

Flatter areas are also associated with the Avoca River corridor that occurs in the west of the study area. Barrakee Granite and Mount Egbert Granite are typically associated with the river corridor, which cuts through ridgelines in the south and moves north through areas of alluvial floodplains onto Charlton Township. The Avoca River is typically incised into these flatter plains.

Smaller watercourses, including Sandy, Campbell, Fentons, Wehla and Brenanah Creeks, traverse gullies throughout the undulating land form to the south and east of the study area. These watercourse are temporarily inundated throughout the seasons depending on rainfall.

3.3.3 Vegetation

As is typical of the broader region, the indigenous vegetation within the study area has now been largely cleared to make way for agricultural uses including cropping and grazing.

The dominant vegetative character of the study area is that of open agricultural land, interspersed with pockets of mature native vegetation. The crops and grazing land typically have the appearance of broad open grasslands, however the character does change throughout the year as crops are harvested and vegetation changes colour through the seasons.

There are however a series of scattered conservation areas in the east of the study area, typically associated with ridgelines. These consist of a Mallee-like landscape characterised by dense shrub land dominated by Melaleuca sp, with vegetation heights typically reaching around 3-4m. These remnant pockets of dense vegetation contrast strongly with the more open character of the surrounding agricultural land.

Scattered pockets of mature native trees do remain within the agricultural land, with greater concentrations of vegetation typically found along roadsides within the road reserve boundary and alongside creeks and waterways within riparian corridors. This vegetation typically has more diversity in terms of the number of species present when compared to the remnant vegetation within the agricultural land.

Less mature native vegetation is also present within agricultural land, typically associated with linear planted windrows located along the edges of paddocks. Vegetative character of these planted areas is typically less diverse.



18

Figure 6 Topography and Hydrology



19

Figure 7 Slope Analysis



20

Figure 8 Existing Vegetation



21

4.0 Landscape Character Types Based upon the assessment of the natural and cultural influences that shape the landscape and visual context of the study area, a number of LCTs have been identified.

Each LCT represents a relatively homogenous character based on the consideration of the following attributes:

Landscape value (e.g. landscapes designated for their scenic or landscape importance or valued

recreational function).

Landscape elements that contribute to defining character e.g. pasture, crops, drainage channels,

river/creek corridors, bushland, mature bushland corridors alongside roads, cultural plantings (e.g.

planting along property entrance drives) etc.

Landscape character attributes (including scale, grain and perceptual characteristics such as the sense

of remoteness, tranquillity and/or its perceived rural character).

The LCTs are defined in Figure 9 and detailed descriptions follow.



22

Figure 9 Landscape Character Types (LCTs)



23

4.1 Landscape Character Types

4.1.1 LCT1: Avoca River Corridor

Location

- Runs on a predominant north – south axis through the western portion of the study area. Located within the broader zone of LCT5.

Key Characteristics

- Gently slopes from south to north, meandering through LCT5;

- Large, mature Eucalyptus sp. are typically associated with the river banks and overhang open water that is snagged with fallen branches and other organic debris;

- Pasture grasses run from adjacent paddocks up to the water edge, with some erosion of the banks and exposed earth also present;

- The incision of the river into the landform and the riparian vegetation typically limit views out from the LCT1. As an exception, formal river crossings allow more exposed views up and down the water course however these views are typically contained to the local riparian environment.



24

Figure 10 Typical Character of LCT1




25

4.1.2 LCT2: Towns

Location

- The main townships within the study site are Charlton and Wedderburn. Wedderburn sits to the far east of the study area nestled amongst LCT4 and LCT3. Charlton lies to the far north of the study site amongst LCT5. The Avoca River (LCT1) runs through the town from the south west to the north east.

Key Characteristics

- The topography of both towns is relatively flat.

- Wedderburn is nestled in a valley framed by views to the surrounding ridgelines. These ridgelines are densely vegetated slopes covered by the Mallee Shrubland of LCT3.

- The main streets through both Charlton and Wedderburn are both comprised of a mix of commercial and public buildings. These buildings are both historical and more contemporary in architectural character.

- A mixture of land uses surrounds both town centres, including residential dwellings, light industrial and public use areas.

- The residential areas immediately circling both towns’ centres are typically smaller lots and dwellings are mainly single story;

- Low density and rural living areas are also associated with the outskirts of Wedderburn and are commonly larger blocks, typically paddocks, with single dwellings. A rural residential area also encroaches into the southern part of the study area, associated with St Arnaud.

- Public facilities around Charlton including a recreation reserve and the Charlton Golf Course. Wedderburn also has a Golf Course as well as the Wedderburn Training Track.

- There are a small number of industrial areas to the south and west of Charlton dominated by grain storage infrastructure.



26

Figure 12 Typical Character of LCT2 - Charlton Main Street

Figure 13 Typical Character of LCT2 - Wedderburn Main Street



27

4.1.3 LCT3: Mallee Shrubland

Location

- LCT3 is located predominately in the east of the site, scattered around Wedderburn. These scatterings decrease in size as one moves further south. There is also an area of LCT3 south west of the study area, immediately north of St Arnaud.

Key Characteristics

- LCT3 is typically associated with ridgelines, interspersed amongst LCT4.

- A Mallee landscape characterised by dense shrub land dominated by Melaleuca sp, with vegetation heights typically reaching around 3-4m;

- Multi stemmed habit and a range of mature to sapling specimens;

- These remnant pockets of dense vegetation contrast strongly with the more open character of the surrounding agricultural land of LCT 4 and 5;

- Views out from this character type are limited due to the dense vegetation cover.



28




29

4.1.4 LCT4: Undulating Pastoral

Location

- Predominately located within and to the south and west of the study area. Fingers of LCT4 encroach to the north and east of the study area, between LCT5. Interspersed with pockets of LCT3 in the west and south, along with the town of Wedderburn and outskirts of St Arnaud (LCT2).

Key Characteristics

- Rolling undulating topography, with a number of ridgelines with localised high points. These ridgelines are not particularly pronounced, with a gradual, rolling level change typical of the topography;

- Geology dominated by granite, with rocky outcrops of this material punctuating some of the ridgelines creating a contrast to the predominant ‘rolling’ nature of the undulating terrain;

- Steep gradients (> 33%) are typically associated with hillsides, with shallower gradients associated with hilltops and ridgelines, and the base of gullies;

- Vegetation has been predominately cleared for pasture land, with the wider vegetative character very similar to that of LCT5. Scatterings of mature, native trees are also present on hillsides and ridgelines, with the occasional occurrence of more densely treed hillsides.

- A number of small creeks and drainage lines, including Sandy, Campbell, Fentons, Wehla and Brenanah Creeks, traverse the low points between ridgelines. These are periodically inundated and home to riparian vegetation, notably mature Eucalyptus sp.

- Roads are typically arranged in a grid-like fashion; however they do deviate from the linear arrangement in response to the more dominate ridgelines. Typically, local roads are both sealed and unsealed and lined with mature native vegetation. Roadways typically follow the low points between ridgelines, and as such views from roadways are typically contained by vegetation and intervening landform.

- Access to the high points of the ridgelines is typically restricted, thus views are typically more contained within this LCT compared to LCT5 as a result of the ridgelines and vegetation obscuring views beyond.



30


Figure 16 Typical Character of an ephemeral water course running through LCT4



31

4.1.5 LCT5: Flat Pastoral

Location

LCT5 covers the area in the north and south east of the study area. It typically follows the broader Avoca River environs (LCT1) and traces the river toward the south between LCT4. Charlton (LCT2) is nestled within this character type to the far north of the study site. LCT5 is framed to the south and east by LCT4.

Key Characteristics

- Typically flat topography, rising gently from north to south;

- Gentle gradients, typically less than 5%;

- Consists predominantly of open agricultural land, interspersed with pockets of mature native vegetation. Crops and grazing land typically have the appearance of broad open grasslands that change throughout the year as crops are harvested and vegetation changes colour through the seasons;

- Sealed and unsealed local roads are typically aligned in a grid formation and often lined with mature, native vegetation. Views of the wider landscape are often permissible through the roadside vegetation;

- Residential dwellings on farmland are scattered throughout LCT5 and generally located close to local roadways. Other agricultural structures and machinery are often associated with these dwellings;

- Arterial roads cut through LCT5 including the Charlton St Arnaud Road which runs north to south, and the Calder Highway which runs from the northwest to southeast. These are typically 2 carriage way, sealed roads, often lined with mature native vegetation with intermittent opportunities for views out across the expanse of paddocks;

- Windrows are often located along the edges of paddocks and typically are consist of a mono-culture of species;

- Expansive views across paddocks are representative of this LCT, with the ridgelines of LCT4 providing a backdrop in a southerly and westerly direction.



32





33

5.0 Representative Public Viewpoints

5.1 Viewpoint selection

A total of 6 representative public viewpoints have been identified within the LVIA study area and are identified within Figure 20. Photographs from each of the viewpoints are provided within Section 5.2, along with descriptions of the existing visual character/viewing scenario of each. Visual simulations of the Wind Farm proposal from each of the viewpoints are provided within Appendix A.

These viewpoints were selected based upon a three stage process:

5.1.1 Identification of Zone of Theoretical Visual Influence

Two Zone of Theoretical Visual Influence (ZTV) analyses (one up to the hub/nacelle of each turbine at 120m elevation, and one to the blade tip at 185m elevation) were undertaken to provide a preliminary representation of the likely ‘worst case’ visual envelope of the turbine layout currently under investigation. These ZTV analyses are illustrated within Figure 19.

The methodology for producing these analyses is outlined within Appendix B. It should be noted that the outputs of these plans are limited, and do not take into account the screening effect of intervening vegetation or built form, and therefore provide an exaggerated indication of the theoretical extent of visibility of the turbines. They were therefore used primarily to guide the desktop studies and site visit work.

5.1.2 Desktop studies

A desktop study was undertaken of the study area in order to identify potential visual receptors likely to be impacted upon by the Berrimal Wind Farm. This included an assessment of public open spaces, public gathering nodes, and clusters of residential properties. A preliminary list of potential representative public viewpoints was established for subsequent ground proofing on-site.

5.1.3 Site visit

A two day site visit was undertaken on the 6th and 7th of December 2012, and attended by two landscape architects. During the site visit the representative viewpoints were confirmed and an assessment was made of each potential representative public viewpoint against the known extent of the Berrimal Wind Farm project.

The resultant identified viewpoints are considered to be representative of:

The variety of landscape types within the study area; and

The range of views and the types of viewers likely to be affected by the project.



34

Figure 19 Zone of Theoretical Visual Influence (ZTV)



35

Figure 20 Representative Viewpoint Locations



36

5.2 Viewpoint descriptions

The following section identifies each of the representative public viewpoints and provides details on their location, the existing visual character of the view, and the rationale behind their selection. The viewpoint locations are identified on Figure 20.

5.2.1 Viewpoint 1

Figure 21 Viewpoint 1 existing view

Location Coordinates: 143°31’44.348”E 36°21’33.748”S

Calder Highway, approximately 10km northwest of Wedderburn, looking southwest.

Existing viewing conditions This view point from the edge of the Calder Freeway looks across open arable land towards the distant Berrimal ridge line, approximately 12.2km away from the nearest turbine. The foreground is open, with a strong horizontal characteristic and flat terrain. The undulating landform associated with the Berrimal Ridge Line is visible on the horizon, with mature native vegetation in the middle ground partly screening the ridgeline. In places the vegetation protrudes above the horizon line and breaks the continuity of the horizon.

This view is considered typical of the views experienced by both local residents and visitors when they travel between Wedderburn and Charlton. It should be noted that the viewing angle towards the Berrimal Wind Farm is perpendicular to the direction of travel, and as such is not considered to be the primary visual focus of people travelling along the Calder Highway.



37

5.2.2 Viewpoint 2



Bartlett’s Road, Yeungroon, looking south.

Existing viewing conditions This viewpoint is located within a cluster of residential dwellings approximately 5.7km north of the Berrimal Wind Farm. The view looks south across a predominantly open agricultural landscape, with the landform gently undulating away to the south. The Berrimal Wind Farm ridgeline is visible on the horizon, and is screened in part by an elevated hill located between the viewpoint and the Berrimal ridgeline. Several agricultural buildings are visible in the middle ground, partly screened by existing mature native vegetation.

This viewpoint is considered representative of the views experienced by the local residents as they travel along Bartlett’s Road. Due to the remote location of this viewpoint and its location away from arterial roadways, this view will rarely be experienced by anyone other than the local residents and visitors to local dwellings.



38

5.2.3 Viewpoint 3



Yeungroon – Nine Mile Road, looking south.

Existing viewing conditions This viewpoint looks across a flat and predominantly open foreground towards the Berrimal Ridgeline which is visible in the centre of the view and tapers away and left from the view. The nearest proposed turbine is located approximately 2.4km from the viewpoint. Scattered mature native vegetation is visible in the middle ground, and this vegetation partly screens the Berrimal Wind Farm ridge itself.

This view is considered representative of that experienced by local residents as they travel along Yeungroon – Nine Mile Road. Due to the remote location of this viewpoint and its location away from arterial roadways, this view will rarely be experienced by anyone other than the local residents and visitors to local dwellings.



39

5.2.4 Viewpoint 4



Intersection of Nine Mile – Woosang Road, Nine Mile – Wedderburn Road, and Berrimal – Nine Mile Road, looking south west.

Existing viewing conditions This view looks across an open foreground towards the Berrimal Wind Farm ridgeline. The nearest proposed turbine is located approximately 5.3km from the viewpoint. Mature native trees are scattered along the ridgeline itself in the distance, with several also visible adjacent to the roadside of Nine Mile – Wedderburn Road. The undulating landform associated with the ridgeline is typically unbroken.

This view is considered representative of that experienced by local residents who use Nine Mile – Woosang Road, Nine Mile – Wedderburn Road, and Berrimal – Nine Mile Road regularly. Given the location of the viewpoint at an intersection, travel speeds in this location are expected to be lower and the view will therefore be experienced for a longer duration than if it were located along a straight section of roadway. Due to the remote location of this viewpoint and its location away from arterial roadways, this view will rarely be experienced by anyone other than the local residents and visitors to local dwellings.



40

5.2.5 Viewpoint 5



Intersection of Hughes Road and Gowar North Road, looking north/north east. The nearest proposed turbine is located approximately 2.2km from the viewpoint.

Existing viewing conditions This viewpoint looks over an open foreground of pastoral land towards the Berrimal Wind Farm ridgeline. The ridgeline is partially screened by a band of mature native vegetation which runs from left to right across the middle ground of the view.

This view is considered typical of that experienced by the limited number of local residents whom regularly use Hughes Road and Gowar North Road. Due to the remote location of this viewpoint and its location away from arterial roadways, this view will rarely be experienced by anyone other than the local residents and visitors to local dwellings.



41

5.2.6 Viewpoint 6



Yeungroon – Coonooer Road north of Old Wedderburn Road, looking east. The nearest proposed turbine is located approximately 2.1km from the viewpoint.

Existing viewing conditions This view looks east across a relatively open foreground towards the Berrimal Wind Farm ridgeline which is visible on the horizon. Immature eucalypt plantings are visible in the immediate foreground, and it is expected that as they mature, visual access towards the ridgeline will be reduced. The middle ground consists of a number of agricultural outbuildings, predominantly screened by the foreground vegetation. The Berrimal Wind Farm ridgeline itself is home to scattered tree plantings.

This view is considered representative of that experienced by local residents as they travel along Yeungroon – Coonooer Road.



42

6.0 Landscape and visual impact assessment methodology The potential landscape and visual impacts associated with the Wind Farm development have been assessed in the following ways:

Landscape impacts are assessed against each of the identified Landscape Character Types (refer Section 4.0) and the associated characteristics of each identified as being of central importance to their overriding character. These elements have been identified based upon an assessment of existing legislation and planning policy (refer Section 2.0), as well as site work.

Visual impacts are assessed from a series of representative public viewpoints. These viewpoints, and the rationale behind their selection, are outlined within Section 5.0.

Impacts have been assessed during the operational phase of the project only. The impact assessment has been undertaken based upon the anticipated conditions approximately 7-10 years post-construction.

6.1 Sensitivity and magnitude of change

The landscape and visual impact assessment methodology is explained in detail within Appendix B. Broadly summarised, it involves the assessment of two key factors, sensitivity and magnitude of change:

6.1.1 Sensitivity

6.1.1.1 Landscape Sensitivity

The sensitivity of a landscape is judged based on the extent to which it is considered able to accept change of a particular type and scale without adverse effects on its character. Sensitivity varies according to the type of development and the nature of the landscape, including:

Its inherent landscape value (its condition, perceptual qualities, cultural importance, and any specific values that may apply e.g. landscape planning designations).

The likely congruency of the proposed change (i.e. the extent to which the proposal may fit or be ‘visually absorbed’ into the scale, landform, land use, pattern, texture of the existing landscape).

6.1.1.2 Visual Sensitivity

The sensitivity of the viewers at the viewpoints is considered to be dependent upon factors including:

The importance (scenic quality) of the view;

Viewer exposure, typically assessed by measuring the number of viewers exposed to the resource change and the type and duration of viewer activity;

The nature of the visual receptor (type and volume of sensitive receptors or viewers) experiencing the view.

Landscape and visual sensitivity is described as being negligible, low, medium, or high, and is applied as outlined within Table 16 (landscape impacts) and Table 17 (visual impacts) of Appendix B.

Landscape and visual sensitivity ratings associated with this project are outlined within Sections 7.0 and 8.0.

6.1.2 Magnitude of change

The magnitude of change affecting a landscape or visual receptor depends on the nature, scale and duration of the particular change that is expected to occur. It describes the extent of change and identifies elements which are removed or added, changed in colour or texture, and the compatibility of new elements with the existing landscape. Visual modification can result in an improvement or reduction in visual amenity.

Magnitude of change is described as being barely perceptible, noticeable, considerable or dominant, and is applied as outlined within Table 16 (landscape impacts) and Table 17 (visual impacts) of Appendix B

The magnitude of change associated with both landscape and visual changes expected to result from this project are outlined within Sections 7.0 and 8.0.



43

6.2 Determination of impact significance

The impact significance ratings have been determined through a combination of the sensitivity and magnitude of change assessments, in accordance with the scale defined within Table 16 (landscape impacts) and Table 17 (visual impacts). Using the rationale outlined within these tables, a judgement is made regarding the significance of the impact.

Both landscape and visual impacts are rated as major, moderate, minor or negligible, and can be adverse (negative), beneficial (positive), or neutral (subjective). There is often a gradual transition between levels of significance, and where impacts lie on the borderline they may be described, for example, as minor to moderate.

Impacts which are graded as being moderate to major are those which should be given greatest consideration, relative to other levels of landscape and visual impacts, in decision making. Minor to moderate levels of impact are of progressively reducing importance, but nonetheless important.

The landscape and visual impact significance ratings associated with this project are outlined within Sections 7.0 and 8.0.

6.3 Community perceptions of impacts resulting from Wind Farm developments

Numerous studies have been undertaken within Australia into the level of community acceptance of Wind Farms and of perceptions regarding their visual intrusion upon the landscape. The resultant findings typically indicate that receptor sensitivity to landscape and visual impacts from Wind Farms is highly subjective, and can be influenced by:

The location of the Wind Farm

The surrounding local context

Personal attachment to ‘place’ by receptors (Devine-Wright, 2010; VCAT, 2007).

Research does indicate however that the majority of the community tends to perceive the presence of wind turbines within the landscape in a positive or neutral way. A 2010 study commissioned by the NSW Department of Environment examined the attitude of communities across six Renewable Energy Precincts within NSW. The survey results regarding perceived landscape and visual impacts are outlined within Table 5.

Table 5 Impact of Wind Farms on visual appeal – NSW (ECC&W, 2010)

Visual

Impact

Overall

(n=1729)

Regional

Control

Area

(n=293)

New England

Tablelands

(n=289)

Upper Hunter

(n=286)

Central Tablelands

(n=290)

NSW/ACT Border Region

(n=287)

South Coast

(n=291)

Cooma- Monaro

(n=286)

Positive

Impact 25% 22% 21% 18% 29% 28% 23% 24%

No

impact 28% 24% 31% 26% 27% 33% 26% 30%

Negative

impact 41% 45% 40% 48% 41% 34% 43% 37%

Other

response 7% 9% 8% 8% 3% 6% 8% 9%

The survey results indicate that within the study area, the majority of people perceive Wind Farms as having either a positive or neutral effect on visual appeal (53% overall) versus those that perceive them to have a negative impact (41% overall). The differing responses across each of the precincts also indicated varied perceptions dependent upon the locality within which the Wind Farm is located.



44

As such, whilst the magnitude of change upon a view or landscape can be determined (i.e. the degree to which a landscape or view will be altered), a decision on whether these changes are expected to be perceived negatively, positively, or neutrally (i.e. neither a positive or negative perception) by a particular receptor cannot be categorically determined due to the wide range of attitudes to Wind Farms amongst the community.

The visual and landscape impacts which arise from Wind Farms are therefore considered to be ‘subjective’, recognising that impacts may be perceived by different people as being either adverse, beneficial or as having a neutral impact upon a particular view or landscape.

It should also be noted that the only regions in NSW with operating turbines at the time of the survey (2010) (NSW/ACT border region & the Central Tablelands) were also the regions showing the highest percentage responses of positive & no impact responses. Also the NSW/ACT border area (with the greatest dominance of turbines) showed the lowest negative response.

Specific and targeted community consultation is required to adequately gauge the community response to expected landscape and visual impacts which may arise from a particular development.



45

7.0 Landscape Impact Assessment Following is an assessment of anticipated impacts upon each of the Landscape Character Types identified within Section 4.0, undertaken in accordance with the methodology outlined within Appendix B.

7.1 Direct Impacts

Direct landscape impacts relate to impacts upon landscape character which may occur upon LCTs as a direct result of the presence of the Berrimal Wind Farm within an area of a particular landscape character.

7.1.1 LCT4: Undulating Pastoral

The Berrimal Wind Farm is located entirely within LCT4 (Undulating Pastoral). Direct landscape impacts are expected to be experienced upon this LCT as a result of the presence of the Wind Farm turbines within the landscape, and these impacts are described within Table 6.

Table 6 Landscape Impact Assessment – LCT 4 (Undulating Pastoral)

Landscape Sensitivity (in accordance with Table 16)

LCT 4 is considered to be of Regional significance, with the rural character and undulating topography a clearly defining feature of the wider region. The undulating topography and expansive landscapes associated with LCT 4 are considered to have some capacity to absorb the type of development proposed, particularly given the restricted locale of the Wind Farm site in the context of the scale of the wider LCT. Overall, the sensitivity of the landscape to the proposal is considered medium.

Magnitude of change (in accordance with Table 16)

Key defining features of LCT 4 are the rolling undulating topography and open, expansive pasture lands with scattered mature native trees. When considering the overall scale of LCT 4, the presence of the Berrimal Wind Farm within is considered to be a considerable change in character over a relatively restricted area. The current landscape is very rural in character and there is no precedent of large mechanical elements commensurate with the scale of the proposed wind turbines. Thus, the Berrimal Wind Farm would introduce a considerable new element into the landscape. However, the presence of turbines within the landscape is not expected to significantly disrupt the smooth rolling topography and will have a minimal effect upon valued landscape elements such as tree cover. Though the turbines are expected to form a dominant visual element in close proximity to the Wind Farm (<2km), as distance from the Wind Farm increases the dominance of the turbines within the landscape will diminish significantly. The undulating topography of LCT 4 means that views to the turbines are likely to be at least partially screened from most locations, and this further reduces the potential for the turbines to impact upon the wider character of LCT 4. Whilst at least some portion of the turbine(s) are expected to be visible from the majority of LCT4, they are not expected to result in a fundamental change in landscape character as the defining characteristics of the landscape (rolling topography, expansive pasture and scattered native trees) will remain intact. Overall, the magnitude of change from this viewpoint is considered to be noticeable.

Expected landscape impact rating (in accordance with Table 16)

The expected landscape impact upon LCT 4 is expected to be minor to moderate. Whether or not these impacts are perceived as being adverse, positive, or neutral is considered to be subjective and influenced by the unique perspectives of individual receptors (refer to Section 6.3).

7.2 Potential indirect impacts

Indirect landscape impacts relate to potential impacts which may occur upon LCTs which are adjacent to the Berrimal Wind Farm site. As these landscape types fall outside of the project area there is no potential for loss or removal of landscape elements such as trees or existing landform. Therefore effects are restricted to changes in landscape character that may occur when modifications within the LCT occupied by the Wind Farm itself indirectly affect perceptions of adjacent LCTs. This is sometimes termed ‘borrowed character’. An example of this may be where changes in landscape character within one LCT are visible from an adjacent LCT and therefore can indirectly affect perceptions of landscape character within.



46

The potential (or lack thereof) for indirect landscape impacts upon adjacent LCT is described below.

7.2.1 LCT1: Avoca River Corridor

The Avoca River Corridor is typically a deeply incised and heavily vegetated landscape with limited opportunity for outwardly focused views to adjacent LCTs. It is also located some distance from the proposed turbine locations (approximately 9km at the closest point).

While the Zone of Theoretical Visual Influence analysis (refer Figure 19) indicates that the turbines are potentially visible from the Avoca River Corridor, the densely vegetated nature, deeply incised topography and consequential inward visual focus mean that the potential for impacts upon the landscape character of LCT 1 are considered negligible.

7.2.2 LCT2: Towns

The towns of Charlton and Wedderburn are both located some distance from the Wind Farm site (approximately 19 and 17 km respectively). Both towns are typically highly built up in comparison to the surrounding landscape, with built form and vegetation limiting expansive views from the towns towards the surrounding landscape.

The Zone of Theoretical Visual Influence analysis (refer Figure 19) indicates that views from the town of Wedderburn towards the wind turbines are expected to be screened by intervening landform located between the town and the Wind Farm site, and therefore views of the turbines are not expected to be permissible from Wedderburn.

Whilst views from Charlton are theoretically permissible, it is expected that these would only be available from the southern edge of town. Given the distance of the wind turbines from Charlton (>19km), it is expected that a combination of distance and intervening vegetation (expected to screen views of the turbines) will mean that the turbines have a negligible impact upon the character of Charlton.

Consequently, the potential for impacts upon the landscape character of LCT2 (including both Charlton and Wedderburn) is considered negligible.

7.2.3 LCT3: Mallee Shrubland

Views out of LCT 4 towards the surrounding landscape are typically limited by the dense vegetation cover which characterises the Mallee Shrubland.

Whilst views of the turbines from LCT 4 are theoretically permissible (refer Figure 19), it is expected that these will be largely screened by the existing vegetation within. Additionally, areas of LCT 3 are typically located some distance from the turbine locations (9km at the closest point), meaning that potential impacts are further diminished.

While isolated glimpses of the turbines may be permissible from within LCT 3, they are not expected to impact upon the critical character elements of the landscape and the potential for impacts upon LCT 3 is therefore considered negligible.

7.2.4 LCT5: Flat Pastoral

The flat and open nature of LCT 5 means that views towards the wind turbines are expected to be experienced from within, as demonstrated by the Zone of Theoretical Visual Influence analysis (refer Figure 19). Additionally, LCT 4 (Undulating Pastoral) forms an important backdrop to LCT 5 in both a southerly and westerly direction (refer Section 4.1.5), and it is in these directions that the turbines are located.

Given the potential minor to negligible impacts that are expected to be experienced within LCT 4 (refer Section 7.1.1), and the role of this LCT 4 as a backdrop for LCT 5 (refer Section 4.1.5), it follows that there may be potential for indirect impacts upon the landscape character of LCT 5.

However, given the open and expansive views available from LCT 5, compared to the relatively restricted scale of the Wind Farm within LCT 4, the Wind Farm is not expected to exert any noticeable impacts upon the character of



47

LCT 4. The defining characteristics of LCT 4 (open agricultural land with expansive views across paddocks) are expected to remain intact, and as such the potential for impacts upon LCT 5 is considered negligible.

Notwithstanding the above, there does remain the potential for visual impacts to be experienced from locations within LCT 5, and these are discussed within Section 8.0.



48

8.0 Visual Impact Assessment Following is an assessment of anticipated impacts upon each of the representative Public Viewpoints identified within Section 5.0, undertaken in accordance with the methodology outlined within Appendix B.

8.1 Viewpoint 1

Figure 27 illustrates the existing view from Representative Public Viewpoint number one, while Figure 28 provides a photomontage of the expected view once all turbines have been installed and with no additional mitigation measures in place. Expected visual impacts from this location are assessed within Table 7. .

Figure 27 Viewpoint 1 - existing view

Figure 28 Viewpoint 1 – photomontage of view with turbines installed (Refer to Appendix A for further details)



49

Table 7 Visual Impact Assessment - Viewpoint 1

Location

Coordinates: 143°31’44.348”E 36°21’33.748”S

Calder Highway, approximately 10km northwest of Wedderburn, looking southwest.

Visual Sensitivity (in accordance with Table 17)

Given its location on the Calder Highway and the use of this road as a principal travel route, this view is experienced by moderate numbers of both local residents and visitors to the area. The most sensitive visual receptors are expected to be local residents, whom have a strong familiarity with the local area and whom will typically experience this view often.

Overall, this viewpoint is considered to be of up to medium visual sensitivity.


All 24 turbines are expected to be visible from this location, silhouetted against the horizon above the distant ridgeline. The turbines are relatively evenly spaced, presenting a rhythmic and organised visual composition on the horizon.

The viewing distance from the viewpoint to the nearest turbine (12.2km) means that the turbines themselves are relatively small elements within what is an expansive and open view, and therefore occupy a small proportion of the overall view. It is expected that as most people are travelling at speed (100 km/h) along the Calder Highway, and the view to the turbines is perpendicular to the direction of travel, that the turbines are likely to form a transient but discernible distant element in the view.

Overall, the magnitude of change from this viewpoint is considered to be noticeable.

Expected visual impact rating (in accordance with Table 17)

The expected visual impact form this viewpoint is expected to be minor to moderate. Whether or not these impacts are perceived as being adverse, positive, or neutral is considered to be subjective and influenced by the unique perspectives of individual visual receptors (refer to Section 6.3).



50

8.2 Viewpoint 2

Figure 29 illustrates the existing view from Representative Public Viewpoint number two, while Figure 30 provides a photomontage of the expected view once all turbines have been installed and with no additional mitigation measures in place. Expected visual impacts from this location are assessed within Table 8.





51


Location

Coordinates: 143°24’41.303”E 36°22’18.579”S

Bartlett’s Road, Yeungroon, looking south.


This viewpoint is located on a local road in the vicinity of a cluster of residential dwellings. The road is predominantly used by limited numbers of local farmers. Due to the remote location of this viewpoint and the fact that it is away from arterial roadways, this view will rarely be experienced by anyone other than the local residents and occasional visitors to local dwellings. It is also considered typical of the views that may be experienced from the adjacent rural properties.

The most sensitive visual receptors are expected to be local residents, whom have a strong familiarity with the local area and whom will typically experience this view often.



All 24 turbines are expected to be visible from this location. Views of some of the turbines are screened in part by intervening landform and vegetation located between the viewer and the Wind Farm, with the remaining turbines expected to be visible silhouetted against the horizon above the distant ridgeline.

The turbines are relatively evenly spaced, presenting a generally rhythmic and organised visual composition on the horizon, however there are some portions of the view where multiple turbines are visible in clustered groups.

The turbines contrast strongly with the existing visual character of the view, which is predominantly of undulating pasture with occasional farm buildings, and are expected to be clearly visible to viewers from this location.

The moderate viewing distance from the viewpoint to the nearest turbine (5.7km) means that the turbines themselves occupy a relatively small portion of what is currently an expansive and open view.






52

8.3 Viewpoint 3

Figure 31 illustrates the existing view from Representative Public Viewpoint number three, while Figure 32 provides a photomontage of the expected view once all turbines have been installed and with no additional mitigation measures in place. Expected visual impacts from this location are assessed within Table 9.





53


Location

Coordinates: 143°24’33.651”E 36°24’3.989”S

Yeungroon – Nine Mile Road, looking south.


This viewpoint is located on a local road in the vicinity of a cluster of residential dwellings. The road is predominantly used by limited numbers of local farmers. Due to the remote location of this viewpoint and the fact that it is away from arterial roadways, this view will rarely be experienced by anyone other than the local residents and occasional visitors to local dwellings.

The most sensitive visual receptors are expected to be local residents, who have a strong familiarity with the local area and who will typically experience this view often.



Up to 17 turbines are expected to be visible from this location.

Views of some of the turbines are screened in part by intervening landform and vegetation located between the viewer and the Wind Farm, with the remaining visible turbines expected to be silhouetted against the horizon.

The turbines are typically visible in clustered groups, presenting a less organised composition within the landscape than that which would be experienced if they were evenly and more regularly spaced. This also increases the visual dominance of the turbines in locations where they are visible in groups.

The close viewing distance from the viewpoint to the nearest turbine (2.4km) means that the turbines themselves occupy a moderate portion of the view (both horizontally and vertically) and are expected to be clearly visible to viewers from this location. The turbines contrast strongly with the existing visual character of the view, which is predominantly of undulating pasture with scattered clumps of native trees. The presence of a number of vertical elements within this view (existing native trees) does serve however to reduce the visual impact of the turbines within the view.

Overall, the magnitude of change from this viewpoint is considered to be considerable.


The expected visual impact form this viewpoint is expected to be moderate. Whether or not these impacts are perceived as being adverse, positive, or neutral is considered to be subjective and influenced by the unique perspectives of individual visual receptors (refer to Section 6.3).



54

8.4 Viewpoint 4

Figure 33 illustrates the existing view from Representative Public Viewpoint number four, while Figure 34 provides a photomontage of the expected view once all turbines have been installed and with no additional mitigation measures in place. Expected visual impacts from this location are assessed within Table 10.





55


Location

Coordinates: 143°29’6.676”E 36°25’25.29”S

Intersection of Nine Mile – Woosang Road, Nine Mile – Wedderburn Road, and Berrimal – Nine Mile Road, looking south west.


This viewpoint is located at the intersection of a number of local roads which provide both north/south and east/west vehicular access through the rural properties surrounding the Wind Farm site.

The road is predominantly used by limited numbers of local farmers as a path of travel to the Calder Highway and Charlton – St Arnaud Road. Due to the remote location of this viewpoint and the fact that it is away from major arterial roadways, this view will rarely be experienced by anyone other than the local residents and occasional visitors to local dwellings.




Up to 13 turbines are expected to be visible from this location. The majority of the visible turbines are screened in part by intervening landform located between the viewer and the Wind Farm, and in some cases only a portion of the rotor blades is visible. No turbine is expected to be visible in its full extent. The portions of the turbines that are visible are expected to be silhouetted against the horizon.

The turbines are relatively evenly spaced, presenting a generally rhythmic and organised visual composition on the horizon.

The moderate viewing distance from the viewpoint to the nearest turbine (5.3km) means that the turbines themselves occupy a relatively small portion of what is an expansive and open view, and the intervening landform further screens the extent to which the turbines impact upon this view. The turbines do contrast strongly with the existing visual character of the view, which is predominantly of undulating pasture with scattered clumps of native trees.






56

8.5 Viewpoint 5

Figure 35 illustrates the existing view from Representative Public Viewpoint number five, while Figure 36 provides a photomontage of the expected view once all turbines have been installed and with no additional mitigation measures in place. Expected visual impacts from this location are assessed within Table 11.





57


Location

Coordinates: 143°22’53.741”E 36°25’28.319”S

Intersection of Hughes Road and Gower North Road, looking north/north east.


This viewpoint is located on a local road used predominantly by limited numbers of local farmers and residents. Due to the remote location of this viewpoint and the fact that it is away from major arterial roadways, this view will rarely be experienced by anyone other than the local residents and occasional visitors to local dwellings.




Up to 20 turbines are expected to be visible from this location. The turbines are expected to be clearly visible silhouetted against the horizon. The turbines closest to the viewpoint are visually most dominant, with the visual impact of individual turbines receding with distance from the viewpoint.

The turbines are relatively evenly spaced, presenting a generally rhythmic and organised visual composition on the horizon, however there are some portions of the view where multiple turbines are visible in clustered groups.

The close viewing distance from the viewpoint to the nearest turbine (2.1km) means that the turbines themselves occupy a moderate portion of the view (both horizontally and vertically) and are expected to be clearly visible to viewers from this location. The turbines contrast strongly with the existing visual character of the view, which is predominantly of undulating pasture with scattered clumps of native trees. The presence of a number of vertical elements within this view (existing native trees) does serve however to reduce the visual impact of the turbines within the view.



The expected visual impact form this viewpoint is expected to be moderate. Whether or not these impacts are perceived as being adverse, positive, or neutral is considered to be subjective and influenced by the unique perspectives of individual visual receptors (refer to Section 6.3).



58

8.6 Viewpoint 6

Figure 36 illustrates the existing view from Representative Public Viewpoint number six, while Figure 37 provides a photomontage of the expected view once all turbines have been installed and with no additional mitigation measures in place. Expected visual impacts from this location are assessed within Table 12.





59


Location

Coordinates: 143°24’46.849”E 36°28’3.222”S

Yeungroon – Coonooer Road north of Old Wedderburn Road, looking east.


This viewpoint is located on a local road used predominantly by limited numbers of local farmers and residents. Due to the remote location of this viewpoint and the fact that it is away from major arterial roadways, this view will rarely be experienced by anyone other than the local residents and occasional visitors to local dwellings.




Up to 18 turbines are expected to be visible from this location, with the remaining 6 screened by vegetation in the left of the view. The turbines are expected to be clearly visible silhouetted against the horizon. The turbines are relatively evenly spaced, presenting a generally rhythmic and organised visual composition on the horizon.

The close viewing distance from the viewpoint to the nearest turbine (2.2km) means that the turbines themselves occupy a moderate portion of the view (both horizontally and vertically) and are expected to be clearly visible to viewers from this location. The turbines contrast strongly with the existing visual character of the view, which is predominantly of undulating pasture and native trees.

The presence of a number of vertical elements within this view (existing native trees) does serve however to reduce the visual impact of the turbines within the view.



The expected visual impact form this viewpoint is expected to be moderate. Whether or not these impacts are perceived as being adverse, positive, or neutral is considered to be subjective and influenced by the unique perspectives of individual visual receptors (refer to Section 6.3). It should be noted that the existing semi mature trees visible in the foreground of the image may have a mitigating effect on the visual impact of the turbines.



60

9.0 Night Lighting Impacts

9.1 Introduction

The potential impacts associated with lighting are difficult to clearly determine as they are influenced by a number of factors, including:

The screening effect of residential dwellings and vegetation, which is highly site specific;

The individual perceptions and sensitivities of specific receptors; and

The presence of lighting at the viewing source which typically serves to reduce visibility of the turbine lighting within the landscape (which is again highly site specific).

Potential night lighting impacts are therefore discussed broadly in terms of potential impacts upon receptors, with actual impacts upon specific views or receptors dependent on the above mentioned factors.

9.2 Proposed obstacle lighting scheme

The proposed obstacle lighting scheme is outlined in detail within section 1.3. Broadly summarised, if required the proposed lighting scheme would include provision of lighting to 13 of the turbines, with two lights located upon the top of the nacelle of each of the lit turbines indicated within Figure 3.

The lights will flash simultaneously across the wind farm at a rate of 20 times per minute, and would be partially shielded such that no more than 5% of the nominal light intensity is emitted at or below 5 degrees below horizontal, and so that no light is emitted at or below 10 degrees below horizontal.

9.3 Existing visual setting at night

The existing night time visual landscape is typically characterised by an absence of artificial lighting, due to the sparsely populated nature of the study area and general lack of roadside lighting. Whilst lighting is typically associated with the individual dwellings which are scattered throughout the study area as well as the towns of Charlton to the north and Wedderburn to the east, there is an overriding sense of remoteness which results from the general lack of artificial light sources.

Lighting associated with vehicular traffic is also intermittently visible throughout the study area, with the greatest concentrations occurring along the Calder Highway, Logan-Wedderburn Road and Charlton –St Arnaud Road.

The ridgeline upon which the Berrimal Wind Farm is located does not currently house any dwellings or light fixtures.

9.4 Potential night lighting impacts

The night time landscape is typically observed differently than the daytime. In locations where there is little ambient lighting to illuminate the surrounding landscape (as is the case for the Berrimal Wind Farm), lights are more likely to be seen in isolation as visually dominant elements within the landscape. Whilst single point and consolidated groupings of light sources are typical of the study area (associated with the dwellings scattered throughout), these existing light sources are typically constant and therefore tend to be less visually dominant or noticeable than a flashing group of lights as would be associated with the Berrimal Wind Farm.

Should obstacle lighting be required within the Berrimal Wind Farm, it will result in the presence of a series of flashing lights in a portion of the night landscape which previously was free of artificial light sources. Whilst these lights will be screened to eliminate any light spill at or below 10 degrees below horizontal, it is expected that they will be visible from some distance.

Given lower levels of use and activity within the landscape and reduced traffic volumes on roadways outside of daylight hours, fewer receptors are expected to be exposed to views of the lighting than are exposed to daytime views of the wind farm. Exposure is expected to be greatest during the winter months when hours of daylight are shorter, and the lighting would be switched on earlier in the evening and switched off later in the morning.



61

9.4.1 Extent of visibility

A worst case scenario for the extent of obstacle lighting visibility is identified within Figure 19 (refer to area nominated as ‘Hub and Blade Tip theoretically visible). It should be noted however that due to the screening effect of intervening built form and vegetation, coupled with the fact that not all of the turbines will house obstacle lighting, that not all areas highlighted will have views of obstacle lighting. Additionally, the number of lights visible from these locations will vary from 1 through to 13.

9.4.2 Light spill

Given the type of lighting involved and associated shielding, light spill towards the surrounding landscape is not expected to be experienced, with the function of the lighting to provide a single point light source rather than to illuminate the surrounding area. Some lighting of the turbine blades may be evident as the blades rotate past the illuminated lights, however given the short duration of each flash and the fact that the blades will typically be rotating, illumination of the blades is not expected to be particularly obtrusive and is not expected to result in a significant visual impact.

On evenings where there is low cloud or mist, some lighting of the atmospheric water vapour immediately surrounding the lights may be visible, however visibility of this would also be expected to be reduced due to the effect of the cloud/mist reducing visibility of the lighting with distance from the turbines.

9.4.3 Impacts upon residential dwellings

The obstacle lighting is not expected to be visibly dominant from within dwellings or their immediate surrounds when internal and external dwelling lighting is in use. This is however highly dependent upon the nature and intensity of lighting that is in use within the dwelling.

When dwelling lighting is not in use, or where it is of relatively low intensity, the wind farm lighting may be clearly evident where direct views to the turbines are available from residential dwellings or their immediate surrounds.

In locations where screening may not be permissible, the lighting may create a visual intrusion upon the receptors associated with each dwelling. Impacts would be greatest upon the dwellings in close proximity to the wind farm (within 3 km) to the south west and north east of the wind farm, where the lighting could potential span a significant portion of the night sky field of view. There are however a limited number of dwellings within this region, with four dwellings located within 3km to the west and south west. Views from these locations will be of a series of broadly spaced lights.

There are a number of dwellings located within a 3-6km radius of the turbines. Impacts are expected to be least intrusive upon dwellings located to the north west and south east of the wind farm, where views are directed along the turbine alignment rather than perpendicular to it. From these locations, the lighting is expected to appear as a grouping a lights as opposed to being spread across the horizon.

9.4.4 Impacts upon roadways and other public areas

The obstacle lighting is expected to be visible from the Calder Highway (approximately 12km away at the nearest point), Charlton-St Arnaud Road (approximately 8km away at the nearest point) and Logan-Wedderburn Road (approximately 12km away at the nearest point). From these locations, the lighting would likely be visible on a clear night as a series of regularly spaced flashing lights on the horizon. On misty nights or during periods of high humidity, the visible intensity of the lighting would appear reduced.

Whilst these roads are used by local residents, the majority of motorists travelling along these roads would typically have less of a connection to the local area and are therefore considered less sensitive to potential impacts. Additionally, given the distance of these roads from the wind farm, and the fact that views towards the turbines from all of these roads are perpendicular to the path of travel, night lighting impacts upon users of these roads are not considered significant.

The local road network which traverses the study area between these roads will experience a range of views towards the turbine lighting. Whilst receptor sensitivities along these roads are typically higher (due to the predominance of local resident use), the frequency of use at night time would be less than that during daylight hours. However, adverse impacts would likely be experienced from these roads, particularly in close proximity to the turbines. The extent and significance of these impacts is highly dependent upon the particular sensitivities of individual receptors, but given that receptors are moving through the area and not experiencing any particular view for a long duration, they are considered to be moderately significant, with impacts decreasing with distance from the turbines.



62



9.5 Mitigation of night lighting impacts

The greatest impacts arising from the obstacle lighting are expected to be experienced from the surrounding residential dwellings, with the level of impact reducing with distance from the wind farm. Where residential dwellings currently experience direct views towards the turbines, dwelling screening could be installed to screen direct views towards the turbines (refer section 11.5.2). Provided that this screening screens views up to at least the height of the nacelle, it could be reasonably expected to also screen views towards the obstacle lighting at night. The lighting would also not be expected to penetrate through curtains.

Whilst impacts are also expected to be experienced from the surrounding local road network, there is no feasible option to mitigate these impacts given the broad area over which the obstacle lighting is expected to be visible.

As previously noted, the obstacle lighting fixtures will include shielding such that no light is visible below 10 degrees below horizontal.



63

10.0 Cumulative Impacts

10.1 Introduction

Cumulative visual impacts can arise as a result of:

The presence of multiple wind farms within an area (not necessarily visible together), which result in changes to receptors perceptions of an area as a result of repeated /frequent exposure to wind turbines within a landscape; and/or

Simultaneous views to multiple wind farms from publically accessible or private viewing locations.

10.2 Adjacent Wind Farms

The Coonooer Bridge Wind Farm has been approved by Buloke Shire Council. Located approximately 3.6km west of the Berrimal Wind Farm, it will comprise a total of 6 no. wind turbines in the approved locations (refer Figure 39). The turbines will have a maximum blade tip height of 150m, hub height of 90m, and rotor diameter of up to 125m.

The Coonooer Bridge Wind Farm is, by comparison to Berrimal, relatively small, in terms of both the number and size of the turbines.

10.3 Potential cumulative impacts

10.3.1 Area subjected to cumulative impacts

The ZTV for the Coonooer Bridge Wind Farm is provided within Figure 40 (to hub height) and Figure 41 (to blade tip), whilst Figure 42 provides a cumulative ZTV for both the Berrimal and Coonooer Bridge Wind Farms.

Areas subjected to simultaneous views of both wind farms include the flatter land to the west and north of the Wind Farm sites, as well as pockets of land within the more undulating topography to the south and east.

The land to the immediate east of the Berrimal Wind Farm does not have direct views towards the Coonooer Bridge turbines, with the Berrimal ridge line screening views. There are significant tracts of land in the south of the study area from which views towards the Coonooer Bridge Wind Farm are also screened by landform.

10.3.2 Cumulative impacts

As indicated above, the presence of multiple wind farms within a broad area can change receptor perceptions of the landscape as a result of repeated exposure to wind turbines.

In the case of the Coonooer Bridge and Berrimal Wind Farms, they are located in close proximity to each other (approximately 3.6km apart), and as such will often be viewed together and read as one wind farm. As such, cumulative impacts from many areas are diminished as opposed to the case where the wind farms are geographically disparate. Given the consolidation of the turbines within a geographically restricted area, there are not expected to be significant additional impacts upon perceptions of the broader landscape beyond those that would be experienced if either of the Wind Farms were considered in isolation.




64

Figure 39 Location of Coonooer Bridge Wind Farm relative to Berrimal Wind Farm



65

Figure 40 Coonooer Bridge Wind Farm - Zone of Theoretical Visual Influence (to Turbine Hub)



66

Figure 41 Coonooer Bridge Wind Farm - Zone of Theoretical Visual Influence (to Blade Tip)



67

Figure 42 Cumulative Zone of Theoretical Influence - Berrimal and Coonooer Bridge Wind Farms (to Turbine Hub)



68

11.0 Conclusions Following is a summary of the landscape and visual impacts which would potentially arise as a result of the Berrimal Wind Farm project. Whether or not these impacts are perceived as being adverse, positive, or neutral is considered to be subjective and influenced by the unique perspectives of individual receptors (refer to Section 6.3).

11.1 Expected Landscape Impacts

The potential for direct impacts upon landscape character is restricted to LCT 4 (Undulating Pastoral). The expected landscape impacts are outlined within Table 13.

Table 13 Summary of Landscape Impacts

Landscape Character Type (LCT) Landscape Sensitivity

Magnitude of Change

Impact Rating

LCT 4: Undulating Pastoral Medium Noticeable Minor to moderate

Whilst the presence of the Berrimal Wind Farm is considered to be a considerable change in character within a relatively restricted area of LCT 4, its presence is not expected to result in a fundamental change in landscape character as the defining characteristics of the landscape (rolling topography, expansive pasture and scattered native trees) will remain intact.

The potential for indirect landscape impacts upon the remaining identified LCTs is typically limited by the inwardly focused visual nature of the landscapes contained within. In the cases of LCT 1 (Avoca River Corridor), LCT 2 (Towns) and LCT 3 (Mallee Shrubland), existing elements, including built form, vegetation and land form, typically combine to restrict views towards the Wind Farm and therefore limit the ability of the turbines to impact upon landscape character. The inherent features of these landscapes are expected to remain intact.

Views towards the Wind Farm are expected to be experienced from within LCT 5 (Flat Pastoral), however the presence of the wind turbines within the wider landscape is not expected to impact upon the critical elements of LCT 5 and its inherent character is thus expected to remain intact.

11.2 Expected Visual Impacts

Table 14 provides a summary of the anticipated visual impacts which will result from the Berrimal Wind Farm as assessed from the six representative public viewpoints.

Table 14 Summary of Visual Impacts

Representative Public Viewpoint Visual Sensitivity Magnitude of

Change Impact Rating

Viewpoint 1 Medium Noticeable Minor to moderate


Viewpoint 3 Medium Considerable Moderate




The fairly uniform landscape character of the study area (dominated by LCT 4 (Undulating Pastoral) and LCT 5 (Flat Pastoral)) typically results in a commensurately uniform set of viewing conditions across the study area, with minor variations occurring as a result of localised topographic and vegetative conditions. This, coupled with very little variation in the type of visual receptors whom will experience views (local residents and workers predominating and also being the most sensitive due to their familiarity with their surroundings and the frequency with which they experience views), means that the major defining factor in the level of visual impact expected from individual representative viewpoints is the proximity of the viewpoint to the turbines.



69

The greatest levels of impact are expected from representative public viewpoints 3, 5 and 6 (Moderate). These are relatively close to the Wind Farm (between 2.1 and 2.4km away), meaning that the turbines are clearly noticeable within the views and, in occupying a large proportion of the view, form a considerable change in visual character when compared to the existing conditions.

The potential for visual impacts lessen with distance from the Wind Farm, with representative public viewpoints 1, 2 and 3 assessed as only having minor-moderate potential impacts. From these viewpoints, the turbines typically appear as smaller elements within the view and therefore exert less influence upon the existing visual character.

11.3 Potential night lighting impacts

Whilst single point and consolidated groupings of light sources are typical of the study area (associated with the dwellings scattered throughout), these existing light sources are typically constant and therefore tend to be less visually dominant or noticeable than a flashing group of lights as would be associated with the Berrimal Wind Farm.

Given lower levels of use and activity within the landscape and reduced traffic volumes on roadways outside of daylight hours, fewer receptors are expected to be exposed to views of the lighting than are exposed to daytime views of the wind farm.

Given the type of lighting involved and associated shielding, light spill towards the surrounding landscape is not expected to be experienced, with the function of the lighting to provide a single point light source rather than to illuminate the surrounding area.

The obstacle lighting is not expected to be visibly dominant from within dwellings or their immediate surrounds when internal and external dwelling lighting is in use. When dwelling lighting is not in use, or where it is of relatively low intensity, the wind farm lighting may be clearly evident where direct views to the turbines are available from residential dwellings or their immediate surrounds.

The obstacle lighting is expected to be visible from the Calder Highway, Charlton-St Arnaud Road and Logan-Wedderburn Road. Given the distance of these roads from the wind farm, and the fact that views towards the turbines from all of these roads are perpendicular to the path of travel, night lighting impacts upon users of these roads are not considered significant.

The local road network which traverses the study area between these roads will experience a range of views towards the turbine lighting. Adverse impacts would likely be experienced from these roads, particularly in close proximity to the turbines. The extent and significance of these impacts is highly dependent upon the particular sensitivities of individual receptors, but given that receptors are moving through the area and not experiencing any particular view for a long duration, they are considered to be moderately significant, with impacts decreasing with distance from the turbines.



11.4 Cumulative impacts

Given the Berrimal and Coonooer Bridge Wind Farms are located in close proximity to each other, it is expected that from the majority of viewpoints they will be viewed together and read as one wind farm. As such, cumulative impacts from many areas are diminished as opposed to the case where the wind farms are geographically disparate. Given the consolidation of the turbines within a geographically restricted area, there are not expected to be significant additional impacts upon perceptions of the broader landscape beyond those that would be experienced if either of the Wind Farms were considered in isolation.




70

11.5 Potential for mitigation

11.5.1 On-site mitigation

The scale of the wind turbines (up to 185m in height) typically limits the extent to which on-site mitigation (i.e. within the boundary of the Wind Farm itself) can be employed to effectively mitigate landscape and visual impacts upon the surrounding landscape and associated receptors. On-site mitigation should focus upon screening smaller scale elements such as substations and ancillary buildings.

11.5.2 Off-site mitigation

The most effective mitigation measures therefore are those that can be employed in a site specific context to limit views of the turbines from specific viewpoints. Viewpoints that may warrant such mitigation include nearby residential dwellings and properties with direct views towards the turbines.

Here, strategic vegetative planting can be employed to screen views towards the Wind Farm and therefore reduce visual impacts experienced by nearby receptors. This mitigation should be focused in locations where sensitive receptors are expected to experience views frequently or for long durations, such as from dwellings, driveways or outdoor residential spaces.

It should be noted that viewpoints from private property have not been assessed within this study – rather representative public viewpoints, considered indicative of the views that may be experienced from the immediate surrounding area, have been assessed in their place. Therefore consultation with land owners will be required to determine the extent to which off-site mitigation may be required. This is particularly pertinent given the range of both positive and negative perceptions within the community regarding the visual impacts associated with wind turbines.

Given the scale of the Wind Farm and the extent to which it is expected to be visible within the wider landscape, effective mitigation is not considered feasible within public areas (for example to mitigate impacts upon views from public roads).



71

12.0 Glossary

12.1 Abbreviations

DEM Digital Elevation Model

DEPI Department of Environment and Primary Industries

EMO Environmental Management Overlay

EVC Ecological Vegetation Class

LCT` Landscape Character Type

LPPF Local Planning Policy Framework

LVIA Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

MSS Municipal Strategic Statement

ROW Right of Way (Road Reserve)

SLO Significant Landscape Overlay

SPPF State Planning Policy Framework

VPO Vegetation Protection Overlay

ZTV Zone of Theoretical Visual Influence

12.2 Definitions

For the purposes of this assessment, we have used the definitions below. Where appropriate, definitions have been drawn from international literature, as this is considered by AECOM as providing the best indication of accepted international practice for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA).

Contrast may be described as the degree to which the proposed development or component of the proposed development differs visually from its landscape backdrop.

Digital Elevation Model (DEM) refers to ‘the way in which a computer represents a piece of topography in 3-dimensions as a digital mode, excluding vertical elements e.g. vegetation, buildings’. The terms Digital Terrain Model, Digital Ground Model and Digital Height Model are also used and are synonymous (SNH, 2006).

Integration refers to the extent to which the proposed development or component of the proposed development can be blended into the existing landscape.

Landscape Character is the distinct and recognisable pattern of elements that occurs consistently in a particular type of landscape, and how this is perceived by people.

Landscape Character Types are ‘distinct types of landscape that are relatively homogeneous in character...generic in nature in that they may occur in different areas in different parts of the country, but wherever they occur they share broadly similar combinations of geology, topography, drainage patterns, vegetation and historical land use and settlement pattern’. (Definition based on Landscape Character Assessment: Guidance for England and Scotland, CA and SNH, 2002).

Landscape Condition is ‘based upon judgements about the physical state of the landscape...its intactness, from visual, functional, and ecological perspectives. It also reflects the state of repair of individual features and elements which make up the character in any one place’. (Definition based on Landscape Character Assessment: Guidance for England and Scotland, CA and SNH, 2002).

Landscape Sensitivity is ‘related to landscape character and how vulnerable this is to change… Landscapes which are highly sensitive are at risk of having their key characteristics fundamentally altered, leading to a different landscape character… Sensitivity is assessed by considering the physical characteristics and the perceptual characteristics of landscapes in light of particular forms of development’. (Definition based on Topic Paper 6: Techniques and Criteria for Judging Capacity and Sensitivity, SNH, 2002).



72

Landscape Value is the relative value or importance attached to a landscape (often as a basis for designation or recognition), which expresses national or local consensus, because of its quality, special features including ‘perceptual aspects such as scenic beauty, tranquillity...cultural associations....and presence of conservation interests... nationally or locally’ (CA and SNH, 2002).

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) is the ‘professional and methodical process by which assessment of the impacts of a proposed development on the landscape and visual resource is undertaken. It comprises two separate and distinct parts – Landscape Impact Assessment and Visual Impact Assessment’. (Definition based on Visual Representation of Wind Farms: Good Practice Guidance, SNH, 2006).

Landscape Impact Assessment is the process by which assessment is undertaken of the impacts of a proposed development on the landscape, its character and quality. The Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LI and IEMA, 2002) states that "Landscape effects derive from changes in the physical landscape, which may give rise to changes in its character and how it is experienced’.

Mitigation: Measures, including any process, activity or design to avoid, reduce, remedy or compensate for adverse landscape and visual effects of a development.

Study Area: The study area for this assessment includes all land up to a distance of 20km from each of the turbine locations.

Visual Amenity: “Amenity” generally means people’s appreciation of a particular place. In the context of this report, it is the visual character of an activity or area (design, colour, texture, scale, foci), which make up the area’s “visual amenity”. Impacts on visual amenity as perceived by people are clearly distinguished from, although closely linked to, impacts on landscape character and resources.

Visual Impact Assessment is the professional and methodical process which is used to assess the impacts of a proposed development on the visual appearance of a landscape and its visual amenity. The Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LI and IEMA, 2002) states that "visual effects relate to the changes that arise in the composition of available views as a result of changes to the landscape, to people's responses to the changes, and to the overall effects with respect to visual amenity".

Visualisation refers to computer simulation, photomontage or other techniques to illustrate the appearance of a development. (Definition based on Visual Representation of Wind Farms: Good Practice Guidance, SNH, 2006).

Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) represents the area over which a development can theoretically be seen, based on a DEM. ‘The ZTV usually presents a ‘bare ground’ scenario; that is, a landscape without screening structures or vegetation. This information is usually presented upon a map base’. A ZTV is also related to/synonyms with Zone of Visual Influence (ZVI), Visual Envelope Map (VEM) and Viewshed. (Definition based on Visual Representation of Wind Farms: Good Practice Guidance, SNH, 2006).



73

13.0 References

Devine-Wright, P. (2010) Renewable Energy and the Public: from NIMBY to Participation. London: Earthscan. ECC&W (NSW Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water) (2010) Community Attitudes to Wind Farms in NSW Australian Wind Energy Association and Australian Council of National Trusts (2007) Wind Farms and Landscape Values National Assessment Framework VCAT (Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal) (2007) Merits Hearing: Permit Application No. 2006/9231, Melbourne: Reference No. P549/2007.



74

Appendix A

Representative Public Viewpoint Photographs and Photomontages



75



76

Appendix B

Detailed Study Methodology



77

Introduction

There is no accepted national or state level published guidance on landscape and visual amenity impact assessment specific to Australia. Therefore, the industry typically refers to guidance from elsewhere to produce a method for producing landscape and visual assessments. The method for this assessment has been developed with reference to current accepted practice as derived from:

The Landscape Institute (LI) and the Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (IEMA), UK (2002) Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment, Second Edition.

Other relevant guidance notes and documentation considered include:

Western Australian Planning Commission (2007) Visual Landscape Planning in Western Australia; a manual for evaluation, assessment, siting and design.

The United State Department of Agriculture Forestry Service (1995), Landscape Aesthetics: A Handbook of Scenery Management.

The Landscape Institute, UK (2009) Landscape Institute Advice Note 01/11: Use of photography and photomontage in landscape and visual assessment.

Scottish Natural Heritage and the Countryside Agency, UK (2006) Topic Paper Six: Techniques and Criteria for Judging Capacity and Sensitivity.

The resultant landscape and visual impact assessment method recognises the full range of natural and cultural components of the landscape. It is therefore necessary to identify the elements of the project that could negatively or positively affect these landscape and visual values, identify the components of the landscape that would be affected, and then develop visual and landscape strategies to mitigate impacts. These strategies apply not only to soft landscape but also to hard form elements at all scales, and across the lifetime of the proposal, including its construction and operation. They take into consideration a variety of viewpoints, how people are likely to visually experience the proposal, residences that directly overlook the proposal taking into account if are they currently screened.

Phase A: Establish existing landscape and visual character baseline

The purpose of this phase is to understand the key parameters against which the Wind Farm will need to be assessed in relation to landscape and visual amenity issues.

Review of legislation and planning policy

A review was undertaken of the key planning designations, policies and guidance relating to landscape and visual amenity within the LVIA study area at the national, state and local level.

The emphasis of this assessment was to identify elements outlined within legislation, policy and planning documents relevant to landscape and visual character and identity of the study area. This identifies and describes key designations and issues noted in policy that are directly relevant to landscape and visual amenity values as well as those that are considered indirectly relevant to landscape and visual amenity to a significant degree. Although many of the designations and policies do not strictly relate to maintaining and enhancing landscape character and visual amenity, their intentions potentially influence and affect the landscape and visual resource within the study area. The discussion of relevance to the current assessment considers the following key issues:

Whether the purpose of the designation is related to the protection/management of landscape and/or visual values

If the project has potential to theoretically directly or indirectly affect those landscape/visual values for which it has been designated - depending on the nature of the specific values this may be affected by factors such as proximity, the presence of intervening landform that may restrict inter-visibility, probable levels of recreation use etc.



78

Desktop analysis of the landscape and visual resource

The first task of this phase involved gathering existing data and other information for the landscape located within and adjacent to the study area. Key information sources include:

Legislation and planning schemes from relevant local councils (see above).

Digital aerial photography.

Cadastral data (showing roads and all major features, built areas, etc.).

GIS mapping, including hydrology/riparian corridors, land use, geology, vegetation, Department of Environment and Primary Industries (DEPI) bioregion designations, and contour/topographical data.

Background studies, reports and data available from Acciona Energy.

Using this data, a preliminary assessment of the landscape and visual resource was undertaken and used to inform the field survey. This included analysis of the underlying landscape (hydrology, geology and landform), land cover (e.g. vegetation, land use, settlement pattern etc.), landscape value (e.g. reflected in scenic routes/trails and landscape designations including national parks and conservation reserves), and desk-based site analysis (e.g. identification of recognised panoramas and views, key landmarks, and local peaks).

Where appropriate, Geographic Information System (GIS) analysis was undertaken to assist the assessment e.g. preparation of Digital Elevation Models (DEM) and landform analysis. Following this, draft landscape character types were created which formed the basis of field verification.

Prepare Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) Assessment

The desktop assessment process was also informed by production of a ‘Zone of Theoretical Visibility’ (ZTV) map (also known as a ‘Zone of Visual Influence’, ‘Visual Envelope Map’ or ‘Viewshed’) to indicate what areas are likely to have views of the project.

The ZTV studies are computer–generated analyses which identify land in the study area from which it is theoretically possible to view any part of a turbine. These have been used primarily to guide the area of field work and representative viewpoint selection and to run comparison studies.

ESRI ArcGIS (v10.0) software was used to model the ZTV of the Wind Farm. A digital elevation model (essentially a 3D terrain model) was produced using a combination of 1m contour intervals within the immediate vicinity of the turbines, and 10m contour intervals for the wider LVIA study area. An elevation model with a cell size of 10x10m was produced, which translates to the model having a uniform elevation for every 10x10m unit on the ground within the study area. A viewing height of 1.8m is assumed.

Two ZTVs were produced:

One depicting the ZTV of the hub/nacelle of each turbine (a height of 120m)

One depicting the ZTV up to the blade tip of the turbines (a height of 185m).

The GIS software used then digitally determines the likely extent over which the feature would be visible or not visible.

In interpreting the ZTV, the following issues must be considered:

It only takes account of the topographic constraints on the view and does not include land cover factors such as the presence of buildings and vegetation. As it only uses the landform it is a worst case scenario of potential visibility;

It does not take into account the effect of distance. Generally the greater the distance from the turbines, the lower the impact, as the development will take up a smaller portion of the view and atmospheric conditions reduce the prominence of the project within the view;

The ZTV is only accurate to the resolution of the elevation model; in this case this resolution is 10x10m. This translated to every 10x10m cell on the ground giving a binary value of seeing the object or not seeing the object.

It should be noted that the ZTV assessment does not provide any qualitative assessment of anticipated visual impacts.



79

Field survey to verify and refine understanding of the landscape and visual resource

A two day field visit was undertaken on the 6th and 7th December 2012 by two Landscape Architects experienced in landscape and visual impact assessment. The purpose of the field visit was to:

Take photographs and ground truth the findings of the desktop assessment;

Assess and portray landscape character;

Refine the viewpoint assessment and selection of viewpoints; and,

Obtain data for the production of photographic simulations and visualisations.

The field visits focused on those aspects of the landscape with potential to be of the greatest sensitivity to the proposals, and on gaining an appreciation of those aspects of the proposals most likely to affect landscape and/or visual values. Records were made in the form of Global Positioning System (GPS) point data, field notes and photographs.

Viewpoints were selected in a variety of landscape types to represent a range of views and types of viewers likely to be affected by the project. The location of each viewpoint was recorded on site using a hand-held GPS. Photographs were taken with a digital single lens reflex (SLR) camera and 30 mm digital lens set to the equivalent of a 50 mm focal length lens on a 35 mm film camera, and were used to feed into the visualisation process. Adobe Photoshop was used to piece together the adjoining images.

Definition, description and illustration of the landscape baseline

A landscape assessment, based on the findings of the desk and field investigation, was undertaken to describe the existing landscape and visual values within the study area. Key aspects considered include:

Landform and topography;

Geological features;

Land use patterns;

Vegetative cover; and

Hydrology;

No additional specialist studies were available at the time of publication and have therefore not been considered within the report.

Definition, description and illustration of the visual baseline

A visual assessment, based on the findings of the desk and field investigation, was undertaken to determine the important views and view sheds within the study area. Key aspects considered (with reference to specialist technical studies where available at the time of assessment) include:

Views and view sheds for the study area;

The relative importance or significance of the views and view sheds;

The location of the Wind Farm in relation to these views.

The visual baseline has been assessed and described in terms of views from selected representative viewpoints within the study area.

Landscape character assessment

Based on the outputs of the visual and landscape baseline, a landscape character assessment has been undertaken. In brief, this assessment considers the way different components of the environment – both natural (the influences of geology, soils, climate, flora and fauna) and cultural (the historical and current impact of land



80

use, settlement, enclosure and other human interventions) – interact together and are perceived to form a distinct pattern.

This approach has been used to establish a baseline audit of the current character of the landscape within the study area and to provide a framework for measuring the impact of the proposals. Using this approach, broad ‘Landscape Character Types’ (LCTs) have been defined and provide a framework for describing the area systematically, ensuring judgements can be made based on knowledge of what is distinctive so that changes can respect local character, where possible. An understanding of landscape character can be particularly helpful in informing the siting of new elements in the landscape and assist with identifying which types of mitigation may assist in integrating the project in the landscape.

Each character type identified represents a relatively homogenous character based on the consideration of the following attributes:

Landscape value (e.g. landscapes designated for their scenic or landscape importance or valued recreational function).

Landscape elements that contribute to defining character e.g. pasture, crops, drainage channels, river/creek corridors, bushland, mature bushland corridors alongside roads, cultural plantings (e.g. planting along property entrance drives) etc.

Landscape character attributes (including scale, grain and perceptual characteristics such as the sense of remoteness, tranquillity and/or its perceived rural character).

The baseline assessment also considers factors which have influenced landscape change in the past and those that are likely to do so in the future e.g. recreational demands, changing agricultural practices, development pressures.

Phase B: Evaluation of the Impacts on the Landscape and Visual Resource

The purpose of this phase was to comparatively evaluate how the landscape and visual baseline (identified in Phase A) is likely to be affected by the Wind Farm project in relation to the agreed performance criteria for the project.

Identification of landscape sensitivity

The sensitivity of a landscape is judged based on the extent to which it can accept change of a particular type and scale without adverse effects on its character. Sensitivity varies according to the type of development and the nature of the landscape, including:

Its inherent landscape value (its condition, perceptual qualities, cultural importance, and any specific values that may apply e.g. landscape planning designations).

The likely congruency of the proposed change (i.e. the extent to which the proposal may fit or be ‘visually absorbed’ into the scale, landform, land use, pattern, texture of the existing landscape).

Identification of visual sensitivity

For the purposes of this assessment, the sensitivity of the viewers at the viewpoints is considered to be dependent upon factors including:

The importance of the view i.e. the scenic qualities of the view, including the presence of other existing manmade elements in the view. Views can be assessed as being of national, state, regional, local or less than local importance as described in Table 15 below.

Viewer exposure, typically assessed by measuring the number of viewers exposed to the resource change, type of viewer activity, the duration of their view, the speed at which the viewer moves, and the position of the viewer.



81

The nature of the visual receptor (type and volume of sensitive receptors or viewers) experiencing the view. Viewer sensitivity is defined both as the viewer’s concern for scenic quality and their response to change in the visual resources that make up the view. Local values may infer visual significance on landscape components and areas that would otherwise appear unexceptional in a visual resource analysis. Residents and visitors to important/valued landscapes are considered to have a higher sensitivity to their visual environment than, say, visitors to non-designated areas or motorists passing through the landscape.

Table 15 Levels of Visual Importance

Importance Indicator

National visual importance

A heavily experienced view to a national icon, for example, views of the Twelve Apostles; the view to Parliament House, Canberra, down Anzac Parade, or views to Uluru.

State visual importance A heavily experienced view to a feature or landscape that is iconic to the state, for example, views along the Yarra River in Melbourne.

Regional visual importance

A heavily experienced view to a feature or landscape that is iconic to a major portion of a city or non–metropolitan region, an important view from an area of regional open space, or a heavily used viewpoint from which a wide region can be viewed. For example, a view to Melbourne from Mount Dandenong, a view of the Cathedral Ranges from Maroondah Highway.

Local visual importance A view experienced by concentrations of residents and/or local recreational users, and/or road and rail users, for example, views from residential areas to a local golf course.

Less than local visual importance

Views experienced by residents, workers, road/rail users, or from recreational areas where visual amenity is not a primary value.

Both landscape and visual sensitivity is described as being negligible, low, medium, or high, as defined and illustrated in Table 16 (landscape impacts) and Table 17 (visual impacts). It is noted that these tables are intended as a guide to the process only. The classifications are illustrative, as there is no defined boundary between levels of sensitivity.

Identification of magnitude of change

This step involved prediction of the magnitude of change in the landscape or the view that may result from the project.

The magnitude of change affecting a landscape or visual receptor depends on the nature, scale and duration of the particular change that is expected to occur. It describes the extent of change and identifies elements which are removed or added, changed in colour or texture, and compatibility of new elements with the existing landscape. Visual modification can result in an improvement or reduction in visual amenity.

With regard to impact on landscape character types, the magnitude assessment assumes a worst case scenario and the assessment is based upon the area of LCT which would be impacted to the greatest extent by the Wind Farm proposal. The effect on a view will depend on the extent of visibility, degree of obstruction of existing features, degree of contrast with the existing view, angle of view, duration of view and distance from the development.

Magnitude of change is described as being barely perceptible (negligible), noticeable (low), considerable (medium) or dominant (high), as defined and illustrated in Table 16 (landscape impacts) and Table 17 (visual impacts). It is noted that these tables are intended as a guide to the process only. The classifications are illustrative, as there is no defined boundary between levels of magnitude.



82

Evaluation of significance of change

This step involved evaluation of the significance of landscape and visual impacts based on the sensitivity of the landscape or viewer to change and the magnitude of change. No established, measurable technical thresholds of significance exist for landscape and visual (The Landscape Institute and Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment, 2002). Significance is therefore determined by considering the sensitivity of the landscape or visual receptor and the magnitude of change expected as a result of the development.

Professional judgement and experience are applied on a case by case basis in order to identify broad levels of significance for each receptor. Each case is assessed on its own merits as factors unique to each circumstance need to be considered. However, there are general principles which can be used as a guide to this process, which provide transparency about how judgements have been made. These are set out in the following diagram (Figure 43) and Table 16 and Table 17.

Figure 43 Approach to evaluating the significance of change

The impacts identified can be adverse, beneficial, neutral or, under some circumstances, subjective. The following provides a summary of each scenario:

Adverse – a visual change that is likely to be perceived as unfavourable by most affected viewers e.g. the loss of vegetation and replacement by an industrial plant.

Beneficial – a visual change that is likely to be perceived as favourable or advantageous by most affected viewers e.g. installation of screening which improves an existing unfavourable view.

Neutral – a visual change that is likely to be perceived as neither favourable nor unfavourable by most affected viewers.

Subjective - This applies to situations where there are likely to be mixed opinions, making consultation the only suitable way to define effects e.g. replacement of farmland with forest.

Judgement on sensitivity

of resource / receptor

Judgement on magnitude

of change

Judgement incorporating sensitivity

and magnitude to generate a

significance of impact



83

Table 16 Significance of Landscape Impacts

LANDSCAPE IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Magnitude of change in landscape caused by development

Dominant change Considerable change Noticeable change Barely perceptible

change # A clearly evident and frequent/continuous change in landscape characteristics affecting an extensive area, which is likely to fundamentally change the character of the landscape.

A considerable change in landscape characteristics, frequent or continuous and over a wide area or a clearly evident change, but over a restricted area.

A noticeable change in landscape characteristics over a wide area or a considerable change over a restricted area, but will not fundamentally change the character of the landscape.

An imperceptible, barely or rarely perceptible change in landscape characteristics.

Sen

siti

vity

of

lan

dsc

ape

to p

rop

osa

l

Hig

h

Indicator

Major*

Moderate to major*

Moderate

Minor to moderate

A landscape protected by

national designation and/ or

widely acknowledged for its

quality and value; a

landscape with distinctive

character and low capacity

to accommodate the type of

change envisaged.

Med

ium

A moderately valued

landscape, perhaps a

regionally important

landscape and / or

protected by regional/state

designation, or where its

character, land use, pattern

and scale may have some

capacity to accommodate a

degree of the type of

change envisaged.

Moderate to major*

Moderate

Minor to moderate

Minor to Negligible

Lo

w

A landscape valued to a

limited extent, perhaps a

locally important landscape

or where its character, land

use, pattern and scale is

likely to have the capacity

to accommodate the type of

change envisaged.

Moderate

Minor to moderate

Minor

Minor to Negligible

Ne

glig

ible

A landscape which is not

valued for its scenic quality

or where its character,

existing land use, pattern

and scale are tolerant of

the type of change

envisaged, and the

landscape has capacity to

accommodate change.

Minor to moderate

Minor

Minor to Negligible

Negligible

* Denotes the most significant impacts for consideration by decision makers # Note: If no changes would be perceptible a significance of No Impact is recorded.



84

Table 17 Significance of Visual Impacts

VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Magnitude of change in views caused by development

Dominant change

Considerable change Noticeable change Barely perceptible change #

Major changes in view, typically at close distances and/or affecting a substantial part of the view, continuously visible for a long duration, or obstructing a substantial part or important elements of view.

Clearly perceptible changes in views, typically at intermediate distances and/or resulting in either a distinct new element in a significant part of the view, or a wider ranging, less concentrated change across a wider area.

Minor changes in views typically at longer distances or visible for a short duration, and/or are expected to blend in with the existing view to a moderate extent.

Change which is barely visible, typically at a very long distance and/or visible for a very short duration, and/or are expected to blend with the existing view.

Sen

siti

vity

of

view

po

ints

to

pro

po

sal

Hig

h

Indicator

Major*

Moderate to major* Moderate Minor to moderate

Large numbers of viewers or those with proprietary interest and prolonged viewing opportunities such as residents and users of attractive and/ or well-used recreational facilities. Views from a regionally important location such as a scenic lookout whose interest is specifically focussed on the landscape

Med

ium

Medium numbers of residents and moderate numbers of visitors with an interest in their environment e.g. visitors to State Forests, including bush walkers, horse riders, trail bikers. Larger numbers of travellers with an interest in their surroundings.

Moderate to major* Moderate Minor to moderate Minor to Negligible

Lo

w

Small numbers of visitors with a passing interest in their surroundings e.g., those travelling along principal roads. Viewers whose interest is not specifically focussed on the landscape e.g., workers, commuters.

Moderate Minor to moderate Minor Minor to Negligible

Ne

glig

ible

Very occasional numbers of viewers with a passing interest in their surroundings e.g., those travelling along minor roads e.g., those travelling along minor routes.

Minor to moderate Minor Minor to Negligible Negligible

* Denotes most significant impacts for consideration by decision maker’s #: If no changes would be perceptible a significance of No Impact is recorded. Note: Distances identified in the magnitude of change are Project specific



85

Prepare photo montages

The use of photo montages play an important part in visual impact assessments to convey the proposals to the assessors, decision makers and the local community.

A photo montage is a technique whereby an image of the proposed development is produced using an existing photograph, overlayed with the proposed Wind Farm, to provide an indicative representation of the scheme. The process entails inserting a computer–generated model of the proposal into a photograph taken from a geographically referenced viewpoint, using existing elements of a known size, location and scale to suitably locate the digital representation within the photograph.

Visualisations have been compiled from locations agreed with Acciona Energy to appreciate the potential visual impact of the presence of the proposed Wind Farm from a number of representative viewpoints. These have been created from the baseline viewpoints, using 2D and 3D AutoCAD drawings issued by Acciona Energy in combination with Rhinoceros 3D modelling software and Photoshop for rendering.

Note that the images produced are indicative only to illustrate the development from a handful of representative public viewpoints. The views selected within this analysis were chosen based upon the ZTV analysis, identification of sensitive receptors and on-site observations and are likely to represent locations from which the proposed development will be most highly visible.

Prepare Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment report

This stage entailed compilation of the landscape and visual impact assessment report, based on the assessment methodology described above. Using text, figures, tables and illustrations as required, this report sets out the findings and outcomes of the study and presents conclusions regarding the landscape and visual impacts associated with the project.

berrimal wind farm...6.0 landscape and visual impact assessment methodology 42 6.1 sensitivity and...

Documents